WikiLeaks Preparing to Release Video of U.S Massacre in Afghanistan; worse then previous
356 replies, posted
[QUOTE=CubeManv2;22795629]I have two opinions on this, If it's just civilians dieing in crossfire then this video means shit all to me. But if it's acutal soliders just killing people randomly then this video has a point. This includes if some idiot is waving his gun in the air with people jumping all around him saying U.S sucks. The second he points it everyone around him is pretty much open to die in my opinion even if they didn't have weapons.[/QUOTE]
Of course, it it's civilians for example running through crossfire between U.S troops and the Taliban(or whatever), then yes, i'd say it's the civilians fault. But if it's actually U.S troops shooting civilians on purpose, then it's not justified.
This entire thread is two sides of people firing shit-buckets at each other.
Freedom of speech keeps this guy invulnerable to the U.S. Government, so, in turn, the U.S. Government can't do shit about it.
Uh oh another video that will cause a big argument on the internet but be barely reported and have absolutely no impact on the wider world for any important length of time.
Why can't we all just get along. :smith:
I never once heard that Apache "massacre" reported on the news. I was the only person in my entire friendship/family circle who had heard about it.
Every country has their own videos their soldiers took showing their wrong doings. U.S. is not different.
[QUOTE=Carne;22795660]Of course, it it's civilians for example running through crossfire between U.S troops and the Taliban(or whatever), then yes, i'd say it's the civilians fault. But if it's actually U.S troops shooting civilians on purpose, then it's not justified.[/QUOTE]
I'm just hoping it's not some video that shows the U.S. soldiers killing some innocent person and that's it. When there is usually a lot more to it.
[QUOTE=Zambies!;22795599]All of a sudden, right before it is released the wiki leaks site is going to say[/QUOTE]
You do realize that if the US government even touches the founder of Wikileaks it's going to cause a worldwide shitstorm as well as cause thousands of other people to set up their own sites like wikileaks ensuring that every horrible thing the US has done gets smeared across the entire internet, right?
[QUOTE=ZakkShock;22795730]
Freedom of speech keeps this guy invulnerable to the U.S. Government, so, in turn, the U.S. Government can't do shit about it.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they can do something about it. You don't think governments deal with certain people that seem to be an upcoming threat? Like this guy who's about to leak more videos of the U.S. Army. The public eye can lose faith in the war which they wouldn't want.
[editline]08:57AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;22795759]You do realize that if the US government even touches the founder of Wikileaks it's going to cause a worldwide shitstorm as well as cause thousands of other people to set up their own sites like wikileaks causing every horrible thing the US has done to be smeared across the entire internet, right?[/QUOTE]
Trust me. You wouldn't hear ANYTHING about him if the US government found him. They would make sure it would be quiet.
[QUOTE=Soldier32;22795763]
Trust me. You wouldn't hear ANYTHING about him if the US government found him. They would make sure it would be quiet.[/QUOTE]
So the US is a police state?
[QUOTE=Soldier32;22795763]Trust me. You wouldn't hear ANYTHING about him if the US government found him. They would make sure it would be quiet.[/QUOTE]
Yeah because nobody will notice Wikileaks ceasing updates
360° rotationnal fire in villages bitches !
[QUOTE=Zeke129;22795834]Yeah because nobody will notice Wikileaks ceasing updates[/QUOTE]
Yeah and then the conspiracy theories would come into play.
[QUOTE=A.C.I.D;22795797]So the US is a police state?[/QUOTE]
No, but are you ignorant to think your government doesn't subdue certain people that go against it? They at the least would monitor them 24/7.
[QUOTE=Soldier32;22795847]Yeah and then the conspiracy theories would come into play.
No, but are you ignorant to think your government doesn't subdue certain people that go against it? They at the least would monitor them 24/7.[/QUOTE]
Yerh I would hope that my government doesn't suppress all opposition.
[QUOTE=A.C.I.D;22795891]Yerh I would hope that my government doesn't suppress all opposition.[/QUOTE]
They wouldn't suppress all. They would of course monitor them all, only certain ones they would take action against. Everyone country does this though. U.S. is no exception. There are millions of secrets every government hides from their people. Type of government is no exception.
Above poster is correct.
[QUOTE=TheChantzGuy;22795020]wikileaks is just some propaganda bullshit[/QUOTE]
TheChantzGuy4President i always wanted to go to iraq and shoot all civilians.
