Please give me an example that Wikileaks provided you information that made your life better in any way.

I know they put US servicemen and agents in danger, but I'm still searching for how this "truth" helped me.

Of course there is. The elite in washington would like to continue business as usual, legislating our lives to their content. Wikileaks bucks the trend.

Anyone that calls Wikileaks traitorous is indeed a traitor themselves, the things our government does around the world is not right and should be exposed.

Hey...if Wikileaks just publishes it's P.O. box or perhaps Julian's home address, I'm sure you can send your check there. Gee...that's how they used to do it in past... Oh wait...you want to do it secret...right...

Just one example. The fact that the World's financial institutions and governments are practicing economic terrorism should be enough to show you exactly where you fit in the scheme of things. Nothing more or less than an alkaline battery plugged into the system. The entitled ones do not want the system changed at all and do not like for the truth to be spoken. Throw a frog into cold water and slowly turn up the heat and it will stay until cooked. Throw it into hot water and it jumps out to save its life. Anything centralized is doomed to be or become corrupt absolutely. When we centralize too much power into the hands of the few what exactly do we expect to get in return?

This is actually a very scary trend as it shows that banks and government can censure anyone from the economic arena extra-judicially. This is akin to economic slavery I have been speaking of for quite a while now and it should be called economic terrorism.

I will assume you are attempting to answer me. You threw lots of nonsensical words together, and used many outlandish terms like "economic terrorism", but never answered my question. I know you can't, but don't believe everyone is an idiot.

The truth is you can't show how it helped you, because it didn't. You can type out all the propaganda garbage you want, but it does not answer my question.

Let's see, they disclose confidential information that is considered by most people to be "stolen." As Tony said, they put US servicemen and agents in danger. They release confidential bank information. Now, why in the world would a bank not want to continue to be an instrument for funding an organization that is out to destroy it? Now that's a difficult one for some, I'm sure.

Of course, the fact is that there is absolutely nothing to prevent people from sending money to them. Looks like they are just using the banks as an excuse. The reality is that the vast majority of people don't support scumbags like wiki.

go to google and type 'wikileaks benefit' then hit enter.

An ongoing Pentagon review of the massive flood of secret documents made public by the WikiLeaks website has so far found no evidence that the disclosure harmed U.S. national security or endangered American troops in the field, a Pentagon official told NBC News on Monday…

David Lapan, deputy assistant secretary of defense for media operations, told NBC News on Monday that a preliminary review by a Pentagon “assessment” team has so far not identified any documents whose release could damage national security. Moreover, he said, none of the documents reviewed so far carries a classification level above “secret” — the lowest category of intelligence material in terms of sensitivity…

Tony - so because you cant figure out how it SPECIFICALLY HELPED YOU, it's of no benefit at all?

Well, I cant quite figure out how autism research will ever help ME SPECIFICALLY...I dont have autism and i'll never have a kid.

Please end all Autism Funding ASAP - it's not helping me, personally.

Makes a lot of sense....great logic.

BTW, Tony my response was to both you and witchrunner.

Instead of being selfish and asking for a personal benefit I choose to look at the bigger picture and see the benefit WikiLeaks has for democracy and for transparency. I don't want for corruption to rule the World I live in nor the World my children's children will live in. How is the World you live in treating you these days. Are you happy with corruption or maybe the way your government is treating its own people? Are you happier with war or with education? Tony?

Sorry, for some reason a double post.

Tactics for Making Up False Quotes by the Dalai Lama and Lady Gaga

Invent

Pick names of famous people and attach them to a made up list of crap.

Pretend

Use a fake side of an argument under the "straw man" logical fallacy to discredit the other side deceptively.

Politicize

Try to involve politics as often as possible using buzz words and major points of contention that one side has clearly lost on, or is against public opinion. Repeat incessantly.

Yell

Remember, whoever talks the loudest is right.

Good..You reap what you sow...and thats what you get for publishing classified information jeopordizing our service men and women.

In no way did this have anything to do with freedom of speach and anyone who says so is not informing themselves or full of it. Freedom of speech means you have the right to openly express beliefs without the fear of being pursicuited by the gov. It doesnt give you the right to steal and publish classified information

No brian. For your benefit a re-post.

David Lapan, deputy assistant secretary of defense for media operations, told NBC News on Monday that a preliminary review by a Pentagon “assessment” team has so far not identified any documents whose release could damage national security. Moreover, he said, none of the documents reviewed so far carries a classification level above “secret” — the lowest category of intelligence material in terms of sensitivity…

Wikileaks is just another puppet tool being used by the media and the government to spread mis-information. Our lives are no better with it or without it. It is just another tool used to keep the sheeple of this country off guard while the government and the media continue to act with impunity.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Wikileaks is not about free speech or transparency and if you believe that, than you might as well believe that water boarding isn't torture. In other words, pure flat earthing, denial of fact.

Having said that, I understand people have different opinions, but I want to be clear that I think what wikileaks did makes them a legitimate target of the US and any other country whose information they published, as the unvetted information is so dangerous to national interests and security, it deserves being dealt with in the harshest of manner.

What you read on MSNBC you may not like, but it is news and it does follow legal format. So does the Wall Street Journal, the New York times, CNN, and on and on and on. Wikileaks is exactly nothing like this.

I am glad that Assange and his obviously troubled peers are suffering. They deserve much more than the hardship they are going through now.

@SidneyHop I could have sworn when I read your post it was referring to the tactics I have seen from the extreme liberals as well.

@sidney: I'm not a republican or a democrat. Thanks for playing.

Your post about Karl Rove simply seemed like a chain-email cut and paste job, as I've seen nearly identical things in the past. I'd like to see actual document, and not the tactics "bullet points" which only appear on clearly biased websites. How about a real source of that "paper?"

Nice attempt at an ad hominem attack there at the end, claiming we lack mental facilities. Is that the go-to attack these days, essentially calling someone a "stupid-head" so that you hope it undermines their future dissent from your opinion? Also, if you're going to make arguments against another person's intelligence, the very least you can do is use correct grammar, not ending sentences with a proposition.

WOW there are a lot of words above. Good job in that department. But sadly none of you have actually answered my question. Someone tell me if the question is hard to understand.

As I said, you can't. I didn't mean to burst your idealism though.

