Visa Blocks Funds for WikiLeaks Again

[Kaitian]

AMARIKA IS SO GUD, WE NO MAKE MISTAKES SO WICKILEEKS BAD HERP DERP!!

i'm pretty sure that wasn't an rpg, it was a freakin railgun.

also, about alleged threat that informants get killed: wikileaks offered the pentagon to have a look at the dokuments to be released and offered to remove these names. again, they said "HURR DURR".

wikileaks is one possible answer to "who watches the watchers?", a part of executing democracy. nobody would say it's wrong if documents of illegal activity of a corporation get leaked, but if illegal activity of the united states or any government and its institutions are involved then the "patriots" show up. there are whistleblower contacts in large corporations as well and it helps to keep decisions of top management in line with laws and corporate guidelines because there is a big risk that some small gear in the large clockwork will report this to the HQ. it's the same on a larger scale.

now where are those freakin bank documents wikileaks promised?

First off, Assange did not offer the Pentagon to go over these documents before they were leaked. He merely offered that any future leaks can be shown to the Pentagon/State Department to eliminate security risk that threatens the lives of people. So it's nice that you're defending the dipshit and all but he has his own self-interest to keep attacking the United States. It's ironic when he wants to protect his privacy but is willing to expose the lives of others and sacrifice their lives if necessary to push forward his agenda.

 

[bacon]

your response is an excellent example of missing the forest for the trees

here's the entire video for anyone who is actually interested in determining for themselves whether the *entire* ordeal was "justified" or if in fact killing civilians (including children) is justifiable for any reason.
http://warisacrime.org/node/51228

that's the danger of "collateral damages" as a narrative construct

So glad we don't depend on you to defend our country, as I am sure you would wait until the enemy has his boot on your throat before acting. It is clear to anyone but you they were enemy combatants, even if they had a camera.

News flash for anyone in a war zone, if you stand next to an enemy holding a weapon chances are you will get lit up.

 

[fattypants]

So glad we don't depend on you to defend our country, as I am sure you would wait until the enemy has his boot on your throat before acting

The jingoism is strong with this one

 

[mope54]

So glad we don't depend on you to defend our country, as I am sure you would wait until the enemy has his boot on your throat before acting. It is clear to anyone but you they were enemy combatants, even if they had a camera.

News flash for anyone in a war zone, if you stand next to an enemy holding a weapon chances are you will get lit up.

I never disputed that there were people there who may have been legitimate targets. I thought I made it clear in my posts that the discussion that came from these kinds of incidents is more about the dangers of your second point: that anyone and everyone is fair game

that's not been the historical way we go about things and it's contrary to our core values...at least as I understand them. I also understand a basic principle in life from being around for a few years: you reap what you sow

 

[That's_Corporate]

So it's nice that you're defending the dipshit and all but he has his own self-interest to keep attacking the United States. It's ironic when he wants to protect his privacy but is willing to expose the lives of others and sacrifice their lives if necessary to push forward his agenda.

He hasn't laid a finger on the United States.

Just as the management of corporations are accountable to shareholders and the board of directors, governments need to be held accountable as well. If not, the same corporate governance issues will run rampant in the government as well (moral hazard, adverse selection). Except these conflicts of interest are 10x worse within the government, because it affects millions of lives, not just select investor bank accounts.

Democracy is said to have the best checks and balances in place because the people can vote-out corruption. But that key facet of democracy is void if news of the corruption never reaches the voters.

 

[Kaitian]

He hasn't laid a finger on the United States.

Just as the management of corporations are accountable to shareholders and the board of directors, governments need to be held accountable as well. If not, the same corporate governance issues will run rampant in the government as well (moral hazard, adverse selection). Except these conflicts of interest are 10x worse within the government, because it affects millions of lives, not just select investor bank accounts.

Democracy is said to have the best checks and balances in place because the people can vote-out corruption. But that key facet of democracy is void if news of the corruption never reaches the voters.

So he just magically sprouted up hundreds of thousands of documents that were from the State Department and Military wire?

Corporations and Democracy have nothing to do with each other. Civil, Corporate, & Criminal law keeps in check of those corporations and if the system is deficit in addressing that, you can go ahead and change the laws. Undermining a company whether financially stable or not through the use of leaked documents is not the proper way to go. Organizations like the SEC exists for this reason and they have killed companies for very little reasons when they find fraudulent activities going on.