• Assange ignores human rights groups as Wikileaks prepares to publish more documents
    868 replies, posted
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyAlt;24064563]and we shouldn't be going into other country's businesses, what gives us the right to act as world police?[/QUOTE] Same thing that enables the real police to intervene, threat of force.
[QUOTE=TH89;24052940]Okay, I'm switching sides. Kill him, CIA.[/QUOTE] what the fuck are you doing
[QUOTE=JDK721v2;24065246]what the fuck are you doing[/QUOTE] He's switching sides. :colbert:
[QUOTE=TH89;24063813]Amnesty international seems to think otherwise.[/QUOTE] What's your point?
why am I not surprised that gunfurry is in here being a military apologist "arrest him" etc. you want him arrested for exposing war crimes? they're REDACTING all the names as previously mentioned. the media is just trying to divert attention from the real reason that people don't want the documents exposed: because they show that the war is a failure and that there have been numerous war crimes that have continually been covered up [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - GunFox))[/highlight]
Because the American media totally supports the war.
[QUOTE=ohadje;24065391]Because the American media totally supports the war.[/QUOTE] because the media is going to make their own country look terrible
[QUOTE=starpluck;24065279]What's your point?[/QUOTE] Between them and you, I'm inclined to believe them. [editline]08:21PM[/editline] [QUOTE=JDK721v2;24065502]because the media is going to make their own country look terrible[/QUOTE] The source in the OP isn't American. And news is a business. For all its flaws, it's not state-run, and it's not a conspiracy.
[QUOTE=JDK721v2;24065502]because the media is going to make their own country look terrible[/QUOTE] Why not?
[QUOTE=TH89;24065685]Between them and you, I'm inclined to believe them.[/QUOTE] Hahaha. The WHOLE purpose of the delay was to censor the names. What should be newsworthy is the fact that they're going to censor the names. CNN barley mentioned that they were going censored at least. To deny this fact is absurd. It's known that they are being censored and it was a very expensive operation. Keep eating what the US media tells you or start thinking for yourself.
[QUOTE=starpluck;24065821]Hahaha. The WHOLE purpose of the delay was to censor the names. What should be newsworthy is the fact that they're going to censor the names. CNN barley mentioned that they were going censored at least. To deny this fact is absurd. It's known that they are being censored and it was a very expensive operation. Keep eating what the US media tells you or start thinking for yourself.[/QUOTE] And if they miss ONE NAME, it could get someone killed. ONE NAME out of 15 THOUSAND documents.
[QUOTE=starpluck;24065821]Hahaha. The WHOLE purpose of the delay was to censor the names. What should be newsworthy is the fact that they're going to censor the names. CNN barley mentioned that they were going censored at least. To deny this fact is absurd. It's known that they are being censored and it was a very expensive operation. Keep eating what the US media tells you or start thinking for yourself.[/QUOTE] I'm going off the source in the OP, which isn't American, and which flatly contradicts what you're saying. Since you haven't provided anything supporting what you're saying, there's not a lot I can do. I'm on an iPhone. In the meantime, I consider Amnesty International a trustworthy and well-intentioned organization. Certainly more so than a cabal of entitled little libertarian douchebags. If that makes me a sheeple or whatever I'm good widdit.
Because somehow the Taliban can do a better job themselves and find the one name. [editline]10:34PM[/editline] [QUOTE=TH89;24065945]I'm going off the source in the OP, which isn't American, and which flatly contradicts what you're saying. Since you haven't provided anything supporting what you're saying, there's not a lot I can do. I'm on an iPhone. In the meantime, I consider Amnesty International a trustworthy and well-intentioned organization. Certainly more so than a cabal of entitled little libertarian douchebags. If that makes me a sheeple or whatever I'm good widdit.[/QUOTE] I'm on my iTouch and the soure doesn't contradict what I sad. Want me to show you the CNN article as well as a chatlog I had with an offical WikiLeaks Staff member?
[QUOTE=starpluck;24065954]Because somehow the Taliban can do a between job themselves and find the one name.[/QUOTE] They are willing to fight the world's meanest military with little more than cold war era hardware and some unforgiving terrain. They are nothing if not tenacious.