Name one person who was put in danger, Tony. Come on, kiddo, you said you KNOW it did, so you should have no problem citing us your evidence.

That part wasn't followed by a ? mark. Read my question.

Please give me an example that Wikileaks provided you information that made your life better in any way.

How naive a statement is that. Giving you the truth and exposing dirty systems that support each other is what WikiLeaks is doing. It is neither saying it is making life of happily ignorants that like to live a life of lies and so don't have much need for truths by others, nor is it big enough do that. It is upto the people to act upon the truth (that is impossible for individuals to figure out by themselves) to make their life better making an effort not to feed these big lying, controlling systems

It's all ok Tony. Just let the banks do this to your bank account, and you of course would be the first to bitch about the banks.

Ok someone explain to me why this organization needs money? Hasn't the database been released into the 'ether' already? Are they not simply holding back the encryption keys to unlock it?

Or is it so that Mr. Assange will be able to travel the world for his little speaking engagements? Perhaps it's to pay people to ferret through their little 'treasure trove' of documents and pull out the juicy stuff? Could it be so he can continue to pay the lawyers as they fight his rape charges and extradition requests? Is it to pay for the new hotel every night he thinks he needs because some CIA hit squad is tracking him? Hell, maybe even for replacements for the 7 cell phones he carries.

As someone mentioned, you reap what you sow, sir. I'm pretty sure the banking industry will have nothing to do with you or your organization ever again. Not to mention, the people most likely to donate are currently sitting camped out in various parks and squares doing the @#occupy thing.

Perhaps you can have some of your supporters pass around a hat there.

Thank you for your answer tes, but in other words, they released nothing of consequence and our lives were not changed one bit, right?

I'm trying to find the reason some jump on the "Rah rah Wikileaks" wagon. I welcome someone to convince me there is a reason that the treason was worth it.

Peter Jacobs

Just because the defense department says none of the material compromised or endangered anyone doesn't make what wiki-leaks did right. This is classified information, not for public dissemination. Even though it's classification is only secret, it is still against the law to publish it without declassification. Second, the way in which it made it's way to wiki-leaks was illegal. It was stolen by a soldier with security clearance which technically makes wiki-leaks guilty of receiving stolen property. All that aside, if you are an American, you should be outraged at the release of anything that could potentially damage or embarrass the US. The publications were not done to tell the truth, but to discredit the US and other ally nations to the world. It was meant to sow anarchy nothing more, to take the US down a peg or two. Assange did this without thought to the possible consequences of his actions and then cries when he finds his ideas are NOT popular with everyone. I will not shed any tears for the financial demise of Julian Assange or Wiki-leaks, they are only reaping the fruits of their actions. I will not defend him because I think what he did was incredibly stupid and destabilizing to an already shaky world. He has yet to answer for alleged rape of a young woman and his reluctance to do so makes him suspect. He is banking on sympathetic ears and wallets to keep him free, living in a mansion in England while the media circus continues. Let him answer the charges in person, and in court, if he wins then he may be worthy of trust, but until this all plays out, his supporters are fools for believing everything he has to say.

Let's see Tony, you want to see some government treason? How about running guns to Mexico like our ATF. Does the name Eric Holder come to mind? Suppose his bank accounts were locked? I very much doubt it, beings he is from the U.S. How many more things like this goes on behind our backs that we don't know about? I would say a lot.

Collapse my question above if it stumped you. Blind faith is a killer. I didn't mean to ask for fact, my bad. I'll try and be more imaginative from now on, and rely less on fact.

Tony

You'll never get the reply you seek, because they really don't have an answer. They only see affirmation of what we all have known was true, Politics is a dirty business run by unscrupulous people that hunger for power. Anyone who did not realize this is naive beyond imagining. NO one that has posted arguments against you seems to realize that these are human beings running things with the same faults, weaknesses and bad habits even the most uneducated and unreliable posses. The things I have read from the postings are not surprising and actually quite understandable when you look at them from a broader view point. Their focus however is quite narrow and doesn't reflect human instincts or character flaws. They only want to sound as if they have been right for complaining and persecute someone else for giving them their opinion.

Please give me an example that Wikileaks provided you information that made your life better in any way.

I wrote my earlier response before I glanced at your victorious and purposefully insulting follow-ups in 21.20 and #1.22. But now after seeing your stubborn ignorance in #1.28, I tend to agree with @1.25.

To call exposing lies 'treason' shows you live happier on lies and are afraid of others knowing it. You don't seem to have any idea of how much effort it must have taken to get the truths. And how much harassment was incurred on Assange and his co-workers just to expose parts of the big and rich's lies. You think it is easy, especially with people like you around who trype away challenging truths and supporting lies and corruption, to change the way these corrupt systems that are controlling the world now, operate? It all starts small with small-scale ideas getting support to bring about change. You are clueless and happy to be so! And I must leave it at that

Well put Archangel, and I believe the same. I was hoping they could point to a fact that would persuade me to see any benefit at all in having our Government files being leaked to the world, beyond blind idealism.

I even had hopes Wiki would release those secret UFO files they promised. Maybe those could have revealed something of value?

It has made my life better by alerting me to things my government does that I find appalling, giving me the opportunity to voice my concerns to my representatives in Congress. This has allowed me to make a direct contribution to the betterment of my country.

Your turn Tony-From-NJ - how has Wikileaks provided you information that made your life worse in any way?

Tes, you are saying the info did in fact help you in some way? Please, do tell.

I never once gloated, merely stated what I already know. Assange and Wikileaks are a failed idea, and nothing more. It did not fix theeconomy, bills, school prices, or terror concerns. It did nothing for you or I, but had potential to make Assange rich.

Give me one example of a phone call you made to your Congressman concerning information you obtained from the leaked information Thammock.

@Only in America-2604171

Just let the banks do this to your bank account, and you of course would be the first to bitch about the banks.

That's what the banks would do if he came out and said he'd release their private documents if he got a hold of them. Just like YOU would bitch if some a-hole got a hold of your private info and released it to the world. So what's your point?

Like it or not folks, the gov and private companies have just as much right to keep secrets as you do. Wikileaks threatens to bite the hand that feeds them and everyone wonders why the hand gets pulled back. Try to join the rest of us in the real world.