Doesn't the first amendment allow for media criticizing the government? In essence, by barring wikileaks from releasing this, the government is in direct violation of the Constitution, seeing as this video reveals not only war crimes committed by US soldiers, but a medium for allowing the public to know about it.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;22795759]You do realize that if the US government even touches the founder of Wikileaks it's going to cause a worldwide shitstorm as well as cause thousands of other people to set up their own sites like wikileaks ensuring that every horrible thing the US has done gets smeared across the entire internet, right?[/QUOTE]
The founder of wikileaks will just be "in hiding".
Wikileaks isn't going anywhere Jesus guys
[QUOTE=Arachnidus;22795988]Doesn't the first amendment allow for media criticizing the government? In essence, by barring wikileaks from releasing this, the government is in direct violation of the Constitution, seeing as this video reveals not only war crimes committed by US soldiers, but a medium for allowing the public to know about it.[/QUOTE]
True, but it is also data theft. It wouldn't be the fact that it became public, it would be purchasing or taking possession of, known stolen goods.
It only gets worse from there. If they market it as US intelligence data, then things start getting really nasty.
It isn't SHOWING it that is illegal, it's OBTAINING it.
Latest Tweets:
[LIST]
[*][URL="http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Special:Jump/aHR0cDovL3R3aXR0ZXIuY29tL3dpa2lsZWFrcy9zdGF0dXNlcy8xNjYyNzgzMjgzNA=="]Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:15:38[/URL] wikileaks: Julian speaking to EU Parliamentarians tomorrow - live stream available [URL="http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Special:Jump/aHR0cDovL2JpdC5seS9jcXJXY08="]bit.ly/cqrWcO[/URL]
[*][URL="http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Special:Jump/aHR0cDovL3R3aXR0ZXIuY29tL3dpa2lsZWFrcy9zdGF0dXNlcy8xNjUxNDk3MTQ5Mw=="]Sat, 19 Jun 2010 02:25:37[/URL] wikileaks: US Army, US Army CID, State Dep have together been visiting Manning's irregular US email contacts.
[*][URL="http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Special:Jump/aHR0cDovL3R3aXR0ZXIuY29tL3dpa2lsZWFrcy9zdGF0dXNlcy8xNjUwODg4MDE3OQ=="]Sat, 19 Jun 2010 00:36:17[/URL] wikileaks: Does WikiLeaks Have Reason to Fear the US Government? | Atlantic [URL="http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Special:Jump/aHR0cDovL2JpdC5seS9hQlhGc3o="]bit.ly/aBXFsz[/URL]
[/LIST]
[editline]02:23PM[/editline]
Kinda of a dickish move for Iran to block WikiLeaks, reason in red.
[release]
[B]WIKILEAKS PRESS RELEASE[/B]
Thu Jul 16 20:37:43 GMT 2009
"Iran blocks Wikileaks"
[I]Iran has blocked the main addresses of the whistleblower site WikiLeaks. In doing so, it has crossed an important human rights line.[/I]
A middle-sized developing country, such as Iran, which is faced with wealthy adversaries, may argue that it needs to censor "enemy media" in order to maintain itself as an independent nation.
[highlight]Since 2007 the United States has publicly earmarked hundreds of millions of dollars for Iranian destabilization efforts, a good portion of which has gone into funding anti-government media.
You can read about one such US-Israeli media effort exposed by WikiLeaks [URL="http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Special:Jump/aHR0cDovL2hhbW1vbmQuZm9yZWlnbnBvbGljeWpvdXJuYWwuY29tLzIwMDkvMDcvMDMvc3RhdGUtZGVwYXJ0bWVudC1ncmFudC1mb3ItbmV3cy13ZWJzaXRlLXRhcmdldGluZy1pcmFu"]here[/URL]. [/highlight]
While funding for farsi media outside of Iran can be well intentioned, often this funding is concealed and comes from Iran's long standing adversaries. Unfortunately such efforts have the side effect of legitimizing Iranian trans-border censorship.
Yet whatever concerns Iran has with foreign destabilization campaigns, its blocking of WikiLeaks can not be justified.
[highlight]Far from being an anti-Iranian propaganda site, WikiLeaks has often exposed other countries' plans actions or plans in relation to Iran. And while much of the anglophone press ran clearly fabricated documents showing a Mousavi landslide in the country's Presidential elections, WikiLeaks did not (this is not to say that there was no election fraud). [/highlight]
But Iran has not blocked WikiLeaks to stop foreign influence pouring into the country. It has blocked WikiLeaks to try and prevent Iranian whistleblowers getting the truth out.
