>>3 Then again, if Wikileaks had existed in 2007
WikiLeaks was established in October 2006. Way to journalism, guys. >>5
I thought that too, the leaks weren't anything extraordinary, nor were they about anything people didn't already know. For me, they confirmed preconceived notions that I had suspected. Still, any "new" truth revealed is better than not any at all, even if it's used for propaganda purposes.
Name:
Anonymous2011-02-27 3:50
Al Gore invented Michael Moore!!!!
Name:
Anonymous2011-02-27 9:36
People are still making a fuss over these scriptkiddies? The damage to them and their glorious leader has been done. The smart ones who put up with Assange's shit have jumped ship, and the only time it makes news anymore is when Assange makes a fuss over "DA EVIL GOBBERMENT" saying or plotting to do "bad" things about him.
Yawn.
Name:
Anonymous2011-02-27 18:32
Yes, that right ASSange, everyone in the world is wrong and you are right! Talk about caught up in your own importance-how is this fool a hero?
What we have here is a criminal hacker in more trouble...and of course, "innocent" again? Look at this half wits history, a large percentage of his life, he has been on welfare, he was convicted of hacking, he has pending charges he won't face and encourages people to steal information to post on his pathetic web site! (Like a little snitch - the reality is that he hates governments and authority)
Interesting how when organizations around the world, didn't want to deal with Wikileaks, their response is to hack in to their sites or close them down - they think they are the law and rules and laws don't apply to them!
Name:
Anonymous2011-02-27 18:35
Assange's only hope, and he knows it, is to cast as much doubt in as many people's minds as possible, via any means. Normally this comes by accusing everyone, apart from himself, of having a secret agenda (normally sucking up to the US), painting himself as the innocent victim in a very clever and sinister international conspiracy against his website, or himself personally. I am tired of listening to him. I can hardly bare to listen to him talk. It sounds like he is telling the same story for the millionth time, which is why it sounds so plausible to those who would rather believe him, all the kinks in his reasoning have been ironed out.
I thought there were laws about prejudicing a trial. Does anyone know why Assange is allowed to speak freely (and way too openly) to the media during the course of a trial? If he feels so controlled by having a tag and house arrest (?), which I suppose will continue for another year while the appeals process goes, why not just go to Sweden to face the music? Ah yes, because it's all a ruse to have him on death row in the US. It all makes sense now....sigh
Name:
Anonymous2011-02-28 1:09
/imageboard discussion/
Name:
Anonymous2011-03-03 6:36
Assange is an unstable, self-important idiot, just perfect for this new age of pointless but very damaging denunciation. He has changed the world - and not in a good way.
We're reading today that Bradley Manning might face the death penalty. Assange is indirectly responsible for this, by providing a platform for deluded young nitwits who, out of boredom and frustration ('I was in a bad place' - Manning), bite off way more than they can chew.
I hope that somebody will put this weirdo on the back burner, where he belongs, preferably by extradition to the US.
Assange is the worst person to be the head of Wikileaks, but wikileaks itself is a good thing. Someone has to hold government accountable for its actions. Wikileaks is about the only real way to do that. I don't know about you, but I want to know what's being done by my government in my name. We can't have a functioning republic without knowing the truth.
And why now? Why not in the 70s or 80s or even before? People could have done what you want back then but they didn't. Don't expect to know what's being done "in your name". In fact why do you think the Government is doing this stuff and would want to say "This was done by [insert name here]"? They wouldn't be allowed to.
And wikileaks still contributes diddlysquat that most people don't care about.