To answer your question Thammock, I had my personal record stolen from a government office long ago, but not linked to Wikileaks. My military record, including SSN and VA benefits were taken on a laptop by someone inside and they attempted to sell the info. Of course I don't just mean mine, but thousands of records. I received a letter from the government warning me of the problem and that they were tracking who has the data and trying to recover it.

Why does that come up? Because the Private that stole the data and gave to Wikileaks may have contained Government emails, but it could also have contained personal records and the status of military personnel all over the world. Even if Assange did not post it online, he would still have it which means it is in an unsecured area. His actions cause our country more trouble than it helps.

Please give me an example that Wikileaks provided you information that made your life better in any way.

I'll answer your question Tony. It makes the sheeple on the left feel safer. Any sort of "hand holding" the left receives, even if it is total nonsense and BS, makes their lives seem "better".

#1.32: There are gut-feelings and instincts and smart guesses, as you point out, and then there are facts and exact instances with examples. You probably do not believe in lengthy justice systems either - just grab a person at your gut-feeling and punish him/her and get done with it; or maybe it is more like blame it on someone that your instincts point to and just accept that people do wrong all the time and that the victims have to be smarter.

Moreover, if it is just truths that were already known to everyone, why the big governments are all up against his organization (and you and your likes jump to call Assange traitor and trasonous). FYI, it isn't just the political system that Assange exposed - goes to show that some people turn away from truth even if it is held right in front of their eyes and snub anyone supporting truth exposure.

Do you also wonder about all the waste that are election campaigns and those 'debates'? That spending borrowed money and lives on wars? Those high paid corporate jobs that work swindle the average guy? Inaction is one thing, gloating about it like it is smart and pointing out others that say things against it are lesser than you is disgusting. You kinds are the reason the systems kept on looking 'successful' using lies and being increasingly corrupt

You have said nothing I didn't already know without Wikileaks.

Tony...: you will only know about my life onbly if you get to read about it in the news - it is private. Pklease stop digging into commenters lives here. And no, don't tell me how the wars changed your life (unless you were sent out there with guns and drones) or how those lies and deceptions your politicians engage in, in the name of 'diplomacy' changed your life for the better - if i did, it is some pathetic life to live and support all those corrupt systems. You're not just disgusting in your comments, but has never taken a stand against any lies or abuse of power ever in your life and feel threatened by people who do.

You have said nothing I didn't already know without Wikileaks.

So you're a traitor, from your own definotion of the word. Did they charge you of rape and freeze your bank accounts as well?

You can use the word "disgusting" 100 times if you like Tes, but it doesn't make it true or relevant in this conversation.

You will have to remind me, when did I ask you for personal info? Or wait, are you implying that the wikileaks data did change your life, but its super secret and can't be discussed openly? Lol, please don't tell me you are going there.

Can someone else besides Tes, who is clearly trying to change the topic in an effort to dodge the issue, answer the question?

...you will only know about my life onbly if you get to read about it in the news - it is private. Pklease stop digging into commenters lives...

I believe hypocrite would be the appropriate term.

tes

What is contained in the documents is irrelevant, it is the dissemination of those documents that are classified that is violation of the law. Jeffery Dohmer was a serial killer, even so, his murder would still be a crime. There is no justification of the "greater good" in the theft of these documents or the publishing of stolen information. Whether they are lies, half truths or secret plots does not matter, the crime is in how they were obtained.

Tony, yes, my life is private that you will know nothing about no matter how you spin your demand. And, as I pointed out in my forst respionse to your rather naive looking question (in spite of missing the symbol) your question has no substance to it, but somehow seems to make you feel smarter every time you ask it. Good luck to your hope that someone tells about his/her life to make you stop asking the same question over and over again in this thread.

Peter Jacobs,

Why don't you show everyone the rest of the story? Or do you just pick and chose to suit your agenda?

A group of human-rights organizations is pressing WikiLeaks to do a better job of redacting names from thousands of war documents it is publishing, joining the list of critics that claim the Web site's actions could jeopardize the safety of Afghans who aided the U.S. military.

The letter from five human-rights groups sparked a tense exchange in which WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange issued a tart challenge for the organizations to help with the massive task of removing names from thousands of documents, according to several of the organizations that signed the letter. The exchange shows how WikiLeaks and Mr. Assange risk being isolated from some of their most natural allies in the wake of the documents' publication.

http://warnewsupdates.blogspot.com/2010/08/human-rights-groups-condemn-wikileaks.html

A group that campaigns for press freedom has become the latest organisation to condemn WikiLeaks for publication of the leaked Afghanistan war logs.

In an open letter to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, Reporters Without Borders accused him of "incredible irresponsibility" for publishing the tens of thousands of documents "indiscriminately".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/13/wikileaks-reporters-without-borders

A joint statement published on the Guardian's website said that the British publication and its international counterparts — The New York Times, France's Le Monde, Germany's Der Spiegel and Spain's El Pais — "deplore the decision of WikiLeaks to publish the unredacted State Department cables, which may put sources at risk."

http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/02/media-organizations-condemn-wikileaks-disclosure/#ixzz1bj2cExEi

All of these support transparency in Government, but condemn Wikileaks for being reckless, irresponsible and endangering lives!!

Lol, not everyone is hitting on you tes. I don't want to know anything about your personal life, past, present, or future. You are either very badly attempting to steer the conversation, or completely missed the point.

But don't worry about it, I can see you don't have an answer. No need to keep wearing out fingers with nonsense responses.

Let's see now...

Wikileaks leaked information that provided people with names and information about undercover operatives. This can very easily lead to these people being killed. Is this even remotely necessary for people to know? Is it necessary for a "transparent" government? Of course not. There is a reason this information is confidential.

Wikileaks leaked information including home addresses, home phone numbers, and home email addresses of border police. Is this information necessary to know? Of course not. This information can make it far easier for drug cartels to target the border police at their homes. Once again, Wikileaks is risking people's lives by publishing information that no one needs to know.

