• US has pressured Britain, Germany, Australia, to charge WikiLeaks editor with espionage
    371 replies, posted
[QUOTE=starpluck;23962962]No one died from the leaks, there's no reason to keep it secret unless you want hide war crimes.[/QUOTE] Fucking this.
[QUOTE=CrazyMoron;23978387]Fucking this.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE][B]Taliban Murders Afghan Elder, Thanks Wikileaks for Revealing "Spies"[/B] It's been a nightmarish last few months for U.S. Military officials. First they discovered that a young soldier serving in Iraq had acted as a spy passing documents to the site Wikileaks. Then they endured Wikileaks release of 90,000 U.S. Military documents -- many of them classified -- detailing their operations in Afghanistan. The Taliban, a radical Islamic militia in Afghanistan, announced its gratitude to Wikileaks for the release and vowed to hunt down those revealed in the documents to be collaborating with the U.S. It appears that they have now made good on that threat. Khalifa Abdullah, a tribal elder, was removed from his home in Monar village, in Kandahar province’s embattled Arghandab district, by gunmen. He was then executed. [url]http://www.dailytech.com/Taliban+Murders+Afghan+Elder+Thanks+Wikileaks+for+Revealing+Spies/article19250.htm[/url][/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=981869]Totally unrelated[/url] yet sadly hilarious, [url=http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=980071]Here's Assange talking about the leak[/url], and [url=http://www.facepunch.com/showpost.php?p=23759823]here's some wl related news[/url], in which is a TED talk and about Times framing wl. [editline]07:05AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Ridge;23978418]implications of him being on the list[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showpost.php?p=23823630&postcount=204[/url]
Ridge, the taliban says A LOT of things they aren't exactly credible show me where Khalifa Abdullah is in the wikileaks documents [editline]12:07AM[/editline] nevermind, he's not even in the documents great job posting more bullshit ridge
[QUOTE=JDK721;23978457]Ridge, the taliban says A LOT of things they aren't exactly credible show me where Khalifa Abdullah is in the wikileaks documents [editline]12:07AM[/editline] nevermind, he's not even in the documents great job posting more bullshit ridge[/QUOTE] Wow, you surfed 96,000 documents in less than a minute?
[QUOTE=Ridge;23978529]Wow, you surfed 96,000 documents in less than a minute?[/QUOTE] >can't read [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showpost.php?p=23823630&postcount=204[/url] and if you disagree then go ahead and search the documents and show me where the guy is in them
[QUOTE=Ridge;23978418][/QUOTE] That Dailytech source is shit. The article has a picture of a bloody hand and then they identify Assange as a "convicted computer criminal". If you're going to cite biased sources at least find ones that hide their bias
[QUOTE=ZekeTwo;23978759]That Dailytech source is shit. The article has a picture of a bloody hand and then they identify Assange as a "convicted computer criminal".[/QUOTE] I noticed that as well and laughed
[QUOTE=FPChris;23962444]Wikileaks server is in Sweden, Sweden is Pirate Country. Good luck taking down that server.[/QUOTE] we aren't talking about a couple of shitty pirated songs and movies here. We are talking about Government Secrets that are putting lives in danger because of some fucking jackass thinking that everybody needs the truth. a.k.a INTERPOL is going to hunt your ass down, you are getting slapped with espionage, and your going to rot in prison for the rest of your life.
[QUOTE=italics560;23979204]we aren't talking about a couple of shitty pirated songs and movies here. We are talking about Government Secrets that are putting lives in danger because of some fucking jackass thinking that everybody needs the truth. a.k.a INTERPOL is going to hunt your ass down, you are getting slapped with espionage, and your going to rot in prison for the rest of your life.[/QUOTE] so people shouldn't know the truth of covered up war crimes.
[QUOTE=italics560;23979204]we aren't talking about a couple of shitty pirated songs and movies here. We are talking about Government Secrets that are putting lives in danger because of some fucking jackass thinking that everybody needs the truth. a.k.a INTERPOL is going to hunt your ass down, you are getting slapped with espionage, and your going to rot in prison for the rest of your life.[/QUOTE] Julian Assange is NOT Wikileaks, he isn't even the founder of it. He is just the spokesperson / public face of it. Wikileaks is not "some fucking jackass" it is a group of journalists who are doing what any other journalist would do with the documents they have. As I have said before, the only person who should be hunted down and arrested is the person who handed them the documents.
Assange's WL's Editor in Chief and a founder of it, though I agree with the rest of your [Jsm] post.
[QUOTE=Ridge;23978418]source[/QUOTE] That source pinned two stories together that were irrelvatnt. That is deceptive as you get. [editline]08:00PM[/editline] The first story was Taliban vowing to hunt down names in the Wikileaks documents. First of all that source already misconstrued the Talibans words and then used it as an excuse. [editline]08:01PM[/editline] Normally I peg bad sources as being biased, leaving out facts or spinning the article a bit but rarely will i ever say a news source is flat out fabircating news and that is what dailytech is doing right now. That article is a flat out lie [editline]08:03PM[/editline] [QUOTE=italics560;23979204]we aren't talking about a couple of shitty pirated songs and movies here. [B]We are talking about Government Secrets that are putting lives in danger because of some fucking jackass thinking that everybody needs the truth.[/B] a.k.a INTERPOL is going to hunt your ass down, you are getting slapped with espionage, and your going to rot in prison for the rest of your life.[/QUOTE] The documents haven't gotten anyone hurt. without the truth getting out, the public still sits in the dark and the war will never fucking end anytime soon.
[QUOTE=Melnek;23972052]Well, there aren't. Especially when your enemy doesn't have them. Rules in wars have just about as much as effectivity as rules in schools.[/QUOTE] wow you make terrible analogies [editline]03:06PM[/editline] [QUOTE=imadaman;23987130]Assange's WL's Editor in Chief and a founder of it, though I agree with the rest of your [Jsm] post.[/QUOTE] yes, he is a co-founder, not the founder
[QUOTE=Lazor;23991493]wow you make terrible analogies [/QUOTE] Elaborate.
[QUOTE=Melnek;23991626]Elaborate.[/QUOTE] You make REALLY terrible analogies. there, elborated
[QUOTE=Warhol;23991664]You make REALLY terrible analogies. there, elborated[/QUOTE] now how about you actually tell me how that is a bad analogy instead of being a complete moron.
Schools have mediocre rules, like don't write on desks and bang your teacher. In war, there are MANY doucments and shit holding you back like the geneva convention, UN charter, INTERPOL and the fucking constitution. If you don't follow them, there will be a backlash from major world countries and international orginisations so if you want to call someone a complete moron, look at your retarded and overly patrotic posts where you cleary demonstrate you know shit about international law.
[QUOTE=Warhol;23992041]Schools have mediocre rules, like don't write on desks and bang your teacher. In war, there are MANY doucments and shit holding you back like the geneva convention, UN charter, INTERPOL and the fucking constitution. If you don't follow them, there will be a backlash from major world countries and international orginisations so if you want to call someone a complete moron, look at your retarded and overly patrotic posts where you cleary demonstrate you know shit about international law.[/QUOTE] I wasn't referring to the quantity of rules, I was talking about their effectivity, when say, a school is against violence. But somehow students still get into fights. For the one simple fact that some people just dont give a shit about rules or laws, the same exact thing happens in a ANY war where they let psychopaths serve. If you actually gave it some thought you would realize that my analogy was decent. And I have stated many times that I am against what the US does in the wars they are in, I'm just saying that you people should stop your blind generalization towards the entire fucking military force just because some retards get a thrill from shooting unarmed civilians.
nice job making an unbiased title
How did this dude even get ahold of this stuff.
[QUOTE=Melnek;23992415]I wasn't referring to the quantity of rules, I was talking about their effectivity, when say, a school is against violence.[/quote] You can't prevent crimes, which is why these laws exist, to try and prohibit them and PROSECUTE people when they break the laws. lern2law. [quote]For the one simple fact that some people just dont give a shit about rules or laws, the same exact thing happens in a ANY war where they let psychopaths serve.[/quote] Again, international courts exist for a reason. [quote]If you actually gave it some thought you would realize that my analogy was decent.[/quote] it skips out on WAY too many differences to be decent. [quote]And I have stated many times that I am against what the US does in the wars they are in, I'm just saying that you people should stop your blind generalization towards the entire fucking military force just because some retards get a thrill from shooting unarmed civilians.[/QUOTE] It's not just maliciousness, it's also fuck ups and miscommunication. The military is not just corrupt and harmful, it's also problematic and has trouble being stable. And any fucking supporter of the troops should agree with me, ask any soldier and they'll say the military is horrendous at taking care of them, even when they're veterans. [editline]10:41PM[/editline] [QUOTE=todd101320;23994616]How did this dude even get ahold of this stuff.[/QUOTE] people in the military leaked it [editline]10:42PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Archy;23993809]nice job making an unbiased title[/QUOTE] the US did pressure Britian, Germany, and Australia to charge wikileaks editor with espionage, what's so biased about that?
[QUOTE=imadaman;23987130]Assange's WL's Editor in Chief and a founder of it, though I agree with the rest of your [Jsm] post.[/QUOTE] Ah, I had guessed he was a bit more involved than just being the public face but I wasn't sure. [QUOTE=todd101320;23994616]How did this dude even get ahold of this stuff.[/QUOTE] They were [B]allegedly[/B] given it by the same person who (according to the US government) leaked the "collateral murder" videos.
Freedom of speech?
[QUOTE=Afgman;23997859]Freedom of speech?[/QUOTE] Usually not the case when it comes to exposing classified government documents (or private, for that matter)
[QUOTE=Ridge;23998071]Usually not the case when it comes to exposing classified government documents (or private, for that matter)[/QUOTE] Regulating free speech is retarded.
[QUOTE=Warhol;23998624]Regulating free speech is retarded.[/QUOTE] Not really.
lol, it is. you can't restrict what people can see. It's pure facism.
[QUOTE=Warhol;23999065]lol, it is. you can't restrict what people can see. It's pure facism.[/QUOTE] you, partially, should.
And what will it acomplish?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.