Wikileaks Supporters being harassed by Government

Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:26 am » by **Simpletruths10**

Wikileaks Supporters being harassed by Government

The United States Government is harassing Wikileaks supporters.

Source
Article about Wikileaks Harassment
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn ... 9/manning/

Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:45 am » by **Godsofatlantis**

hmmmmm

And yet all the corporate owned media can't stop talking about wikileaks and i'm pretty sure the government have a share in them as well.

If i was supporting wikieaks, and i'm sure many people on here are as well how come i'm not being arrested right now or being asked questions?

Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:38 am » by **Hackjames**

godsofatlantis wrote:hmmmmm

And yet all the corporate owned media can't stop talking about wikileaks and i'm pretty sure the government have a share in them as well.

If i was supporting wikieaks, and i'm sure many people on here are as well how come i'm not being arrested right now or being asked questions?

Pretty sure, eh? I'd ask you to share your reasons, assuming of course they're based on more than just opinion.

To your question, I'd answer that it's probably because no one cares enough to ask/detain you. If you read the article you'd know that the individuals had specific relationships to Wikileaks (they were not just "supporting" the group, whatever that means).

This kind of behavior is very telling about what the certain agencies within the government are prepared to do if they think it will benefit them. It's childish and immoral.

Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:42 am » by **Samuelthemule**

it's a good idea to attack something, that works for you secretly, publically, to throw the trail off.

Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:47 am » by **Hackjames**

samuelthemule wrote:it's a good idea to attack something, that works for you secretly, publically, to throw the trail off.

Sure, potentially, and if it's actually true in the first place.

Wed Nov 10, 2010 12:33 pm » by **Samuelthemule**

hackjames wrote:
samuelthemule wrote:it's a good idea to attack something, that works for you secretly, publically, to throw the trail off.

Sure, potentially, and if it's actually true in the first place.

not sure you understand: proposition: wikileaks is government funded and works to further their agenda, to dissociate between government/wikileaks and make it seem like a genuine conflict, they both attack one another, and the overall agenda is furthered, perhaps even accelerated.

impossible? proven false? I'd love to hear it.
I remember wikileaks calling for donations, maybe they do and are funded by the public, but, I'm always suspicious of big organizations, and anything on 'the news' : p

Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:24 pm » by **Hackjames**

samuelthemule wrote:not sure you understand: proposition: wikileaks is government funded and works to further their agenda, to dissociate between government/wikileaks and make it seem like a genuine conflict, they both attack one another, and the overall agenda is furthered, perhaps even accelerated.

impossible? proven false? I'd love to hear it.
I remember wikileaks calling for donations, maybe they do and are funded by the public, but, I'm always suspicious of big organizations, and anything on 'the news' : p

Yes, I understood you. Thanks for the explanation though. The tactic you describe may in fact work to the advantage of the government and any supposed "outside group" it may be in collusion with, my point was that speculating on that being possible is different than having evidence that suggests it is in fact the case with Wikileaks. Is that clearer?

Healthy skepticism (or a cautious but open mind, if you prefer) is one thing, but this seems a fairly baseless accusation (unless you're aware of something I'm not).

Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:06 pm » by **Samuelthemule**

hackjames wrote:
samuelthemule wrote:not sure you understand: proposition: wikileaks is government funded and works to further their agenda, to dissociate between government/wikileaks and make it seem like a genuine conflict, they both attack one another, and the overall agenda is furthered, perhaps even accelerated.

impossible? proven false? I'd love to hear it.
I remember wikileaks calling for donations, maybe they do and are funded by the public, but, I'm always suspicious of big organizations, and anything on 'the news' : p

Yes, I understood you. Thanks for the explanation though. The tactic you describe may in fact work to the advantage of the government and any supposed "outside group" it may be in collusion with, my point was that speculating on that being possible is different than having evidence that suggests it is in fact the case with Wikileaks. Is that clearer?

Healthy skepticism (or a cautious but open mind, if you prefer) is one thing, but this seems a fairly baseless accusation (unless you're aware of something I'm not).

yeah, it is baseless, just a brain fart essentially, and a repeated one at that.