These are just two blatant examples of how Wikileaks is not just trying to provide proof of wrongdoing, but is instead just trying to take down the government and the economies of major countries. *I say economies not from these two examples, but from their attacks and blackmailing of banks and businesses.*

There is a HUGE difference between providing information that shows wrongdoing (such as proof that troops may torture prisoners) and providing information identifying undercover agents or providing home addresses for police. The first is valid information that the public should have access to. The latter is not something that anyone needs to know. Wikileaks chooses to publish all information without caring at all about that. *IF* Wikileaks had instead just published valid information to create transparent governments, then I'd have no problem with them. But that isn't what they are doing. It's what they claim they are doing, but in reality, that's just an "extra" that happens in the process of their terrorist-like attacks on governments, businesses, and banks.

The point is that their CLAIMS of why they are doing things aren't true. You can believe what they claim if you want to, but if you actually look at what they are doing, you'll see that their claims are just a cloak over what they are really doing. Their goal isn't to make government transparent. Their goal is to bring it crashing down without any care about who they hurt in the process. And all of you who support them are just helping to create more problems in this country when we can't afford them. And believe me, attacking banks and trying to make them fail is definitely NOT going to improve our economy or get people working. It will do just the opposite and that's what Wikileaks has been doing all along.

So before you start copy/pasting what others have said in support of Wikileaks, take a moment to actually examine all the stuff they've released that no one needs to know and which risks people's lives, risks destroying our already weak economy, risks creating even higher unemployment, etc. Then decide if you want to be on the side of destroying what's left of this country (and others) or if you want to take time to think for yourself.

day in and day out, the same question is being asked yet never spoken: "what is truth"?

What is the very foundation in which we define truth? TV, social media, news, science, religion, etc.

Is any truth absolute? mathematics, physics

How do we know what we believe to be true is really true?

Does wikileaks deal in truth or deception (or do they care) or are they re-printers of "stuff" (truth or lies)?

A good concept ruined by an egomaniac. I have no problem with Wikileaks goal, but I do have a big one with their blanket methods. Print the juicy bits and make the guilty squirm, dont just grab a handful and throw it at the wall to see what sticks not caring who gets caught in the splatter. Th y claim to be concerned with govt and business responsibility, how about personal responsibility to make sure the innocent dont get harmed. Assange made himself guilty of calling the kettle black.

To whomever restored the comments, thank you. You can see that privilege is abused and should be taken away, or left but the ultimate decision left up to the Mod.

This bank thing is a red herring. The truth is that Wikileaks supporter have abandoned them because of the indiscriminate way in which Wikileaks released information. People realized that Wikileaks was putting people's lives in danger for no reason other than Jullian Assange's ego. What would stop people from mailing a check to Wikileaks if they supported them. If what Wikileaks is doing is so righteous, why hasn't some rich left wing liberal come forward with a big check to keep them in business. The truth is that Wikileaks obtained stolen, classified information and published it to the world. Of course the pentagon is claiming that there has been no one injured and no one put in danger because of the leaks, what would you expect them to say. They do not want to let the terrorists know that there really is valuable intelligence to be gathered from the trove of documents. The truth is that at least one Afghan civilian who was cooperating with US intelligence gathering efforts has been killed as a result of the leaked documents. You will never get anyone official to confirm this, but trust me it happened. The release of the state department cables also did serious damage to international relations and diplomacy by revealing confidential assessments made by US diplomats of the people they deal with in other countries. These frank assessments are needed by our leaders to know how to handle foreign diplomats and potentially volatile situations. By revealing these assessments, Assange has endangered many people throughout the world. Jullian Assange only cares about his own ego and his only purpose in publishing these documents was his own self aggrandizement. The higher purpose he claims is a complete crock. He intentionally jeopardized US intelligence efforts and resources by post unredacted documents that revealed significant information regarding information gathering sources and methods. He does not care who he hurts so long as he keeps his name in the paper. This latest pronouncement about money problems is just one more attempt to keep his name in the press. Watch, Wikileaks will magically have their money problems solved at the eleventh hour so that they can stay in business. Assange should be arrested and tried with espionage for receiving and releasing stolen classified information. The soldier who provided the information to Wikileaks should be tried for treason in time of war.

So what great secret, what great injustice of the US government has wikileaks exposed? What terrible crimes of the US have they exposed? None. Not a single thing. All they have managed to do is release some classified documents that make the US look bad but in no way reveal any evildoing by the US government. I would be for them if they were actually exposing some cover-up of wrong doing. But they are not.

Peter Jacobs What do you think they are going to say, If you read these doc we will lose valuable men in the field? Your not too bright.

I've been wondering myself what evil doings were revealed by Wikileaks. So far I see things like which diplomat picks his nose, what some Saudi Prince bought for his wives. Things like that, which seem to sate some voyeuristic spot in people's brains but really haven't done a thing to support claims of hidden agenda's we MUST know about.

Some might try to claim "well we would have never seen that Blackhawk footage of reporters being killed", which is bull@!$%#. The information was public knowledge 2 years prior to Manning's little escapade.

If what Wikileaks is doing is so noble and needed, how about instead of clever screen names, you guys use your real ones and please include addresses, phone numbers, and Social Security numbers on your profile pages. Hell no you say? Why not? Wikileaks did the same thing to thousands of border officers and policemen. Transparency right?

No Wikileaks has become a smorgasbord of stolen information and things that don't belong in the public domain and I believe it's done mainly as a power trip for those that are capable of stealing things that supposedly are protected. A way for juvenile people to wave their e-penis around and shout out like Stewart "Look what I can do!"

Under the secrecy banners we have all kinds of corruption going on and have lost much transparency. Remember helicopters assassinating civilians and the military trying to play it down? I wish he would release the banking files. However, this would most certainly get him killed. As long as it is only politicians being embarrassed it is ok. Once WikiLeaks starts publishing banking secrets that is a whole different story.

To Juliann Assange and other would be "crusaders for Truth":

Fund raising 101. Lesson 1: Do not, under any circumstances, call the people giving you money liers and thieves. Lesson 2: do not steal and publish information from the companies which allow you to get the money. Lesson 3: do not attempt to shut down the companies which allow you to get money.

Those that say wikileaks is a pupet for goverment should note that Juliann Assange stated less than 2% of the documents he released about isreal where published. So he is putting out info we just are not hearing about it.

dirp101

To Juliann Assange and other would be "crusaders for Truth":

Fund raising 101. Lesson 1: Do not, under any circumstances, call the people giving you money liers and thieves. Lesson 2: do not steal and publish information from the companies which allow you to get the money. Lesson 3: do not attempt to shut down the companies which allow you to get money.

