|
Post by krzych32 on Dec 4, 2010 8:39:05 GMT -5
Wikileaks, what do you think about what they are doing. I think I'm actually with Sarah Palin on this one, they should be considered a terrorist group as they fit the profile of one.
|
|
|
Post by dylansumner on Dec 4, 2010 10:25:53 GMT -5
I've been pretty neutral on this topic. For every time I've heard this on the news, I think if they haven't put any information on the site that would kill or endanger someones life, then why throw them under the bus with the terrorists? It does come back to the freedom of speech, they haven't really hurt anyone, besides the way the crummy politicians we have in office right now. It hasn't put anyones life in danger, plus when these two where going to post they personally called the pentagon and said hey do you have anything you would like to exclude us from publishing, the pentagon then replied don't post any of it. It has only changed the way other countries view us as, but many of us weren't good people to them anyway. Just imagine what the other politicians around the world has said to each other about our politicians. Maybe this WikiLeaks will finally change the peoples views about how the Government is run, it seems pretty close to the way the Mafia's are run. Plus we have a President from Chicago and history tells us that not many politicians from Chicago have a clean record.
|
|
|
Post by Freddy on Dec 4, 2010 11:17:24 GMT -5
I'm pro-wikileaks. It's just a site, and people are the ones who submit the classified info.
They just clean and post whatever people upload there. Maybe it can affect international relationships, but this ain't gonna start a war or whatever, so governments should shut up and see what else they post (and secure more their data).
They shouldn't be having secret spies in other countries (or whatever) or making plans against others in secret. I really think this is a step towards transparency (even if it was really poorly executed). People with classified info should really consider publishing. Imagine that (for example) the myths about Area 51 are actually true. Wouldn't you like to know it? Don't you want to know what governments/big corporations are actually doing?
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Dec 4, 2010 12:28:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by James McClelland on Dec 4, 2010 15:51:22 GMT -5
My views and opinions on Wikileaks are the same as Alex's.
|
|
|
Post by Ferrrrrre on Dec 4, 2010 16:11:05 GMT -5
People are easily called a terrorist these days..
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Dec 4, 2010 16:43:50 GMT -5
If something is a secret there is most likely a reason for it.
|
|
|
Post by dylansumner on Dec 4, 2010 16:50:09 GMT -5
If something is a secret there is most likely a reason for it. Secret's often lead people to not trust others. That is something that you wouldn't want the people of a country feeling about their government.
|
|
Camoon
Star
[AWD:01020307]
Trust your pilot, respect your monkey.
Posts: 574
|
Post by Camoon on Dec 4, 2010 17:14:02 GMT -5
If something is a secret there is most likely a reason for it. You've grasped the concept of secrets superbly my friend. The only thing wrong with that, is that most secrets are unnecessary. They cause more problems than they solve. If I was just hanging out with your girlfriend, helping her with her course work (because you don't know jack SHIRT about... geography, or whatever subject she's studying), I would personally tell you, so I can breathe easy, not be all secretive, and we can all be friends. The secretive man wouldn't. The secretive man would pick times when you're not there, make her promise not to tell you, etc. I'm sure you know the kind of problems that can come out of this. One lie leads to thousands of lies, next thing you know, the guy is hiding in your closet when you get home, you go to grab a coat, see a guy in your closet and assume the worst. That's one big analogy for wikileaks. Secrets just aren't worth it.
|
|
|
Post by Raydawn on Dec 4, 2010 17:28:21 GMT -5
wikiliks is good
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Dec 4, 2010 17:29:18 GMT -5
I know that next time I need to get secret things on the internet, I'll use a CD labelled as Lady Gaga.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Dec 4, 2010 17:37:46 GMT -5
If something is a secret there is most likely a reason for it. You've grasped the concept of secrets superbly my friend. The only thing wrong with that, is that most secrets are unnecessary. They cause more problems than they solve. If I was just hanging out with your girlfriend, helping her with her course work (because you don't know jack SHIRT about... geography, or whatever subject she's studying), I would personally tell you, so I can breathe easy, not be all secretive, and we can all be friends. The secretive man wouldn't. The secretive man would pick times when you're not there, make her promise not to tell you, etc. I'm sure you know the kind of problems that can come out of this. One lie leads to thousands of lies, next thing you know, the guy is hiding in your closet when you get home, you go to grab a coat, see a guy in your closet and assume the worst. That's one big analogy for wikileaks. Secrets just aren't worth it. I don't see how this teen drama analogy is comparable with government institutions.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Dec 4, 2010 17:45:27 GMT -5
Journalism =/= terrorism. It's not the fault of Assange, it's the fault of the leakers.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Dec 4, 2010 17:55:41 GMT -5
Journalism =/= terrorism. It's not the fault of Assange, it's the fault of the leakers. He creates the conditions and wants this to happen, also there are some responsibilities in journalism.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Dec 4, 2010 17:58:47 GMT -5
Journalism =/= terrorism. It's not the fault of Assange, it's the fault of the leakers. He creates the conditions and wants this to happen, also there are some responsibilities in journalism. Oh, so now you're telepathic and can read his thoughts now? The point of WikiLeaks, to my understanding, is to expose, report and leak information regarding the ethics or legality of the actions of certain entities. WikiLeaks is not an intelligence organization, nor is it an operation meant to collapse the United States government. As I said in my video, the truth will out. Lies are always discovered in the end.
|
|
|
Post by marypo on Dec 4, 2010 21:08:00 GMT -5
Don't shoot the messenger.
If one is unhappy with something that another has said, they should confront the one who said it and not the one who revealed it.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Dec 5, 2010 0:23:30 GMT -5
He creates the conditions and wants this to happen, also there are some responsibilities in journalism. Oh, so now you're telepathic and can read his thoughts now? The point of WikiLeaks, to my understanding, is to expose, report and leak information regarding the ethics or legality of the actions of certain entities. WikiLeaks is not an intelligence organization, nor is it an operation meant to collapse the United States government. As I said in my video, the truth will out. Lies are always discovered in the end. Everyone can see from his actions that this is what he wants. But if that makes you feel any better, yes I read minds.
|
|
|
Post by newschooled on Dec 5, 2010 0:25:54 GMT -5
Showing reality to the public. Pffft. Stupid terrorists.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Dec 5, 2010 0:30:03 GMT -5
Showing reality to the public. Pffft. Stupid terrorists. And Terrorists, and enemy governments......
|
|
|
Post by low on Dec 5, 2010 12:24:57 GMT -5
They didn't do proper redactions in the Afghanistan papers to prevent informers from getting killed, but, otherwise, they're doing something which very much needs to be done. The diplomatic cable releases are certainly less risky. The Chief of Staff to the German Armed Forces lost his job, but that's not a terribly serious consequence.
|
|