seems like someone is trying to cut off wikileaks entirely

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by vtol, Dec 3, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Luxeon

    Luxeon Registered Member

    I am disturbed that Wikileaks is doing this.
    I apologize in advance for jumping upon the soap-box.

    Someone stole property of the United States and gave/sold it to Wikileaks. That person will hopefully be prosecuted ASAP.

    Wikileaks knowingly disseminated this stolen property, therefore they should also be shut down ASAP.
    Wikileaks was not given permission by the American people to provide a check on power/oversight--that role belongs solely to the individual branches of the United States government.

    Though not perfect, Separation of Power provides an impressive safeguard against abuse by providing oversight while maintaining a good level of security.

    Wikileaks is not a whistleblower. A true whistleblower discovers evidence of malfeasance and, attempting to remedy the issue via the proper chain of command, is stymied by the system, therefore they have no choice but to go public.
    Whistleblowing is always a last resort. Wikileaks is simply attempting to damage the US. Their intent is hardly noble: I would classify it as sabotage.

    (On a side-note: Perhaps the Wikileaks heroes will, in the spirit of freedom of speech and the noble cause, attain and release some classified info from China, North Korea or Russia.
    These countries probably would not be as...lenient... as the US in their handling of the matter.)

    Interestingly Wikileaks have now leveled threats of leaking non-redacted documents if the US attempts to shut them down. This shows clear intent to harm the US, and could create an air-tight case for charges of espionage.

    One can only hope our Justice department has the guts to carry it through.
  2. Kid Shamrock

    Kid Shamrock Registered Member

    Wikileaks needs to be shut down and Assange tried for espionage. May the DDoS attacks continue!! :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
  3. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    the initiation of this thread was not meant to stir a discussion about like/dislike of wikileks, please make your statements in an appropriate forum.
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2010
  4. Luxeon

    Luxeon Registered Member

    I apologize, sir.
  5. Kid Shamrock

    Kid Shamrock Registered Member

    Gee, it seems that anyone expressing an opinion you don't agree with is off-topic and nothing is said to those supporting your viewpoint. You're not a mod anyway, so you have no business trying to silence others. :mad:
  6. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    express away, but where it is related. and that is all what has been politely asked of you. if you read the thread I did ask others as well to stay on topic (see post #4).. nor did I express a viewpoint of liking/disliking wikileaks.
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2010
  7. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    if it holds true the German government is indirectly supporting wikileaks by tax deductible donations

  8. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

  9. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Using "Official" channels to highlight and complain about wrongdoing/fraud etc etc is NO use whatsoever ! The people who are supposed to investigate won't rock the boat as it can/will affect their position/s. Plus, when they get referred higher up the chain they can/will also get blocked/impeded etc for similar reasons by those people too.

    Not only that but the "buddy system" is in place to protect the backs of everyone involved, especially the ones highest up the chain. And don't expect the mainstream media to investigate either as they are also part of the problem. Too much advertising etc $ at stake to be Totally impartial !

    So without www's like Wikileaks a lot of the real truth about what goes on and by who etc, would Never be known. Or not for years later when even more damage/fraud etc would have been committed in the meantime.

    If we had TRULY honest politicians who actually worked 100% for "The People" and not self interests, the world Would be a much better place. Unfortunately it's not like that, so until We/You kick them out and replace them and the system with something a whole lot better, we Really do need to be eternally thankful for sites like Wikileaks.

    As 2011 is nearly here and 2012 not far away, it may be too late to stop the rot after all this time. But as the system in it's current state needs to breakdown anyway so it can be repaired, even though it will NOT be pretty for quite some years, it IS absolutely required as things can NOT go on the way the have been doing anymore.
  10. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

  11. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    would appreciate if this thread does not turn into a battlefield of political a/o personal statements about the goals of wikileaks and mr. assange, which could be different in many ways than perceived by the people.
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2010
  12. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    Not offense guy, but was your post #2 meant to be part of a mere technical discussion of how the website was cut off, or perhaps a 'non-critical' discussion of who all is doing it?
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 6, 2010
  13. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    none taken. I aware that this a fine a line to walk or to miss....

    the thread was meant for the technical side, unfolding events and the background of it, thence the links and quotes to background information, showing different sides of the fence

    just I was hoping that forum users would stay away from making their judgment/justification calls here about the purpose of wikileaks and the persona of mr. assange.
  14. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    Do you really believe that Daniel Ellsberg's open letter to calling for a boycott of the same (your link) because of "Amazon’s cowardice and servility in abruptly terminating its hosting of the Wikileaks website" is not part of "political a/o personal statements about the goals of wikileaks and mr. assange"?