So you say we should all tuck tail and cower? Because of money you would allow evil to succeed?

Edmund Burke said all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Do not allow evil to triumph. Do not do sit by and do nothing.

Question for you dirp, economically speaking, how are you progressing? Are you living the American Dream? Are you allowed to live the American Dream or are you feeling marginalized by your own?

Who says it's unethical/unfair? Banks are privately owned corporations, last time I checked. If you want them to start paying WikiLeaks, buy some shares in the company, and go to a shareholder's meeting to vote on the issue.

It's not unethical to refuse to do business with another entity. People do it all the time. Is it unethical for a person to boycott Walmart, or only "buy American" or anything else of that nature? And unfair? That just sounds like the cries of an 8 year old when the other boys won't let him in their treehouse.

Matt - they arent "paying" wikileaks anything...private donations are paying wikileaks, and they simply shut off the channels that money can traverse through our technological age.

Wikileaks has laid down the challenge to all the hackers, and computer wizzes out there to find a new avenue to filter the funds...and im hopeful they can manage to make that happen.

It shouldnt be unlawful to donate money to something like Wikileaks that exposes private businesses, govt and other corrupt people for the frauds they are...if it's not unlawful for a newspaper like the ENQUIRER to write false stories about real humans (celebrities)...or for any media outlet to run stories on anything without 100% full information.

Do you know how many lives the media destroys by linking people to crimes, who didnt have anything to do with the crimes, simply because the police said those were people of interest?

if thats not a crime...then neither should what Wikileaks is doing...they are taking information "leaked" to them and sharing it with the world.

Just like the media takes "leaked" info from police officers who cant speak on record because LEGALLY they shouldnt be saying @!$%# to begin with...but still do.

Jessica: People can still donate money to WikiLeaks. They just can't use any of the channels that decide they're not allowed, a la Paypal.

If you want to donate money, send them an envelope of cash. I can even give you the address to send cash to.. and I swear, it's totally legit.

It's not unethical to refuse to do business with another entity.

Is it ethical for a bank to tell you what you can do with your money? I don't know of any charges against wikileaks, there may be some.

When the banks can just up and say I refuse to cash a check written to you, or refuse to give you your money. Without any reason other than I don't like what your doing, there is a problem.

@Al: If you are making money illegally, the bank is allowed to "freeze" your account, which they have done in the past.

Last time I checked, taking "donations" for illegal activities (stealing US government documents, releasing stolen information, amongst other things) falls right into the "making money from illegal activities" branch of things. There is nothing unethical/unlawful in that.

Last time I checked, taking "donations" for illegal activities (stealing US government documents, releasing stolen information, amongst other things) falls right into the "making money from illegal activities" branch of things. There is nothing unethical/unlawful in that.

Do you have a link to the charges?

@ Matt, on what charges? they are not a United States entity, our US Law does NOT apply to them. Wake UP!!!

They did not steal the documents, PFC Manning did. Why do you try to muddy the waters on who is accused of what?

Wikileaks published documents, last time i checked, there are no international laws against publishing another countries top secret documents.

Matt - they arent "paying" wikileaks anything...private donations are paying wikileaks, and they simply shut off the channels that money can traverse through our technological age.

They make these great little things called envelopes. I know it's all old school, so guess what, you gotta actually do a bit of work, with that whole licking stamps and using an ink pen to address it. Heaven forbid he be forced to go to a currency exchange and convert a donation..

Jessica

I know of no law that has been passed that prohibits anyone from donating to wiki-leaks. I know of no law that has been passed that prohibits any bank from doing business with wiki-leaks. Wiki-leaks assault on the US, its allies, and the banking system came back to bite them in the ass, that is all. There are no laws anywhere that I know of that say anyone must do business with someone they do not wish too, unless the action is deemed discriminatory. I hardly say that not wishing to do business with someone who is trying to hurt you is discriminatory.

Is it ethical for a bank to tell you what you can do with your money?

I suppose not but what does that have to do with anything? Are these banks preventing people from withdrawing their money and sticking it in an envelope? No. If you want to use the services a bank provides then you have to follow their rules. If you don't like their rules take your money elsewhere. The bank isn't telling you jack sh!t. YOU are the one who wants to force someone (the banks) to do something they don't want to do; not the other way around.

Hmmm, so you're saying that it's NOT unethical to refuse to do business someone because of the color of their skin either? Because wikileaks uncovers the lies the government feeds to the world, it wrong for them to do so because there's a law saying they can't. Ya know if it's legal it's ethical. There's never been a bad law. Who cares if the government lies cheats and steals as long as we're safe. We should endorse the mob and their "protection" on that logic.

Ethical or unethical, it doesn't matter. The fact is that banks do not have to do business with Wikileaks if they don't want to. You are free to send money to them in other ways. Snail mail for example. And there are probably ways to send money through certain banks as well, though I don't know for sure about that. Either way, there is no law saying banks have to provide transactions to every person regardless of criminal or possibly criminal activity. They have every right to do business in the manner they choose.

The fact that Wikileaks is trying to attack and blackmail these banks provides very good reason for the banks to stop providing access to support Wikileaks. If you were to try blackmailing your bank and they cancelled your account and wouldn't allow you to do business with them again, it would be their right and your own fault. The same is for Wikileaks, though it wasn't their account that was cancelled, but their access to money transfers through the banks in question.

The funny thing about all of this is that half of you who are complaining about the banks not allowing donations through them to Wikileaks would have sided with the banks if it was 20 years ago. The fact that the economy is doing poorly and that there was some issues with the banks that helped to cause it has soured people's opinion of banks. The result is that many of you are willing to support anyone in their attack on banks even if you would have stood with the banks if this happened long before the recession. It isn't about what is right or wrong... it's about what you think of the banks. If you're happy with them (such as when the economy is booming), then you support them. If you're unhappy with them (such as when the economy is in recession), then you oppose them. It doesn't matter if the issue is the exact same... you guys side based solely on your current opinion of the banks.

Hmmm, so you're saying that it's NOT unethical to refuse to do business someone because of the color of their skin either?

No that's just your attempt to build a straw man because you have no legitimate argument against what I'm saying.

