wikileaks is down; long live wikileaks

6pack said:
imo, wikileaks is just another terrorist organization. why? cause they published a list of most vulnerable places in USA. That endangers people's lives to a great extent there. Also they might in the near future also publish places in India or any other country once they get their hands on it. And all that talk of publishing even more documents is just a threat for more money. whistle blower my foot. Those people are just extortionists in disguise.

[/url]
Click to expand...

Either you are blind or don't to see the real truth.Wikileaks leaked Afgan Dairies,Iraq warlogs and now diplomatic cables but till date no diplomat,solider or a civilian has been reported to have died due to wikileaks.

But compare this to politicians; they got real blood on their hands. wikileaks only has "hypothetical" blood.

second fact,

What wikileaks leaks is doing does not violates the law. That's the reason they booked Assange under a false "rape" case instead of direct punishment. this embarrassing for US, that why they want wikileaks to be stopped at any cost. that's why they are pushing all US companies and its ally nations to kill wikileaks in attempt to save itself

Third example,

Watch this video of American troops killing Unarmed civilians including a TV reporter and lying that they had weapons.it seems as if they are playing Call of Duty and want more number of kills. if it was not for wikileaks, world would have never known about this inhumane act that Great US of A has done.

Wikileaks reveals video showing US air crew shooting down Iraqi civilians | World news | The Guardian

[youtube]is9sxRfU-ik[/youtube]

Btw, don't think this is fake, its as real as it can be
 
Gaurish said:
What wikileaks leaks is doing does not violates the law. That's the reason they booked Assange under a false "rape" case instead of direct punishment. this embarrassing for US, that why they want wikileaks to be stopped at any cost.
Click to expand...
They're making an example out of him to deter any one else in the future trying the same. They should have ensured that a 22yr old kid could not just wily nily copy all these plain txt files in the first place, they screwed up.
 
@Gaurish, same goes for you too. Even you are blind or cannot see the real truth. False rape case? were you there when it happened? how do you know it is false in the first case? You are taking the side of a criminal.

And how does publishing secret files not violate the law? Those files were stolen by someone from the US govt and sold to wikileaks for some money. Not everything is as black and white as you make it out.

And its just my opinion btw, so no need to get so personal in your comments.
 
They've shot themselves in the foot by giving the threat of releasing more documents imho. REALLY REALLY stupid move that one.
 
It would be if its a bluff, otherwise .... ?

TIME's Julian Assange Interview

Asked what his "moral calculus" was to justify publishing the leaks and whether he considered what he was doing to be "civil disobedience," Assange said, "Not at all. This organization practices civil obedience, that is, we are an organization that tries to make the world more civil and act against abusive organizations that are pushing it in the opposite direction." As for whether WikiLeaks was breaking the law, he said, "We have now in our four-year history, and over 100 legal attacks of various kinds, been victorious in all of those matters." He added, "It's very important to remember the law is not what, not simply what, powerful people would want others to believe it is. The law is not what a general says it is. The law is not what Hillary Clinton says it is."
Click to expand...
 
Live Updates on Wikileaks:

WikiLeaks US embassy cables: live updates

6pack said:
@Gaurish, same goes for you too. Even you are blind or cannot see the real truth. False rape case? were you there when it happened? how do you know it is false in the first case? You are taking the side of a criminal.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, Try to see the connection between timing of alleged sexual charge & releasing of cables.Clearing, US is trying everything it can to stop wikileaks, but it has failed.

And how does publishing secret files not violate the law? Those files were stolen by someone from the US govt and sold to wikileaks for some money. Not everything is as black and white as you make it out.
Click to expand...

All the organization has done is to publish classified documents that originally belonged to the U.S. government — something that may be uncomfortable and embarrassing, but is not illegal. Because as per US Supreme Court Ruling on June 30, 1971 on NY Time vs US Govt Case, it said. While "Leaking" classified is against the law, publishing them is not illegal. Further court also said "Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". If it was illegal, then you should jail every single media/News organization in the world because they too are guilty of publishing that same information. Wikileaks is an media organization of different kind.

I consider a wikileaks in its own ways; good for society because it provides means for a normal citizen to report anything wrong that is going on. Without it, its impossible to raise your voice & report injustice.

And its just my opinion btw, so no need to get so personal in your comments.
Click to expand...

you are free to form your own opinion. Same way, I am free to criticize your opinion because its WRONG!
 
6pack said:
@Gaurish, same goes for you too. Even you are blind or cannot see the real truth. False rape case? were you there when it happened? how do you know it is false in the first case? You are taking the side of a criminal.

And how does publishing secret files not violate the law? Those files were stolen by someone from the US govt and sold to wikileaks for some money. Not everything is as black and white as you make it out.

And its just my opinion btw, so no need to get so personal in your comments.
Click to expand...
I think you must ask your self, is govt a person? Does it have the right to privacy? Answer is NO.

