Wikileaks: For Public good or National Security concern?

To you, no. And it isn't going to say otherwise is it now?
If wikileaks can get hold of some secret documents it can get hold of more. Who knows what its got and who gets it. Would Osama and buddies pay for it? Yes.
In wikileaks there is a place people can go with secret documents and we all know people are corrupt and money makes the world go round.

Can you not see how this is a threat? Im not saying this is happening im just saying there is a huge potential threat there and the US government cant afford to ignore it.

 

Fuck's sake.

You know what? Fuck you. Stupid arguments, stupid cherrypicking. Stupid, stupid you.

Continue with your bullshit with someone else. I'm not biting anymore, you ignorant clod. Fuck this, and fuck you.

 

...you do realise that if it may endanger lives, then they wont post it?

They dont have to post everything they get, they just post what SHOULD be known.

Show me something that can imeddietly get people killed please and Ill believe.

 

Did you read that post fully?

 

Fuck it, nuke Wikileaks, with a nuke even. You've convinced me.

 

I'll try and put it another way because im not good at explaining things.
Wikileaks says it only publishes things that wont get people killed, but what about the stuff it doesn't publish? Its clearly got some sensitive documents there, who knows what they are. If they can be smuggled out of the US they can certainly be removed from an office or computer at wikileaks.

 

Why is it stupid? Do the US government want all their secrets in wikileaks where they cant possibly keep track of it? At least in their own back yard they have a chance.
The less people have them the better, its less security risk.

Im trying to say wikileaks is there for everybody to take documents to, everybody knows what it is and what it does. People on the other side also know, anything that gets to wikileaks will almost certainly be in russia, china, al qaeada etc.
It is a risk to national security just by been what it is.

 

WiKiLEAKS isn't Wikileaks

 

OMG, these last pages have been pure lol!
With the people who wish the US government was more like Somalia, to the ones who think Hitler was right in banning books he deemed a threat to National Security.
I just can't handle so much reasoning.

 

So is allowing military researchers leave, hey maybe we should prevent anyone with access to sensitive information from communicating with anyone else! I mean they could be a risk to national security.

/sarcasm

 

If Wikileaks causes a death because of their posted information, they'd be in some serious shit. (can everyone agree on that?)

What Wikileaks COULD do is just potential, you can size them up and be prepared, but that's all you can do. Until it causes grievance or other uncool shit, governments can't really touch it. Now, the posted videos and information is not the site's fault, but instead the responsibility is on the Government's shoulders. If this is leaking out into the public eye, they need to do a SitRep.

Governments can't really do anything to those who have given information when they retired, but hope for the best.

It is not Wikileaks, but instead the government that is the national security concern.
Post Merge: [time]1293057607[/time]

 

^^^
This

 

But people are taking documents to wikileaks because of morals, freedom of speech or whatever, taking them to another country is treason and an entirely different thing altogether. They dont realise these documents could get there via wikileaks. If these people have such high morals they wouldn't want their countrys secret documents in china.

Wikileaks hasn't published the harmful documents right? But it does have them clearly. So what happens to them? How harmful are they? How secure is wikileaks? Are wikileaks willing to sell that information?
Just by those documents getting to wikileaks is a risk to security, they are much safer in the US. They could be anywhere by now. My point is these people that think they are doing good are actually putting their country at risk.

If anyone can guarantee me, with proof, that those harmful documents never got past wikileaks and never will, I will concede the argument.
Until then I am saying wikileaks is a security risk.

 

Understandable and I see where you're coming from. Which tends to be why most of the documentation released to Wikileaks will be harmless bar names that can be redacted. If it was seriously harmful, purely treasonous information like spy movements that the informant wanted to get out to the world, then chances are that the information will go through different channels than Wikileaks - one that has fewer controls on the information going through.

No they haven't published any harmful documents it might have received (and I find it disturbing that you're acting under the impression that they have received harmful documents at all - why do you think this?). I believe their website says something about secure destruction of any data found harmful to individuals. And they are secure. When you consider that the largest security forces in the world have been trying and failing to penetrate these servers, that says a lot for the secure running of their systems. Furthermore, Assange has stated a number of times his dedication to letting truths be told outweighs that of money. We can't know his motivations for sure, obviously - but then, can we know anyone's?

What harmful documents? Can you guarantee me, with proof, that these "harmful documents" are in the possession of Wikileaks?

 

Exactly, we just dont know. We dont know anything about his intentions, which documents and if they got further. He sure wont admit to it, thats a fact.
I think it is a risk but I also think they do public good, in my opinion the risk outweighs the good but others think differently and we will never agree.
I was just pointing out there is a real risk.

 

I'm finding it unlikely to believe documents of real national security importance will ever end up in the hands of Wikileaks in the first place.

 

But you cant guarantee it, therefore it is a risk.

 

As much of a risk as any recognised media outlet, or indeed the entire platform of the internet.

 

Law.
You're doing it wrong.
You know, innocent until proven guilty and all that?