I wanna go back to the days when women didn't ask questions..i.e. Stepford Wives, oh wait, some of us still don't, we'd rather be ignorant, Michelle Bachmann you r my hero, where's my jello salad, Herman Ca Ca Ca, Oh no Im short cicuitin,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ah,hhhhhh,

Thank you!!

You stole the words right out of my mouth and put it on the interwebs. Just like Wikileaks. I, however do not have powerful friends and won't be shutting down your banking stuff. :)

Joking aside, I really hope that they aren't too surprised by this. When you piss in the punchbowl, expect to get your butt handed to you.

When you piss of the wrong people, such as the US government, they have a tendency to either cut off your money or kill you

So you like that sort of government? No trial no charges.

@Matt

Your comment falls right into line with your Dear Leader in chief, Obama. He has now become judge, jury, and executioner.

Enjoy your freedom while it lasts. This is not the same america that the founders envisioned.

AlMightyDollar: So what should we do, just file charges against people based in foreign countries and hope they turn themselves in for doing illegal things? I'm sure that would work... /sarcasm.

I'm sure a strongly-worded letter will make Kim Jong-Il reform the NK government, stop the drug wars in Mexico, and make the remained of terrorists worldwide throw away their bombs and hold hands, all singing kumbaya around a campfire.

Trial and charges are for US citizens -- haven't you read the United States Constitution. A United States citizen is guaranteed a trial, not foreign nationals.

@ Matt

Your missing the big picture entirely. At what point do we draw the line? Can obama brand Assange as a terrorist and drone kill him?

What gives the USA the moral high ground to police the world? Why is what we say absolutely correct and what other people view not correct? What gives us the right?

Do you ever think of how you would like it if the roles were reversed?

Why do we have the authority to tell kim Jong Il to reform? Didn't we just end up killing over 100k Iraqi's with our invasion? What gives us the moral high ground to tell him otherwise?

THINK BIG man, your thinking on such a small scale.

@brendan: Nice assumptions. Nearly every president for decades has been "judge, jury, and executioner." How does Barack Obama have anything to do with the principle matter?

You say that the current state is not what the founding fathers had envisioned, and I agree whole-heartedly. They were libertarians at heart, minimizing government, having strong state-governments, and a small, weak central government, all of which had a focus on personal and property rights, with non-existent social programs.

@brendan: I don't think the US has the necessity to "police" the world. I do, however, believe the United States Government has an obligation to protect her citizens from threat from without by use of force, only in the retaliatory sense. You're attempting to put words into my mouth, when I am clearly not saying anything you claim.

Economic sanctions, resolutions, petitions, they are used to attempt to influence a hostile nation well before military action is needed. Sometimes it works, often, it doesn't. Its intent is to prevent the necessity of violence, aka diplomacy. I never said I supported the Iraq war, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say, other than to stir the pot.

@ Matt.

No other president in history has executed an american citizen without due process. It has to do with the principle issue at hand because of your statement:

When you piss of the wrong people, such as the US government, they have a tendency to either cut off your money or kill you. They should be thankful they chose the former and not the latter.

The US government has no right to do either. With no law broken, how could you justify an attack on financials or an attack on one or multiple lives?

Edit:

I wasnt stating you supported the war, i was simply showing you a point of view other than the status quo. Economic sanctions never work, they are only a precursor to war. Talk with countries in times of problems, don't put unneeded sanctions that only affect the people of the nation, most of the time tempting them to back the leaders because they are being oppressed by the USA.

"When you piss of the wrong people, such as the US government, they have a tendency to either cut off your money or kill you."

Yeah, a corrupt government, that's something to be proud of, isn't it? The problem is, in today's world, the only thing you have to do is say one wrong word about the government, and you could end up with the short end of the stick.

@Only: I wasn't stating the US Government isn't corrupt, I was reiterating the current SOP. I'm not happy with the current government, but I'm also not pleased with the direction people want it to move -- I don't support larger government, nor the nonsensical programs proposed.

brendan-4

What has the US done to Wiki-leaks or Assange personally? Nothing! They urged other nations to look into possible espionage and used influence to make it difficult for Wiki-leaks to move money around. They are not depriving him of life, liberty, property, or the pursuit of happiness in any way. No charges have been formally filed against him and no extradition attempts have been tried other than the original requesting he return to face alleged charges of rape. Maybe wiki-leaks would be doing better if their founder quit spending millions on defense attorneys and a high end lifestyle. Maybe, if he answered the charges in person, they would be dropped and all this would be for nothing, but then again maybe not. Don't think for one moment, that if the US government wanted him dead, or whisked away to prison forever, that it could not be done while he is in Great Britain.

Trial and charges are for US citizens -- haven't you read the United States Constitution. A United States citizen is guaranteed a trial, not foreign nationals.

I wouldn't bank on that. I'm sure some how some way. The world or the USA government could come with some charges.

There are some serious whack jobs commenting on this post. We are going from personal liberties to death threats to government conspiracies.

What government on this planet could benefit from having their internal documents spread all over the web? None! What company for that fact can survive in a cut throat industry if all their documents were laid out like this? None!

The release of these documents are not unlike airing your personal and private information out on the web, for anyone with the ability, aptitude and desire you use your information for whatever purpose they choose. Illegal, immoral or otherwise.

I think most people are missing is the fact that the release of said documents are ILLEGAL and to be in possession of these documents are also ILLEGAL. Read that again...Ill wait for you....Let me give you an example; I steal a TV and then give it to you. You are now in possession of stolen property and subject to prosecution. Only way to avoid this is to turn in the TV to the authorities.

The question is did Wikileaks knowingly accept stolen materials. I think we all know the answer to that.

I think liberals in general have forgotten that we live in a world where people want to kill us just because we are Americans. Just like children some can be put on time out and some need to be spanked...it all depends on the child. You may hate some of the things this country has done and probably will do, but I can remember a time when it wasn't for the betterment of this country and its citizens. Take out a leadership hell bent on destroying the fabric of our Country...I'll gladly allow my tax dollars to shove a missile up his/her ass.

@Only in America-2604171

Yeah, a corrupt government, that's something to be proud of, isn't it? The problem is, in today's world, the only thing you have to do is say one wrong word about the government, and you could end up with the short end of the stick.

