WikiLeaks Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

mystwalker

Distinguished
Jan 11, 2011
2
0
18,510
0
WikiLeaks does what is most beneficial for JulianA - no problem there.
US government will do what is most beneficial for it - no problem there.
Governments prosecuting JA are doing what is most beneficial to them - namely, not pissing off the big dog. No problems here.

Information being published are "CLASSIFIED" - I have no idea what data is and do not doubt that there is questionable info hidden, BUT it is CLASSIFIED.

JA will be on trial for some kind of sex crime? This is fact.

Does JA/WikiLeaks deserve Nobel for doing something illegal? NO WAY!
If JA deserves Peace Prize, I want to nominate member of "Black Op" teams all over the world for keeping our world safe by eliminating threats. These guys risk their lives to keep us safe. Oh wait ... WikiLeaks have not published these yet, have they so I guess we have to wait before acknowledging their actions?
 

snoogins

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2010
35
0
18,580
0
I don't necessarily believe in his tactics, but a bit more transparency could go a long way with showing the the citizens of the US whats going on. Not 100%, but more than we had - especially with the lackluster excuse to invade Iraq for WMDs.
 

pinkfloydminnesota

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2010
55
0
18,580
0
Why does he deserve to be in prison, and not the NYTimes et al? They did the same thing he did; in fact, they distributed the material to a much wider audience.
 

f-14

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2010
774
0
18,940
4
the thing i like about this is if wikileaks wins, we all know how much assange likes talking to the world; he will be dumb enough to come and get it. so the time & the place is already determined all the cops/assasins in the world need to do now is play the waiting game.
 

mikem_90

Distinguished
Jun 24, 2010
284
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]He published documents knowing they were stolen that's why. Assange is an egomaniac who thinks he's a big player in the world scene. Here's hoping he'll have an "accident" soon. I bet the intelligence services of a half dozen countries are itching to put this guy 6 feet under.[/citation]

Its not against the law to publish government secrets, no matter how they were obtained. Read up about the pentagon papers. Its in the interest of its citizens that these documents were released. We want to know how crooked these guys behave. There are real war crimes and other nasty stuff in there. like US contractors hiring child prostitutes. your tax dollars at work!

US Supreme court ruled this back in the 1960s.
 

toosober

Distinguished
May 20, 2006
1
0
18,510
0
You have got to be kidding me? This guy should be drawn and quartered, not nominated for an award for being a criminal.
 

mikem_90

Distinguished
Jun 24, 2010
284
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]pinkfloydminnesota[/nom]Why does he deserve to be in prison, and not the NYTimes et al? They did the same thing he did; in fact, they distributed the material to a much wider audience.[/citation]

You know what's funny? The same newspaper did it in the 1970s... and the Supreme court said its not illegal.

On June 30, 1971, the Supreme Court decided, 6–3, that the government failed to meet the heavy burden of proof required for prior restraint injunction. The nine justices wrote nine opinions disagreeing on significant, substantive matters.

Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.
—Justice Black[16]
 

dalauder

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
356
0
18,960
7
[citation][nom]f-14[/nom]i'm sorry you can not tell the difference between a RPG and enemies of coalition forces engaging with US american AH-64 and iraqi-american news reporters standing around in the middle of the enemy herd watching.i'm more sorry that you were never taught the laws of the united states and failed your history class in regards to knowing the constitution of the united states which happened to be written in the middle of a revolutionary war by the people fighting it.go read article 8 of the US constitution. not just the parts you want to believe, but the whole thing.you will only get an A+ if you can cite which of the 4 of 11 sections do not apply to every one connected to these leaked documentsyou will get extra credit if you can tell me which section in which encryption act also applies to every one who even reads these documents.it's covered ALL OF IT. people alot smarter then you or me and all of tom's hardware put together thought of and figured out how to deal EXACTLY with this particular problem long before it even happened. even your liberal dog boy 'slippery willy' clinton had a hand in crafting the laws that cover this '96 & '97.[/citation]

Did you say the U.S. Constitution was written DURING the Revolutionary War? You really should learn your history before you start lecturing it.

#1: American Revolution 1775-1783. U.S. Constitution 1787.
#2: The Articles of Confederation were written during the American Revolution AND it wasn't by the people fighting it--it was their leaders. And the Articles of Confederation sucked! That's why they were redone.
#3: The U.S. Constitution only goes to Article 7. Maybe you meant Amendment? And that's 16 words: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

Honestly, you think the U.S. Constitution is flawless and created by unfathomable geniuses beyond our comprehension? No, they were very smart people who worked very hard at a SECOND attempt at a constitution. This one was pretty good, but since they knew it didn't cover everything, they allowed provisions for Amendments. Blind faith in a bunch of people who died 200 years ago--brilliant. Maybe you should look at the situation at hand and come up with your own solution, then discuss it with people. That's a lot more effective than worshiping some very smart dead guys.
 

dalauder

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
356
0
18,960
7
[citation][nom]sykozis[/nom]So, the Norweigen's feel the need to financially support what amounts to a terrorist group...and here I thought the Nobel "Peace" Price had something to do with peace...[/citation]
Do you even know what a "terrorist group" is? Look up the definition because it sounds like you're just spouting Fox New's loaded words. Really--read up on it and if you have evidence that Wikileaks is a terrorist group, bring it back here and make me feel stupid. I challenge you.
 