Its a body chosen by people and people have a right to know what it does , how it does and what are the consequences of its action. In short it should be transparent.

People who need lists of vulnerable spots have way more sophisticated and reliable methods of getting it, including spies in top positions. So lets now get blinded by the stupid things spread by the politicians.

Also in case of wiki leaks, its just very basic documents. I hope this trend continues and people get to see the TOP SECRETS too. WHY you ask? Cause a government should not be allowed so much secrecy. Its defeats the purpose of a government when you can only judge it from a very broad perspective of its performance based on stupid politics. What it hides from the people, how cunningly important secrets are kept from the people, and how it covers up its tracks and benefits those who support it, should also be out in the open.
 
Party Monger said:
I think you must ask your self, is govt a person? Does it have the right to privacy? Answer is NO.
Its a body chosen by people and people have a right to know what it does , how it does and what are the consequences of its action. In short it should be transparent.

Also in case of wiki leaks, its just very basic documents. I hope this trend continues and people get to see the TOP SECRETS too. WHY you ask? Cause a government should not be allowed so much secrecy. Its defeats the purpose of a government when you can only judge it from a very broad perspective of its performance based on stupid politics. What it hides from the people, how cunningly important secrets are kept from the people, and how it covers up its tracks and benefits those who support it, should also be out in the open.
Click to expand...
From the TIME interview

RS: Are there any instances [in] diplomacy or global affairs in which you see secrecy as necessary and as an asset?

JA: Yes, of course. We keep secret the identity of our sources, as an example, [and] take great pains to do it. So secrecy is important for many things but shouldn't be used to cover up abuses, which leads us to the question of who decides and who is responsible. It shouldn't really be that people are thinking about, Should something be secret? I would rather it be thought, Who has a responsibility to keep certain things secret? And, Who has a responsibility to bring matters to the public? And those responsibilities fall on different players. And it is our responsibility to bring matters to the public.
Click to expand...
 
6pack said:
imo, wikileaks is just another terrorist organization. why? cause they published a list of most vulnerable places in USA. That endangers people's lives to a great extent there. Also they might in the near future also publish places in India or any other country once they get their hands on it. And all that talk of publishing even more documents is just a threat for more money. whistle blower my foot. Those people are just extortionists in disguise.

btw, that Julian Assange guy got arrested and denied bail. Hope they put him in prison for lifetime.
BBC News - Wikileaks founder Julian Assange refused bail
Click to expand...
My friend do you live on Earth did you check out how the terrorists came on our soil on 26/11 did you notice they used Google Maps now the next thing you'll say is ban Google Maps right, then ban Satphones next what... as tech advances it makes fighting a guerilla war as easy as we can use it to stop them have you read the Blood Telegram, I hope you have heard about Agent Orange in co relation with Vietnam, As the saying goes :

"Who controls the present, controls the past, who controls the past controls the future" ~ Anonymous

I have no personal venom in this post, but I have experienced a military man's predicament, my father is in the Armed Forces and as long as such revelations happen the better it is for governments like ours ( transperancy, corruption, lobbying for votes etc. ) so on this count I must conclude the post with two links and the fact that Wikileaks is a great step towards fighting a Sytem which is put in place,by us for, us AGAINST US

Archer Blood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Agent Orange - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Long live Wikileaks
 
Wikileaks buys the documents? No i dont think so. They are given by people who think it shld be made public.
Yes the approach by wikileaks is bad, but then again what is govt does isn't right either. If they were to fight legally then they'll never reach this stage. The only way was to forcefully show what they had to show. i guess it's okay as long as it isn't revealing anything which was meant for a better tomorrow?
 
blr_p said:
From the TIME interview
Click to expand...
Yes i agree, but thats how you bargain, you ask for the unreasonable and then after bargaining settle for the reasonable :p

Ofcourse i dont want every secret out, But then again, i dont want that the govt should be directly, indirectly or even remotely related to the body deciding what's a GOOD secret and whats a BAD secret.
 
wikileaks is good.. but tell me one god damm thing

whatever america do, bad or good... each n every country just gonna NOD to whatever decesion take .. no matter what the documents leaks.

if america thinks bad about so and so country, what can that small country do in front of it ? stop talking to it ? stop buyin weapons ? stop doing what ?

us rules and it doesnt give shit , but yes they have to take actions against ol this no matter wht
 
even after reading all your guys posts, i still think it is the right of the Govt to see what secrets are made available to be published and what remains as secret. call me a fool or whatever, that is my opinion. no govt will be able to go on and rule properly if everything was transparent. even companies & people ruling them have secrets else they might not have success or monopoly.

call it a necessary evil or whatever.

Btw, what difference will it make to you guys whether a secret is published or not? will it make your lives any different? will you change your life thereafter?

And in @Blr_p's Time's interview link, i read that wikileaks makes changes to the documents. So what is there to stop them from changing facts and making it look like something else? In other words what is the guarantee that the published articles are 100% not tampered? are 100% truth?
 
Back
Top