What government system would you suggest as the pinnacle of prosperity and equality? I frankly find that Democracy is far and above other systems currently in practice. Sure we have our issues, but at least you won't be killed for speaking about them. And if we are unhappy with our Government we only have ourselves to blame, after all we did vote them into power.

@brendan. al-Alawki wasn't a citizen at the time of his death. He renounced his citizenship and became an enemy combatant. As for presidents executing citizens; as much as I hate to stand up for Obama, he wouldn't be the only president to do that. Unless you don't want to include the native americans as citizens, being born here and all.

He is not much different than Harold Camping, and his version on the "Truth".

explain to me how he's so much different than Rupert Murdoch?

explain to me how he's so much different than Rupert Murdoch?

I bet Rupert can still pay his electric bill.

I'll bet you are about Rupert. Rupert created the largest wiretapping business I've every heard of. Isn't that illegal too? Thing is, he just buys his way out. Criminal prosecution cannot touch him for invading the private lives of hundreds.

It is one thing to invade private lives to sell scandal sheets. It is quite another to dig out what our government is doing in our name. If you don't really think you need to know, then just go bury your head in the sand until you get hit by a bus.

If you don't really think you need to know, then just go bury your head in the sand until you get hit by a bus.

Might take a while. Not a lot of buses that drive around on a beach.

Hey Pippo,

You can start a trend...be my guest and publish your address on here, ok?

Pippo, I need your SSN and bank numbers. Set yourself Free

@ Tony

Personal and a public privacy are two completely seperate things. Individual privacy should not be confused with a governments privacy.

To make the comparison that they are the same is insanity.

The government holds a whole lot of personal info.

There is no difference given the viewpoint of Wikileaks. They expose confidential information that impacts private individuals and thus Tony's comment is spot on.

No it's very very different. It about exposing what is secretly being done by our government and it's controllers which affects all of us. If we don't know what they are doing, we cannot have anything resembling democracy or freedom.

@brendan: Correct. Tell that to Wikileaks. They released HOME addresses, HOME phone numbers, and PERSONAL email addresses of border police. Based on what you say, they are wrong. But they've shown that they don't care. They continue to provide PERSONAL information and information that can easily lead to people being killed. Btw, a person's opinion of another government's leader or anyone else is a PERSONAL matter regardless of whether or not they are a politician. IF they put the opinion into the public, then it's a public matter. But Wikileaks stealing private (confidential IS private) data and posting it while claiming it's necessary isn't the same thing. It's still PERSONAL PRIVATE opinions and there is no reason why the public needs to know what someone thinks of someone else. So again, Wikileaks is doing what you say is wrong. Yet you're supporting them. I think you need to step back and actually examine what they're doing before continuing to support them based entirely on their false claims.

@TooMany: If I release all kinds of personal and private information about US citizens and include in it some details about a murderer so he can be brought to justice, am I doing the right thing? It's easy to make the claim that I was releasing all the information so that the murderer could be brought to justice and make it sound like I was doing everyone a favor. When on the other hand, I could have only released the information on the murderer and kept the rest private. So would you support me if I released everything instead of only that which was pertinent? I didn't think so.

Wikileaks has released data that fits in with their claim that they are releasing information to provide for a transparent government. However, they have also released a lot of private information that has absolutely no need to be publicly displayed. Just like with the hypothetical example above, Wikileaks could have released only the data that was pertinent without releasing anything that could be used to harm the US or its citizens or any information that is not in any way necessary for the public to know. Instead, they released information on undercover operatives, information on where border police live, and other information that could easily lead to people being killed. They've released personal opinions that no one needs to know. So much of what was released isn't at all necessary for the public to know and Wikileaks knows this. Do they care? Of course not. They are attempting to destroy the governments and economics of major countries. And you're supporting that.

@Pippo Schillaci

"THE TRUTH WILL SET US FREE"

It is not the exposition of many government secrets we need to worry about, it is that they are secret at all that's the problem. This is our country and it is Government for and by the people. How can we be in charge as we should be if things are done without our knowledge.

Do you watch sports? Take Football for an instance. Two teams with two coaches come up with plays and a strategy to best the other team. The Team that has the better strategy and completes it wins. What would happen if the other team knew your plays or had insight into your play book? Defeat!

The reason why there are secrets is for strategy and if they don't want you to know something there is probably a good reason for it at the time. While I can understand peoples concerns about BIG CONSPIRACIES a government has its purpose and you have to let it takes it's coarse. Go back to watching Michael Moore's crap film of the week.

Troy: When I think about what the US Gov. could do, this is a relatively mild effect. If I was out there trying to piss them off, stealing/releasing classified information, I'd be expecting a JDAM to ruin my dinner.

Newsflash: Wikileaks is NOT unbiased ...

Another newsflash: The US government was all for Wikileaks and its release of secret documents that helped to change the elections in Kenya, then pissed themselves when they became the next leak.

There's no demonstrable evidence (and fully admitted to no effect by the State Department and as listed previous to this post) that Wikileaks has caused any harm to the USA.

Thor T

Unbiased? What have they said or done against countries not allied with the US? Which other financial systems have they broken into and stolen information from? They are far from unbiased.

Cipher-o

Yet the release of classified documents when done by a citizen is considered treason and when done by a foreign national, espionage. Yet no they did nothing wrong! What is happening is backlash at an irritation not a serious threat.

Well archangel, here's the problem. If they can claim anything they want is a secret and you are treasonous for attempting to divulge it to the public, then I guess you will never know what is really going on and can never even hope to.

As I read these posts, I see a common theme... morals and ethics. I have to ask, who's morals and ethics? Yours? Christian? Muslim? Left? Right? Mine...? I have been around the world a few times and I can tell you that the U.S. has the best system of government that I have encountered. No government is perfect and no country is squeaky clean, nor should it be. I like my way of life and will fight for it above all others; it is in MY best interest. If my government sees fit to execute someone that is a threat to Americans, I say go to it and thanks. I believe my government should be able to keep the secrets it needs to, just as every other country on earth does. I believe that my personal business is mine, so stay out of it. My suggestion is: if you don't like it, vote. If you don't get your way and want it your way immediately: move to a country that most closely matches your ideals. There are many different systems to choose from. Just don't force your way on me, you wouldn't like the outcome. The same with my country. I am a right leaning libertarian; I want smaller gov't and the freedoms I am guaranteed. I want to be able to fail on my own and to enjoy the fruits of my labor when I don't. I want my privacy and I don't want to pay for someone else's failure just because I have more than they do; I earned it. FACT: Wikileaks has violated the law. FACT: They have been known to edit documents and video to spin it the way they want it. FACT: Jullian Assange has gotten rich from it. Gotten rich without even offering a product or service. Gotten rich STEALING information from others. It breaks my heart that the banks are exercising their rights, lol.