[QUOTE=GunFox;24065856]And if they miss ONE NAME, it could get someone killed. ONE NAME out of 15 THOUSAND documents.[/QUOTE] I would guess if they missed a name (I also guess they would have to miss an entire record not to see it) while trying to censor it then someone reading it would also miss it. Unless of course someone was looking for someone and they knew the rough details of when they were mentioned. [editline]08:39PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Wayword;24063481]The site is about leaking uncensored documents, did you guys really think they would go against their values? If they do/did, they are just undermining their integrity and going against the point of the site. If they don't, they're a bunch of senseless assholes. Either way they lose.[/QUOTE] I think (and hope) they take what appears to be the common sense route, getting the information into the public domain with censored names. Removing names and locations of peoples houses etc wouldn't effect the overall information, the truth of what's really happening would be out there and that seems to be what they want.
[QUOTE=GunFox;24066036]They are willing to fight the world's meanest military with little more than cold war era hardware and some unforgiving terrain. They are nothing if not tenacious.[/QUOTE] It's been almost have a month when the first batch was released. Not a death threat nor death has been caused. I'm pretty sure missing one name would yeild the same results. The few names that were leaked are so damn insignificant and hard to find. The Pentagon should take part of the blame as well if anything occurs due to the constant bullshit about it making it seem like an informant name leak only thus publicizing the very few names already avalablie.
[QUOTE=GunFox;24066036]They are willing to fight the world's meanest military with little more than cold war era hardware and some unforgiving terrain. They are nothing if not tenacious.[/QUOTE] It doesn't fucking matter. As long as guerilla tactics are implied, then whatever troops the USA sends in are as good as fucked/ambushed/heavily damaged.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;24052321]A coalition of human rights groups has called on Wikileaks to remove details of civilian Afghans who [b]were named when the website released more than 77,000 classified US Army documents[/b] on the war in Afghanistan. "There [b]was no consideration[/b] about civilian lives," he said, adding that Afghan civilians seen to be collaborating with Nato forces are often assassinated by insurgents. "We said that [b]in the future the names should be redacted[/b] and [b]the ones that are already there need to be taken down[/b]. Even though it's late, it is still worth doing." The emails, which were also sent on behalf of Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict, the Open Society Institute and International Crisis Group, are the first clear indication that some human rights activists are at odds with the way the Afghan logs [b]were published[/b].[/QUOTE]
They were referring to the ones already published, Theta-ix.
Yes. Those are the ones I was talking about, because that article is the topic of this thread.
No. I said the whole purpose of the delay of the 2nd batch was to censor the names. You denied this. Even then, THIS is the topic of the thread; the 2nd batch.
lol whatever dude [editline]09:01PM[/editline] PS why are you calling me by my waffles username
I'm suprised you haven't banned me for "Advocating Leaking". jk :P [editline]11:10PM[/editline] [QUOTE=TH89;24066530] PS why are you calling me by my waffles username[/QUOTE] Mind fuckery.
Hezzy didn't tell me to do that Anyway Lozenge and his cronies are hypocritical douchebags gambling with the lives of "insignificant" brown people so that they can play petty power games with Washington. The fact that they've already willfully released names of collaborators shows that they either don't know or don't care what they're doing. They're not a force of good--Amnesty International is. Wikileaks is essentially the Pirate Bay of international politics. Yeah, they're entertaining a lot of the time, but they're motivated by their sense of Western entitlement, not by a desire to improve the situation in Afghanistan. All they want to do is stick it to The Man.
The leak was about exposing war crimes and real death numbers etc. You're making it sound like they leaked names to act all badass.
They did it to fuck the US government, not for the sake of the Afghani people.
[QUOTE=ZekeTwo;24054847]Okay, I'm switching sides. Ban him again, Garry. [/QUOTE] Someone disagrees with me, Ban him. You can boast all you want about how you want freedoms protected but deep down you can't give a shit when it falls in your favor.
[QUOTE=TH89;24066926]They did it to fuck the US government, not for the sake of the Afghani people.[/QUOTE] If that were true they would have released all of the files immediately upon obtaining them.
They did it to inform the world about the USGs bullshittery and how war crimes are being comitted. This will have positive reprocussions in the long run.
-snip-
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.