In censorship terms, the blocking of WikiLeaks is Iran's Berlin wall moment; it is not an attempt to keep enemies [U]out[/U], rather, it is an attempt to lock Iranians [U]in[/U], and as such must be condemned.[/release]
I like how the article says the founder is in hiding, when he was out in public speaking yesterday (Albeit for the first time in a month). I think he is just avoiding the USA.
(Although after writing this I just read the articles date and it was the 18th :mad:)
I also like how the US are trying to police the entire world, Wikileaks is not based nor hosted in America. Not to mention they haven't committed any crime, its not like they are the people getting hold of the secrets and leaking them they are just giving people the ability to share them. I would like to see the US (Or any countries) government try and force Wikileaks to reveal any of their sources, apparently they are protected by Swedish laws which make it illegal for them to reveal sources.
Edit: Wow in the time it took me to write this post a load of posts have appeared, I am referring to the article in the OP btw.
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;22794440]It's the stupid soldiers, not the government. Some redneck goes "This here'll be a great picture show back at the homestead!" as he plows down iraqis in his humvee, and it spreads from there, occasionally spreading from soldier to soldier until it gets into the hands of someone who leaks it. At least, that's how I envision how it happens.[/QUOTE]
If I remember correctly all aircraft and vehicles have cameras. For what reason I haven't got a fucking clue but at least some do as far as I remember.
And air strike massacre? Come the fuck on, really when you're flying at low level at something akin to mach 3 a few hundred feet from the ground your attention tends to be focused on not hitting a high building, killing yourself and destroying a 250 million dollar machine.
I'll watch it but if it's what I think it is, theres way too much hype.
[QUOTE=Jsm;22796135]
I also like how the US are trying to police the entire world, Wikileaks is not based nor hosted in America. Not to mention they haven't committed any crime, its not like they are the people getting hold of the secrets and leaking them they are just giving people the ability to share them. I would like to see the US (Or any countries) government try and force Wikileaks to reveal any of their sources, apparently they are protected by Swedish laws which make it illegal for them to reveal sources.[/QUOTE]
It's called espionage when you take secrets from one government and give them to someone else.
Welcome to Central Intelligence Agency territory. I assumed they were based inside the United States, which is a silly assumption of course, but it would mean the FBI would be responsible. The FBI is a police organization and has rules to follow, the Central Intelligence Agency is more of a military organization and has a distinct lack of rules to follow. This...is not good.
[QUOTE=bravehat;22796153]If I remember correctly all aircraft and vehicles have cameras. For what reason I haven't got a fucking clue but at least some do as far as I remember.
[/QUOTE]
I assume (other than for actually being able to see where they are going / targeting) they are just used for reviewing what they have done. And probably to prove / disprove claims of things. It's amazing how ANY of these videos end up on the internet, you would think they would be kept quite secure.
[QUOTE=Arrows;22794355]Who cares, war is war, what happens in war, stays in war. wikileaks should just die.[/QUOTE]
The US follows just war theory, hell the whole west follows Just War theory. Under this they're breaking the law to protect innocents.
[editline]02:35PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=GunFox;22796193]It's called espionage when you take secrets from one government and give them to someone else.
Welcome to Central Intelligence Agency territory. I assumed they were based inside the United States, which is a silly assumption of course, but it would mean the FBI would be responsible. The FBI is a police organization and has rules to follow, the Central Intelligence Agency is more of a military organization and has a distinct lack of rules to follow. This...is not good.[/QUOTE]
It won't be easy to take him down regardless, now that his name is popular among internet dwellers and campainers.
[QUOTE=GunFox;22796034]True, but it is also data theft. It wouldn't be the fact that it became public, it would be purchasing or taking possession of, known stolen goods.
It only gets worse from there. If they market it as US intelligence data, then things start getting really nasty.
It isn't SHOWING it that is illegal, it's OBTAINING it.[/QUOTE]
I didn't consider that, you're right. So it looks like no way other than pure morals and ethics, that the US government can essentially go to town on WikiLeaks.
This is why a sedentary civilian population sucks so much ass. It seems the only people that stand up and fight are the religious fanatics and all the retards that joined the Tea Party.
[QUOTE=GunFox;22796193]It's called espionage when you take secrets from one government and give them to someone else.
[/QUOTE]
I hadn't thought of it like that. I guess leaking government secrets is taken a lot more seriously than the bulk of Wikileaks leaks (Business / Private individuals info).
Although I don't think the US government would do anything (directly) 'illegal' to Wikileaks or its founders. Surely it has its image of being a reasonable country that deals with things properly to uphold.
is the video out i want to see what all the commotion is about
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
