Poetry Forum

Full Version: wikileaks founder such a nice guy
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, whose whistle-blowing website caused uproar last month with a leak of secret U.S. military files on Afghanistan, has been charged in Sweden with rape and molestation, the National Prosecutor's Office said on Saturday.

source:

if found guilty where the fuck will his morals be then?

on one news feed, wikileaks said no one has contacted them and that "this will be hugely distracting"

that has to be the underfuckin statement of the year.

i larfed as soon as i heard. all i'm waiting for now are the conspiracy theories as to how and why he was set up Hysterical
sad but true, though he his being charged with molestation. (which carries no prison sentence)
does that mean his morals are still suspect?
if thats the case then maybe they'll succeed with a simple molestation charge Smile
i do hope so. sadly i doubt it was them, they'd have been much more professional and used a clean cut agent instead of some hooker.
what should be under discussion is the morals of the us army,not this 1 guy's,what he does ,publishing these files is of great benefit to society

mrmod

Isn't that just a great coincidence. There's a lot of people who are not very happy with Mr. Assange and they have found a nice way to stain his reputation Dodgy
why is always the conspiracy theory against the cia that crops up. why can't the conspiracy theory go like this;

the wikileaks cretin feels the media are paying his premo donna self enough attention so he hires
two idiot woman who he knows or doesn't know to make these accusations which they subsequent drop after the charges have been laid or simply say.."that wasn't what i said"

sadly the swedish prosecutors office not wanting to look like morons lay the blame squarely at the foot os some junior clerk...but know lets all play blame the cia Hysterical


i seriously hope the preening twat dies in a fire. a good drone pilot would be really effective.
listen
in the main i love wikileaks and what it does, i just hate that sanctimonious fucker.
i also feel that while many leaks are good some are not. the truth of the matter is people specially Afghani people could be put at risk because of some of the leaks. this fucker is trying to come across as holier than though but he's a worm. you can see it in him.

the fact you call him hero saddens me. do you really think him a hero VF? seriously, yes or no?

as for the truth, shame they don't say the same thing about the twin towers or kennedy's death or a bunch of other shit. i know the occams razor theory (i saw the film "contact")

yes, the truth is always simple. it's the route to it which often proves impossible Wink

(08-23-2010, 09:42 AM)velvetfog Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-23-2010, 09:29 AM)billy Wrote: [ -> ]the fact you call him hero saddens me. do you really think him a hero VF? seriously, yes or no?
Yes, I do. Power to him.

I am no fan of the trigger happy antics of the American federal government.
well neither am i but it would have to be someone a lot better than a glory hound to be my hero.

all can say is your standards in creating heroes seem rather low Wink
(08-23-2010, 09:29 AM)billy Wrote: [ -> ]listen
in the main i love wikileaks and what it does, i just hate that sanctimonious fucker.
i also feel that while many leaks are good some are not. the truth of the matter is people specially Afghani people could be put at risk because of some of the leaks. this fucker is trying to come across as holier than though but he's a worm. you can see it in him.

the fact you call him hero saddens me. do you really think him a hero VF? seriously, yes or no?

as for the truth, shame they don't say the same thing about the twin towers or kennedy's death or a bunch of other shit. i know the occams razor theory (i saw the film "contact")

yes, the truth is always simple. it's the route to it which often proves impossible Wink
i think the afghan people are more at risk from the usa army then from wikileaks,come on,Bill

i agree, but come on sj. isn't it bad enough being damaged by the us army without facing being tortured as well because someone traced you through a wikileak timeline? i really struggle to see why he's a hero?
assuming he's a hero, then I submit that he's an imperfect one. Which isn't so unique... after all, lots of stories have been prettied up/ turned black and white by history, when often reality is not so simple.
true,addy
i don't think the man is a hero but him and his team provide a very usefull service to society,he won't last long though,or his organisation won't,they'll find a link to some banned terrorist org.or something and then wipe them from the internet
that would be irony gone to far.
i love the all the leaked stuff. but i don't believe he and his org can make safe and inspect so many 10's of thousands of documents so quickly and guarantee they're not putting peoples lives in danger. and yes as i said i agree the usa is reckless with it's drones and armed forces. i just don't think the prob should be exacerbated. as for taking him down. i'm sure those up on the hill will have a bigger hand in it out of fear of being caught with their hand in the cookie jar than any secret service entity.

i can't see them finding links for him to terrorists but i do agree there are a lot of other crimes out there to be used which would be just as distasteful.

and so they should.
it doesn't mean i think he's a good guy though. i actually think he's somewhere between slime and dog shit in relationship to how near it is to being a human being. the cunts nothing more than a glory hound. certainly not (in my opinion) heroic.
stop making out i'm against wikileaks please.
i've already stated i think in general they do a good job. i just don't agree that the blanket release of tens of thousands of whatever was prudent without first checking them out. something they couldn't have done properly given such a short time line and volume of incidents.
i read a lot of there stuff. please don't presume to know what and what i do not know about wikileaks. i do know that the guy on tv is a hard faced glory hound.

just because i despise michael jackson does not men i despise tamla motown or black artists in general. what you're doing is called is called stereotyping, you should read about it sometimes.

i personally think wikileaks needs castrating over these leaks.
(08-25-2010, 03:53 PM)billy Wrote: [ -> ]i just don't agree that the blanket release of tens of thousands of whatever was prudent without first checking them out...i personally think wikileaks needs castrating over these leaks.