One last poke at sidneyhop: I have searched and searched for these alleged Carl Rove e-mails. The only thing I can find is the article that you yourself wrote on the Young Turks. I personally think you took Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, converted it to bullet points and attributed it to Rove. I doubt your veracity and your motives. Before we start the namecalling, I just want to say that emotion destroys honest debate and I try to stay away from it. I slip from time to time, being human and all. That said, I am going to allow myself a slip right now. Sidney, in my humble opinion , you are a waste of a perfectly good zygote. I believe that you make the world a poorer place for your existence.

Caligula

I don't need wiki-leaks to protect me from enslavement by my own government. All you need is eyes and ears to read the direction a government is taking. It always ends up with a choice that is made by you, no one else. There is plenty of information, unclassified information, that can tell you what and where government is leading. All you have to do is look and listen.

archangel...

If you really feel as you imply, then you should be defending wikileaks against the big bad government, not criticizing it. Do you really believe that "classified" isn't used to by the government to hide things from us that we have a right to know as citizens? You on one-hand want to limit government but on the other hand are willing to place blind faith in the government. You don't see the irony?

Transparency in government?

Sure, but I want the DOMESTIC stuff transparent. I want to know where my Tax dollars are going, why Congress can't be bothered to do anything other than line their own pockets, etc... I want an end to the armed conflicts that are going on through out the world.

I don't care that Hillary Clinton thinks another ambassador is being a moron. I don't see that as being transparent. I see that as being juvenile.

Frankly, Wikileaks has done nothing to make the government transparent and has done more to portray themselves as immature and ignorant.

@Caligula-1763025

Some of you are actually willing to participate in your own enslavement by governments and multinational corporations. Interesting phenomena to say the least!

What I find really interesting is that a lot of the conservatives who scream that government is evil are THE VERY SAME PEOPLE who are against Wikileaks! That is one of the the greatest ironies of our day! It shows conservatives for the hypocrites they are and really makes the point quite sharply...

I think every person in power needs a check and balance to keep everything on the up and up. But, just because you think you should know something doesn't mean it should happen. Plausible deniability is for your benefit. Our country is great because our men and women do great things a lot of which we will probably never know because if it was exposed we would be frowned upon in the media and by liberals a like. You enjoy your freedom that is givin to you yet question how it is done.

As long as they hurt the bad people and help the good ones who gives a @!$%# how its done. Some times its better not knowing whats in your hot dog.

All information free and available to anyone?

Ok, post your credit card numbers (if you have them, with exp. date and security code), SSN, bank account number(s), home address, telephone number(s), full name, place of employment, mother's maiden name, account names to all websites with login passwords, and a photocopy of your driver's license.

Infinity,

Nothing in the world is preventing people from contributing to them via snail mail. If they were to publish a P.O. box or perhaps Julian's home address, then I'm sure people would be lining up to contribute. You want to make life easy on yourself by pushing buttons and let the banks do the work (you know, the dirty guys you are supposedly trying to bring down) and then cry when you can't use their technology. You are nothing but a hypocite.

Infin1ty: why should ALL INFORMATION be free and available to anyone? Does that mean your personal information should be free to everyone? Does that mean when a company designs and develops plans for a new product or recipe that those plan should be free to all people? Should we publish the detailed designs for a new jet fighter system so China can stop spying on us and just get the plans from WikiLeaks (its not Wikilinks)? Should we publish all people's bank account and salary information? Quite frankly, most information is no one's business and it DOES NOT belong to everyone. You have rights as an individual or a company, then you have a right to keep it personal as well.

Private banks and institutions blockading wiki-leaks is not prohibited by the first or any other amendment. Assange should have thought of the consequences of threatening or attacking any banking institution in the world, let alone one as powerful as Bank of America.

I think that's power, not freedom. With great power comes great responsibility.

Before Assange gave it on Wikileaks, he stole it. He's a thief.

Ed Peters

The ones blocking WikiLeaks have every right to do so, regardless of whether you think it is unfair or not! They are protecting their information as much as you would keep your credit card numbers and personal information hidden from hackers.

Because it supports his view of how things should be, without allowing for differing opinions any

room to poke at his view of it all.

Wikileaks, took information that was not meant for them, from someone who had no right or authority to release them and for that, they should pay the price, which happens to be the banks starving them to death. While it is not fair, life is seldom fair, if Assange had been smarter, he would have let out a small amount of them, then another chunk, then another, the reaction would have been much smaller and he would have at best gotten a smack on the behind. If your going to play ball, where a helmet.

Who in his right mind doesn't want to know as much about our corrupt banking system as possible.

We know they have been getting billions in 0% loans to play the market. The low life scum have been driving up the price of gas and food by manipulating the commodities market. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are giants in manipulating oil prices.

If we had a government all guaranteed loans would be made directly for a low interest. This would cut house notes by half or more and leave trillions in the hands of our people instead of thieving banks.

Why should anyone pay a bank 600k for a 200k house, when the tax payer backs the loan. We are letting the scum of the earth control our housing, education, money supply, and government. The world is waking up and if we don't do the same and demand real change the pigs will have us in depression and chaos. The corporate and big money controlled media are certainly not going to discuss the corruption of our financial system.

I will never forget how fast both parties came together to bailout banks and wall street when their stocks were tanking. The financial clown on CNN told us every day how the public needed to understand that this was not about wall street. It was about auto and student loans. The same clown is still talking and I have heard no retraction.

These pigs want the people to know as little as possible and its obvious the own both parties. Soon they will be cutting hard earned social security to pay untold billions in interest to thieving banking. They produce nothing and have the world in debt. Isn't it time we said screw you and set up a banking system to serve instead of rape our people?

Down with these scum that have done more harm than all terriorist combined. Also, to hell with their supporters.