dalauder

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
356
0
18,960
7
[citation][nom]mystwalker[/nom]WikiLeaks does what is most beneficial for JulianA - no problem there.US government will do what is most beneficial for it - no problem there.Governments prosecuting JA are doing what is most beneficial to them - namely, not pissing off the big dog. No problems here.Information being published are "CLASSIFIED" - I have no idea what data is and do not doubt that there is questionable info hidden, BUT it is CLASSIFIED.JA will be on trial for some kind of sex crime? This is fact.Does JA/WikiLeaks deserve Nobel for doing something illegal? NO WAY!If JA deserves Peace Prize, I want to nominate member of "Black Op" teams all over the world for keeping our world safe by eliminating threats. These guys risk their lives to keep us safe. Oh wait ... WikiLeaks have not published these yet, have they so I guess we have to wait before acknowledging their actions?[/citation]
You made some very good points. However, "Black Ops" killing people doesn't make anyone safe. The only reason there are foreign terrorists is because we fight terror (which is an expression of desperation) with violence. If we fought it by building infrastructure and bringing food, education, & jobs to these regions (which is cheaper than war), then the only terrorists would be extreme political groups within our own nation--and right now there aren't any of those.
 
G

Guest

Guest
1) Leaking documents that show crimes and war crimes is not a crime no matter how classified the documents are. If you see a crime and say nothing, you are responsible as well.
2) Many people here seem to be unaware that whistleblowing when exposing crimes is legal and a civic duty.
3) Julian Assange is a journalist since he has been in the guild since 1994 and wikileaks is registered non-profit news agency. They published leaked material like journalists have done for a hundred years.
4) Those wishing death on him or imprisonment, you are anti-american aholes and should move to China or Iran.
 

bayouboy

Distinguished
Sep 12, 2009
41
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]Cirdecus[/nom]If you think 100% transparency would work, then you obviously have no idea what national security means. If you have such a bleeding heart for those being mistreated by government, then you're probably liberally blinded to the realities of modern governance.[/citation]

"'A matter of internal security,' the age-old cry of the oppressor." - Jean-Luc Picard
 

milktea

Distinguished
Dec 16, 2009
344
0
18,930
1
Great! So now everyone would try to hack into the Government to obtain secret documents, then post them on the web and hope to get a piece of the Nobel Peace Prize. This sounds great on your resume (hacker with Nobel Peace Price), no? :D
 

mikem_90

Distinguished
Jun 24, 2010
284
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]dalauder[/nom]Do you even know what a "terrorist group" is? Look up the definition because it sounds like you're just spouting Fox New's loaded words. Really--read up on it and if you have evidence that Wikileaks is a terrorist group, bring it back here and make me feel stupid. I challenge you.[/citation]

There are a bunch of idiots spouting off garbage as if they know something. Hell, Julian is only a spokesperson, he is not "Wikileaks", just the public face of it. Besides, the CIA has been on a big long fight to take them down, we're just seeing the people who lap up everything they hear without any real research or history bark.

Wikileaks is just a drop point for documents of government and corporate wrongdoing. They publish and do some fact checking to be sure of what they release, but they aren't much different from a newspaper with investigative journalists. Its just with the past decade and all the nasty dirty scummy crap that the US has been going to such lengths to outdo some third world countries on civil liberty violations that it gets a big fat target on it.
 

aaron88_7

Distinguished
Oct 4, 2010
279
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]Cirdecus[/nom]agreed. This man needs to be in prison, not given an award.[/citation]
Thanks to our constitution, mobs of idiots with this type of mentality will never get their wishes of imprisoning those risking their lives for free speech and true government transparency.
 

mikem_90

Distinguished
Jun 24, 2010
284
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]milktea[/nom]Great! So now everyone would try to hack into the Government to obtain secret documents, then post them on the web and hope to get a piece of the Nobel Peace Prize. This sounds great on your resume (hacker with Nobel Peace Price), no?[/citation]

No, Hacking is illegal. And if you have security clearance and violate that clearance, you are committing a crime.

Wikileaks did neither of those. PFC Manning is the person who committed the crime.

Get your fact straight.
 

col_krismiss

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2010
16
0
18,560
0
You made some very good points. However, "Black Ops" killing people doesn't make anyone safe. The only reason there are foreign terrorists is because we fight terror (which is an expression of desperation) with violence. If we fought it by building infrastructure and bringing food, education, & jobs to these regions (which is cheaper than war), then the only terrorists would be extreme political groups within our own nation--and right now there aren't any of those.
Maybe some people dont know this, since it isnt something thats detailed in his secret documents, but that IS how we are fighting it. Where I was in afghanistan, we built roads leading to places that didnt already have them, those roads lead to local businesses being opened because they finally had a way to efficiently ship their product. We assisted the locals in raising money to build a school in which to train teachers to go off and start other schools. One of the afghans I worked with that was in charge of these projects was once captured and held and tortured by the taliban for 3 years. So how are we to respond to terrorism like that? be friends with them? Until you actually go over there and actually SEE whats happening instead of rely on the news or on someone to finally reveal the governments secrets, you wont ever really KNOW. All the locals that I worked with actually said they liked and appreciated our help and protection.
 

antixbaby

Distinguished
Oct 11, 2007
5
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]dalauder[/nom]Do you even know what a "terrorist group" is? Look up the definition because it sounds like you're just spouting Fox New's loaded words. Really--read up on it and if you have evidence that Wikileaks is a terrorist group, bring it back here and make me feel stupid. I challenge you.[/citation]

I looked it up in all possible descriptions and definitions. It's borderline, but I would say he was okay in using the term. You should watch Fox more, you might find yourself less biased and learn a few things that get edited out elsewhere. It worked for me.

We already know people have very different opinions on Wikileaks. Why all the aggression?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY