The Official Wikileaks Megathread: All Wikileaks news will be posted here! - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Tyler_Durden;26592886]I have no idea what the fuck you are all bitching about with this thread, I hate looking around for all the bullshit on Wikileaks, and thanks to this guy we have a single place for everything. Facepunchers will bitch about anything.[/QUOTE] Small thread for the help of others? People will bitch rather than ignore.

Someone is going to make a movie about Julian Assange, Wikileaks, and this whole thing in 20 odd years. Calling it now.

Got back from acing my Criminal Justice final :smug: Gonna update the OP with more cables and shit.

[QUOTE=Ninjarooster;26595840]Someone is going to make a movie about Julian Assange, Wikileaks, and this whole thing in 20 odd years. Calling it now.[/QUOTE] Twenty? Try 4 or 5. [editline]9th December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=BrickInHead;26590756]since pretty much everyone is immediatelly discounting those who don't blindly support wikileaks, aka shit like this, for example, i'm reposting my reasoning i have no issue bringing corruption / war crimes to light but releasing diplomatic information is dangerous[/QUOTE] I agree with all of this. Of course, I'd also say that he's not really the one that should be releasing even the warcrimes. I feel that we need to strive for an honest government that is willing to release information like these warcrimes of their own accord... letting fringe sites release it not only encourages this absurd "above authority" thinking, but it convinces governments that they need to keep their shit further under wraps, which is the opposite of what we want.

[QUOTE=postmanX3;26596280]Twenty? Try 4 or 5. [editline]9th December 2010[/editline] I agree with all of this. Of course, I'd also say that he's not really the one that should be releasing even the warcrimes. I feel that we need to strive for an honest government that is willing to release information like these warcrimes of their own accord... letting fringe sites release it not only encourages this absurd "above authority" thinking, but it convinces governments that they need to keep their shit further under wraps, which is the opposite of what we want.[/QUOTE] I agree that injustices should be brought to light. However, releasing a list of vital installations that have actually done nothing wrong and could have potentially dire consequences if destroyed? That's different. As is threatening to release some sort of "Doomsday File" (Just calling it by what the thread referred to it as) if something were to happen to him. He honestly starting to sound like some sort of super villain, rather than a hero of free information.

[QUOTE=Dalndox;26597466]I agree that injustices should be brought to light. However, releasing a list of vital installations that have actually done nothing wrong and could have potentially dire consequences if destroyed? That's different. As is threatening to release some sort of "Doomsday File" (Just calling it by what the thread referred to it as) if something were to happen to him. He honestly starting to sound like some sort of super villain, rather than a hero of free information.[/QUOTE] Yeah, I agree with that, too. Couldn't you tell I was against WL/Assange from my post?

[QUOTE=postmanX3;26597532]Yeah, I agree with that, too. Couldn't you tell I was against WL/Assange from my post?[/QUOTE] I could tell. I was just getting my personal opinion out there. Keeping the discussion going and all that. :v:

[QUOTE=Dalndox;26597466]I agree that injustices should be brought to light. However, releasing a list of vital installations that have actually done nothing wrong and could have potentially dire consequences if destroyed? That's different. As is threatening to release some sort of "Doomsday File" (Just calling it by what the thread referred to it as) if something were to happen to him. He honestly starting to sound like some sort of super villain, rather than a hero of free information.[/QUOTE] Well information IS power. And you know what they say about power.

According to from what i hear Anonymous is going to stop DDOSing. They are changing strategies to find the Least known info that is the most hard hitting in the cables and throw it everywhere

[QUOTE=Wii60;26598726]According to from what i hear Anonymous is going to stop DDOSing. They are changing strategies to find the Least known info that is the most hard hitting in the cables and throw it everywhere[/QUOTE] Wait, Anon doing something intelligent...FFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

How does anon...DO something? How do they talk to eachother? I don't get it

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;26599329]How does anon...DO something? How do they talk to eachother?[/QUOTE] I don't know, but i hear they're using this invention called "the Internet" :downs:

[QUOTE=Van-man;26599601]I don't know, but i hear they're using this invention called "the Internet" :downs:[/QUOTE] He means how do they communicate while raiding, I.E. skype etc. [editline]10th December 2010[/editline] To organize I believe they just use their forums.

[QUOTE=RayDark;26599810]He means how do they communicate while raiding, I.E. skype etc.[/QUOTE] The question was pretty vague, should specify it better.

Ron Paul addressing congress regarding WikiLeaks: [media][URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=ywoInPNXZJk[/URL][/media] [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/"] [/URL] And this is coming from a a Texas Republican!! This speech sums up the entire situation and the question that [I]should[/I] be being asked. I'm gonna go ahead and rate myself agree because I agree with this guy so much.

Coldblood on Radio 4's Today programme. [URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4/2010/12/anonymous_pro-wikileaks_hackers_on_radio4s_today.html[/URL]

[I]"Cold Blood is a twenty two year-old software engineer" Sounds more like 16 [/I]