What do you mean by "checking them out"?

Visiting Afghanistan personally to verify the authenticity of every single incident? Thats simply not feasible.

Asking the US Defence Department if it was OK to publish them? Then you would have a leak site which never actually published any leaks.

You're also missing the point of the site--it publishes material so that people can make up their own minds. If it was selective in what it disclosed then it would simply be another "news" organisation, where someone sitting behind a desk decided what you would / would not be allowed to know.

(08-23-2010, 09:29 AM)billy Wrote: [ -> ]i also feel that while many leaks are good some are not.

That's true.

But who, specifically, do you believe should be empowered to make that decision? To decide what you should not be allowed to know? Rupert Murdoch? Conrad Black? Barack Obama or Robert Gates [the US Secretary of Defense], or some totally anonymous officer in the US Department of Defense.

Some leaks are "not good" in the sense that they hurt individuals--you're absolutely right about that. But society as a whole is still better off for them.
i agree with touchstone,i think it's good that things are in the open as much as possible and not decided by some individual what we can read and what not,in the end that would probably cause more dead

mrmod

Nothing is perfect. We shouldn't expect a Wikileaks to be so. They can be trusted to do one thing and that is release (some) documents which some people do not wish to be public and that's what they do best. If they hurt someone in the process, you have to remember it's not their intention. Of course, it doesn't clear them of the damage done, but you have to think of the freedom of expression beacon that they're holding and the example they serve to the said movement.
so if i found out your cheating on your wife it's best if i tell the world or at leats your family.
something which wouldn't bother me by the way. if all the truth is best, why do we have an admin section> or even passwords.

by checking them out i meant, crossing them out deleting stuff that could lead to deaths. so names of informants etc were not published. something smarmy arse said was done. what i and others are complaining about (i'm not on about the usa gov, so please vf don't make it out i support their stance, if anything i said it before they did Smile ) is the fact that simply removing the names doesn't ensure their saftey. the time lines and, areas and actions are still left in. to correctly remove them i presume would take long that they spent on the first batch.

who do i believe is empowered to make that decision? whiki leaks themselves could be so empowered.

come on lets be honest here. is society any better off fro now a shagged be or even shit and most of it is, that's in the war leaks. sorry but we're not better off. the majority already knows and knew of killed civilians of drones dropping bombs everywhere.

we already know of underhand deals. these leaks aren't showing us anything we don't already know unless you've just landed from mars. what some of these leaks have shown is that some people have been put in danger are scared to live in their own community.

in truth these leaks have shown us nothing really, nothing but some poser whose out for fame and glory. we even have vf someone whose opinion i once thought relevant Smile a hero.

now the leaks that show how much a senator is stealing and from where i like. but as i say. some things in my opinion shouldn't be leaked.

as for them holding the freedom of expression beacon, who for? you me? sorry no, i can't see any altruistic premise for what they do. not when they go on every news channel telling us why they do it. the twat who fronted it is doing it for the wow factor, to get that rush, the buzz of being so called invincible. sorry but to say they're fighting for the freedom of expression is a crock of shit. (in my opinion) if those leaks are their stand on freedom of expression or any other freedom i'll eat my hat. freedoms freedom of free speech, freedom to know whats going on, freedom to do etc. that's what what they;re doing or showing. they're playing games. and as for the right to know. aren't the some thing we have the right not to know. so now the world knows and is better for it. wtf does the world now know? what? and how is it better for knowing it?

mrmod

Freedom of Expression is not passwords or whatever. my passwords concern me only. The Iraq War concerns the millions of tax payers who fund it and they're giving their money and not being told the entire truth.

If the users of this forum payed for the host and all the services provided it would be fair for them to know how it's being run. It wouldn't be giving them passwords but informing them on changes on rules, new features and what not. If a user was banned, then supply the reason. Not all things need to be shown, but the truth should never be diluted. Of course using the forumas a model is not really viable, but you get the idea.

And of course everyone knew about them. But this is de facto. These are real documents, evidence to back up what people were saying. And the videos that show what's happening and what's not happening. That's why Wikileaks is useful. Because it's evidence, not just speculation. What can be done with the evidence is arguable, but it's there and you can't deny that.

And are you saying we'd be better off if we didn't know some things? If I had a son that was thinking of joining the army, should he know what it's like? Or just be gone in the rush like many in WWI. I agree with you, not everything needs to be leaked, but as someone else said by being selective on their leaks, wikileaks would be more of a political view-point website than an arbitrary free site.

Now I don't know about the founder, and I haven't read up on his charges lately. But if you say he's enjoying the spotlight, I don't doubt it. I mean who am I to say I wouldn't do the same? He may like the attention. But you shouldn't just look at him and maybe look at the project as a whole. He may have become corrupt with his new found fame but I still think Wikileaks does what it's designed to: release information that may be useful to the public that has been ommitted. That's freedom of expression, to say what you want and to know the things you have the right to know. How many things that is, is very different between the minds of governemnts and people.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7