WikiLEAKS

[TheRealAndyCook]

with the names being properly redacted, i DO believe wikileaks if functioning the way a legitimate news source would.

Which is why i didn't want this thread to turn into a **** storm about assange

 

[Madding]

I believe they are taking greater efforts to keep names out of documents, which is probably why they've shifted to the diplomatic cables while their volunteers comb through the war material.

 

[jcardona1]

With all the severed business ties and DDoS attacks, it makes you wonder what the government is trying to hide. I'm not the least bit anti-government, but I also don't like the idea of corruption. If we weren't talking about the government here, it would be considered organized crime, if you really think about it.

 

[TheRealAndyCook]

How to take down a website 101.

your 14 years old, and you get banned from myspace...

go to 4chan and get all your gaiabuddys to LOIC myspace's load balancing server


or
your the government

block wikileaks ip

 

[nikond70s]

You do understand this "tight chess game" he is playing is with real people's lives. and I'm not talking about the Washington crowd either. How would you feel if your family member or friend were the "chess piece" he was playing with next? As for the US being dirty, yeah I'm sure my country has it's faults but given the choice I'd still pick it hands down, if you have such a problem with it go live somewhere else.
I will agree having lived in Australia they won't just hand him over to the US, and if Washington pushes it will get messy.
As for Wikkileaks anyone that has leaked information to him regarding National Security and or that endangers people's lives should be tried for treason and due to his threat of this "info bomb" of his he should be treated as a terrorist.

the argument that he has put people in peril is pure government propaganda. he has put no-one in peril, except those who have not acted within the law. how can you substantiate that statement? from what i read about 3 million peoples had access to all these info. If this information was so sensitive that it would endanger people's lives, or start a war, or some other such nonsense, how come it wasn't more secure? do you honestly think that the intelligence operatives of other countries couldn't have obtained this information if they wanted? With 3 million low level employees having access to it, getting hold of any of this information would have been a walk in the park for any country's intel, if they wanted it. Most probaby, most of the countries in the world already had this info.

If this information is as dangerous as you suggest, the US is criminally negligent in not having made it more secure. you NEVER give 3 million people access to info which would put lives at risk. but the fact is, it wasn't considered dangerous info, therefore low level security and widespread access was attributed to it. they are simply using the tired technique of blaming the messenger to deflect from their own lack of integrity which has been exposed.

and no i dont have a problem living here? who said i did?

read more:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/o...re-embarrasses-us-15017383.html#ixzz17FzrdP7l

 

[Chaitika]

with the names being properly redacted, i DO believe wikileaks if functioning the way a legitimate news source would.

Which is why i didn't want this thread to turn into a **** storm about assange

Legitimate news sources don't hold "news" as a form of blackmail against the establishment.

 

[greenterra]

I always thought MFK did not allow any posts/threads which incorporate politics or religion in any form in the forums.

 

[jcardona1]

Legitimate news sources don't hold "news" as a form of blackmail against the establishment.

But then again, "legitimate" news sources are nothing more than puppets, biasing reality to please those with ve$ted intere$t$

 

[Chaitika]

But then again, "legitimate" news sources are nothing more than puppets, biasing reality to please those with ve$ted intere$t$

Red herring. It doesn't disprove what I am saying.

 

[jcardona1]

Red herring. It doesn't disprove what I am saying.

Who said a news media had to play nice? Governments sure don't. Still doesn't discredit the information being leaked.