[QUOTE=kevn150;26594573]honestly this was all fun and games at first but now its grown into a serious deal it was fun to support Assange and be like "yeaa fuck the government hahah lmao xD" but he's kind of a terrorist now, considering the massive harm he is willing to do our country and to the people who think he's doing the correct thing (aka rebellious fat 13 year olds who cant be rebellious in any other manner than supporting an aussie radical), please open your eyes and see that he is making threats against the United States, which if i recall correctly, is terrorism so if you aren't from America and you're supporting him, go ahead don't care you non-americans never liked us anyway however, for the people living in the United States who support this guy, please move somewhere else thanks[/QUOTE] Ok, first of all, Assange isn´t doing shit. He isn´t leaking the files, he isn´t even the one publishing the files. At most, he´s just calling the shots on what gets released. And since when has TRUTH been considered terrorism? I certainly missed that meeting. Wikileaks isn´t the one doing harm to your country, it´s your country itself. Why shouldn´t the government be responsible for its doings? Let´s say you´ve murdered someone, your brother knows it, and he finally turns you in. Is it his fault you´re in trouble? No, it´s your´s for killing the guy in the first place, and it certainly doesn´t mean your brother is a terrorist. I do think releasing the huge list of things of importance to the US was totally unnecessary, I don´t know why they did that, it doesn´t have anything to do with truth, but everything else they´ve released is entirely justifiable. And I raged when I saw a headline in a newspaper today saying "Wikileaks attacks more websites". Because it totally is Wikileaks attacking the sites and not some fucking /b/tard thinking they´re making a difference and starting some kind of anarchist revolution by DDoSing some banks website for a couple of hours. I´m totally ok with bringing down Palins homepage, though.

[quote=tetracycline;26599329]how does anon...do something? How do they talk to eachother? I don't get it[/quote] irc

[QUOTE=TehKaboose;26600935]Ok, first of all, Assange isn´t doing shit. He isn´t leaking the files, he isn´t even the one publishing the files. At most, he´s just calling the shots on what gets released. And since when has TRUTH been considered terrorism? I certainly missed that meeting. Wikileaks isn´t the one doing harm to your country, it´s your country itself. Why shouldn´t the government be responsible for its doings? Let´s say you´ve murdered someone, your brother knows it, and he finally turns you in. Is it his fault you´re in trouble? No, it´s your´s for killing the guy in the first place, and it certainly doesn´t mean your brother is a terrorist. I do think releasing the huge list of things of importance to the US was totally unnecessary, I don´t know why they did that, it doesn´t have anything to do with truth, but everything else they´ve released is entirely justifiable. And I raged when I saw a headline in a newspaper today saying "Wikileaks attacks more websites". Because it totally is Wikileaks attacking the sites and not some fucking /b/tard thinking they´re making a difference and starting some kind of anarchist revolution by DDoSing some banks website for a couple of hours. I´m totally ok with bringing down Palins homepage, though.[/QUOTE] The truth can be considered terrorism in today's society. It's like informing America that China just launched a nuke at the white house, so america freaks out and destroys them, only to find out the nuke was filled with flowers.

[QUOTE=Kade;26600698][I]"Cold Blood is a twenty two year-old software engineer" Sounds more like 16 [/I][/QUOTE] /b/ does that to people.

[QUOTE=RayDark;26601027]The truth can be considered terrorism in today's society. It's like informing America that China just launched a nuke at the white house, so America freaks out and destroys them, only to find out the nuke was filled with flowers.[/QUOTE] Your analogy sucks. America would already know about the nuke, thanks to radar. You wouldn't put flowers in a nuke, because even without a war head the missile would crash and explode. If they wanted to send flowers they'd do it in a more reasonable way, like hand delivering them. And if they did decide to send over flowers via a missle, for like a publicity stunt, they'd probably set arrangements with the government. TehKaboose's murder analogy is based in realistic events and logic, you've bent reality to fit your opinion.

The supposed "rape" victim has connections to the CIA. German Source: [url]http://info.kopp-verlag.de/hintergruende/geostrategie/udo-ulfkotte/wikileaks-die-vergewaltigte-ana-a-und-ihre-kontakte-zur-cia.html[/url] Use a translator.

[QUOTE=RayDark;26601027]It's like informing America that China just launched a nuke at the white house, so america freaks out and destroys them, only to find out the nuke was filled with flowers.[/QUOTE] If they did inform America that they had launched a nuke, even if it was full of flowers, without that information and without any way of determining if that information is correct, any retaliation would be justified based on the premise that a 'shell' of a nuke was on its way, regardless of what is supposedly contained. As said above, your analogy sucks.

[QUOTE=BloodYScar;26601385]The supposed "rape" victim has connections to the CIA. German Source: [url]http://info.kopp-verlag.de/hintergruende/geostrategie/udo-ulfkotte/wikileaks-die-vergewaltigte-ana-a-und-ihre-kontakte-zur-cia.html[/url] Use a translator.[/QUOTE] He isn't charged for rape because of the "victims", both the girls have dropped the charges.

And they raised the charges when Assange didn't use a condom (pulled out though) and they found out he was doing both of them at the same time (not literally at the same time, that would have been nice, but awkward).

[QUOTE=imadaman;26601512]And they raised the charges when Assange didn't use a condom (pulled out though) and they found out he was doing both of them at the same time (not literally at the same time, that would have been nice, but awkward).[/QUOTE] I thought he never raped them, but that not using a condom was considered rape in sweden?

The analogy isn't even the fucking point. The point is; even the truth can be considered detrimental to a country, because it is coming from a source that has full control over what they publish, if they so choose, they can hold back leaks, for example that one 'doomsday' file, to bend other people to their views. [editline]10th December 2010[/editline] I'm for wikileaks though.

[QUOTE=RayDark;26601526]The point is; even the truth can be considered detrimental to a country,[/QUOTE] Detrimental is a very subjective word. In the long term I'd say the truth (while perhaps being able to benefit individual countries in the short term) can only be seen to be beneficial to the international community as a whole in the long term.

[QUOTE=Kade;26601769]Detrimental is a very subjective word. In the long term I'd say the truth (while perhaps being able to benefit individual countries in the short term) can only be seen to be beneficial to the international community as a whole in the long term.[/QUOTE] But not when it is passed through a membrane.