    And if you consider it part of 'unfolding events' or 'background information', then virtually any link to the news about WikiLeaks falls under that heading, including the posts with links you seem to be concerned about.

    Unless I'm mistaken, threads here are supposed to be on topic, but not one-sided.

    Please practice what you preach, that's all.
  15. nightrace

    nightrace Registered Member

    Since when did they start offering money for documents?

    In theory.

    Wikileaks has no control over what is sent to them.

    It's called self-defence.

    The reason WikiLeaks exists is because the corporate news media is not doing the job they are supposed to. Let me give you one example. When the whistleblower at East Anglia University leaked the Climategate emails (from which he had carefully redacted names) to the BBC that so-called "news organisation" sat on them for months. When it became obvious the BBC would never release the information he uploaded them to a server in Siberia. Perhaps that is what all whistleblowers should do? If the fourth estate actually did their job WikiLeaks would be irrelevant.
  16. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    I do not preach. you are referring only the the Ellesberg post, yet I quoted Amazon and Tableusoftware even in the initial post. Also quoted from a news outlet citing the Australian attorney general and the Australian foreign minister. How is that one sided? Ellesberg is not a user here, or at least did not post here, nor does it reflect my perception of wikileaks or mr. assange.

    As much there as the authorities (Liebermann) on the crimes of the platform voicing their concern it would be one sided to leave them without a statement of their counterpart, such as the EFF and Ellesberg. If you do not concur with the credibility of those authorities both ends please let us know.
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2010
  17. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    The reference to "one-sided" wasn't in regard to the content of your links.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 6, 2010
  18. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    as mentioned earlier this a fine line, which in the end lies in the eye of the beholder, due to the environment it is taking place. I did not mean to be sided either way, just trying this thread not to slid into a war of words between pro and anti wikileaks/assange, that effort might prove unsuccessful though...
  19. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    I don't advocate such a war of words, but you may be right, considering that a mod has already directed the OP of the [thread=288079]Wikileaks scandal: 'Boycott Amazon!'[/thread] thread to post here instead. It will probably be difficult to discuss that issue without some here offering an opinion of support or opposition (or indifference). Good Luck.
  20. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Folks I have my own feelings about this which at this point I will refrain from posting.

    However I do have this opinion:

    This thread is dangerously close to being a political controversy which is off limits. The close button is twinging.

  21. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    A perfect example of how "politics" can be tricky to moderate. I mean, we're only talking about the biggest computer security story in history!

    We just can't pretend a story like this isn't happening.

  22. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    the mod was kind enough to keep the door open and did not close it yet. that is why I did asked and tried to keep posters on topic, in view of the fine line to walk. supposedly there are other forums where everybody can just express their personal feelings
  23. LockBox

    LockBox Registered Member

    Did you see something wrong with my post? I was expressing the conundrum that the mods must feel.

    And by the way, vtol, (serious questions - I'm not being snarky)... express to me, in your own words -

    1) What exactly is the topic you would like us to stay on?

    2) How do you propose we discuss that topic without discussing the ramifications which are - inherently - political?

  24. vtol

    vtol Registered Member

    1 see above in the thread, that was asked and replied before.
    2 don;t discuss the political ramifications or your personal political views - as pointed by the mod, seems their patience is already strained. there are probably a few other platforms where the matters you mentioned can be explored

    if you will, for the moment the process of harnessing wikileaks has come to halt, will see and report back in case of further developments

    N.B. I did not see anything wrong in your post, or did I say?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.