"I haven't heard a decent argument on how Wikileaks isn't a terrorist organization"
That's not how the justice system works.
"Wikileaks itself, though, has shown that it is blatantly anti-American"
So fucking what?
That's not how the justice system works.
"Wikileaks itself, though, has shown that it is blatantly anti-American"
So fucking what?
In the same way, when someone participates in an organization that's going out of its way to acquire and distribute classified stuff, regardless of news value, but rather simply because it's there, I'd hope that our government would make life hard on them.
Wikileaks is not engaging in journalism- it's engaging in infowar against America. That's not legally defined yet, and the legal ramifications have not been decided yet- but I hope that it is defined, and there are severe legal ramifications for it.
That's what Wikileaks is trying to make happen: they're making those people who "operate against society" accountable to that society, secondarily so that those people can get screwed, but primarily to protect society from them. Here's a partial list of people "operating against society" who have gotten screwed so far by Wikileaks: Ben Ali, Hosni Mubarak, Gamal Mubarak, Omar Suleiman, US troops that murdered civilians in Iraq, Magnus Gudmundsson, Ágúst and Lýður Guðmundsson, Hreidar Mar Sigurdsson, the US diplomats promoting ACTA, and most recently Robert Tchenguiz.
People "operating against society" who still may get screwed by Wikileaks include Björgólfur Guðmundsson, various tax evaders protected by Julius Baer, and some Bank of America executives.
This is not "infowar against America". War involves killing people and creating confusion. This is the opposite of war: exposing corruption and conspiracy, creating accountability, protecting the public.
So what you're saying is that you're a fuckwad who's just making shit up?
"Wikileaks is not engaging in journalism"
In Your Opinion. There is a reason they haven't brought the law down on them, and have to resort to Mafia like tactics.
Perhaps it is a sign that this avenue of discussion is finally maturing enough to understand the difference between a comment that merely uses taboo words, and a comment that actually contains uncivil content.
I would agree that Wikileaks have recently had much material relating to the US leaked to it, and has then published it.
However, I think this ignores their publications in relation to Kenya, Peru, various banks, Scientology, Iran, and so on. They publish what they get.