08-26-2010, 08:14 AM
Freedom of Expression is not passwords or whatever. my passwords concern me only. The Iraq War concerns the millions of tax payers who fund it and they're giving their money and not being told the entire truth.
If the users of this forum payed for the host and all the services provided it would be fair for them to know how it's being run. It wouldn't be giving them passwords but informing them on changes on rules, new features and what not. If a user was banned, then supply the reason. Not all things need to be shown, but the truth should never be diluted. Of course using the forumas a model is not really viable, but you get the idea.
And of course everyone knew about them. But this is de facto. These are real documents, evidence to back up what people were saying. And the videos that show what's happening and what's not happening. That's why Wikileaks is useful. Because it's evidence, not just speculation. What can be done with the evidence is arguable, but it's there and you can't deny that.
And are you saying we'd be better off if we didn't know some things? If I had a son that was thinking of joining the army, should he know what it's like? Or just be gone in the rush like many in WWI. I agree with you, not everything needs to be leaked, but as someone else said by being selective on their leaks, wikileaks would be more of a political view-point website than an arbitrary free site.
Now I don't know about the founder, and I haven't read up on his charges lately. But if you say he's enjoying the spotlight, I don't doubt it. I mean who am I to say I wouldn't do the same? He may like the attention. But you shouldn't just look at him and maybe look at the project as a whole. He may have become corrupt with his new found fame but I still think Wikileaks does what it's designed to: release information that may be useful to the public that has been ommitted. That's freedom of expression, to say what you want and to know the things you have the right to know. How many things that is, is very different between the minds of governemnts and people.
If the users of this forum payed for the host and all the services provided it would be fair for them to know how it's being run. It wouldn't be giving them passwords but informing them on changes on rules, new features and what not. If a user was banned, then supply the reason. Not all things need to be shown, but the truth should never be diluted. Of course using the forumas a model is not really viable, but you get the idea.
And of course everyone knew about them. But this is de facto. These are real documents, evidence to back up what people were saying. And the videos that show what's happening and what's not happening. That's why Wikileaks is useful. Because it's evidence, not just speculation. What can be done with the evidence is arguable, but it's there and you can't deny that.
And are you saying we'd be better off if we didn't know some things? If I had a son that was thinking of joining the army, should he know what it's like? Or just be gone in the rush like many in WWI. I agree with you, not everything needs to be leaked, but as someone else said by being selective on their leaks, wikileaks would be more of a political view-point website than an arbitrary free site.
Now I don't know about the founder, and I haven't read up on his charges lately. But if you say he's enjoying the spotlight, I don't doubt it. I mean who am I to say I wouldn't do the same? He may like the attention. But you shouldn't just look at him and maybe look at the project as a whole. He may have become corrupt with his new found fame but I still think Wikileaks does what it's designed to: release information that may be useful to the public that has been ommitted. That's freedom of expression, to say what you want and to know the things you have the right to know. How many things that is, is very different between the minds of governemnts and people.