Originally posted by jon jon
I wonder how significant this hyped up UFO/Aliens leak is going to be...
probably all, but IMAGINE! lol
That would be insane! lol. Although it probably is nothing. (or something involving area 51?) :O :)
hardcore trancer
quote:
Originally posted by jon jon
I wonder how significant this hyped up UFO/Aliens leak is going to be...
probably all, but IMAGINE! lol
According to Assange from one his past interviews the information on UFO's isn’t something we already didn’t know about and it is nothing major. Like how the military has confirmed the existence of the UFO's. I highly doubt that this is going to be a major disclosure but I could be wrong.
Endlesswave
quote:
Originally posted by hardcore trancer
According to Assange from one his past interviews the information on UFO's isn’t something we already didn’t know about and it is nothing major. Like how the military has confirmed the existence of the UFO's. I highly doubt that this is going to be a major disclosure but I could be wrong.
When has the military ever confirmed the existance of UFOs??
As far as I know they did a report in the 80s or earlier that debunked it and said we have no evidence for or against.
hardcore trancer
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Endlesswave
When has the military ever confirmed the existance of UFOs??
QUOTE]
There are many ex military personals that have come out in the past few years and admitted about the existence of the UFO's. Check this out if you haven’t already, it is long but worth to watch:
The Potter
quote:
Originally posted by Yohan
And there is aspect of what wikileaks is doing is clearly illegal, not because of free speech, but from ownership point of view. Wikileaks never had legal ownership of the files it published. Would you be happy if someone published all your emails and online banking info without your consent?
quote:
Originally posted by Yohan
Wikileaks may not be criminally guilty of breaking the law, I think they are guilty of breaking the spirit of the law.
You have gone from stating that it is actually illegal, to breaking the spirit of the law. Which is it? It is almost certainly not the former, as based on the US constitution, the press, as 3rd-party participants, have the freedom to publish facts obtained by another party; also, it cannot be the latter, as in our society, something is either a crime, or it is not. Wikileaks is either guilty, or it is innocent/exonerated.
Additionally, based on Wikileak's actions, your attempt to justify a citizen being able to reveal another citizen's private information does not work. Neither does it work if the government were to publish the personal details of its citizens. The logic of citizens having the right to know certain information held by the government, stems from the fact that they work for us; therefore, just as shareholders have the right to information (such as financial statements) showing how their agents (CEOS's) are acting on their behalf, the same principle should apply in the relationship between the public and governments. In contrast, the government does not employ us as their agents(government of the people, by the people, and for the people), so cannot justify releasing our information. Furthermore, a principal-agent relationship does not exist between two individual citizens (my neighbour therefore has no right to know my personal info). Therefore, citizens have rights to more privacy than governments, and the rights that governments do have, are to be determined by the people/shareholders, not the government/representative.
Finally, Anonymous is not hacking. If what it is doing is illegal, that does not change the fact the onus is on governments, as representatives of the wider civilised society, to maintain higher standards. Moreover, it is especially incumbent on the US, acting as the world police and beacon of democracy, to ensure that it does not employ the same tactics as the criminals, if it is retain any moral authority and lead by example. By the way, notice how quickly they caught someone targeting the credit card sites in the Netherlands, compared with those who took down the Wikileaks site.
The Potter
What the hell happened to not benefiting from the proceeds of 'crime', you two-faced pricks? :whip:
Originally posted by Endlesswave
When has the military ever confirmed the existance of UFOs??
As far as I know they did a report in the 80s or earlier that debunked it and said we have no evidence for or against.
The US government (as well as many others) have confirmed the existence of UFOs for a long while now. I think MJ-12 documents spoke to this in some parts (whether you think it is legitimate or not). Generally many governments have spoken to the existence of phenomena that they cannot explain or identify. The distinction is that (to my knowledge) no governments have ever identified UFOs as correlating to the existence of non-terrestrial life forms of any sort. UFOs exist, it's just whether they're some natural phenomena we can't explain yet or something else.
StereoPrincess
quote:
Originally posted by jon jon
I wonder how significant this hyped up UFO/Aliens leak is going to be...
probably all, but IMAGINE! lol
and then we find out all this has been just a marketing ploy for some new TV show or movie. , imagine THAT!
Jer
quote:
Originally posted by StereoPrincess
and then we find out all this has been just a marketing ploy for some new TV show or movie. , imagine THAT!
mind=blown
ChemEnhanced
quote:
Originally posted by The Potter
What the hell happened to not benefiting from the proceeds of 'crime', you two-faced pricks? :whip:
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange 'to be charged with spying by the US'
America is set to bring spying charges against jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, claims his lawyer.
US prosecutors are said to be finalising their case against the 39-year-old Australian behind the publication of more than 250,000 secret diplomatic messages.
Mr Assange’s lawyer Jennifer Robinson said she understands US charges are ‘imminent’.
He is likely to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act, which makes it a crime to receive national defence information if it is known to have been obtained illegally and could be used ‘to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.’
US Justice Department officials refused to make any comment last night.
But Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed earlier this week that he had ordered a criminal probe and claimed the leaks had put America at risk.
‘We have a very serious, active, ongoing investigation that is criminal in nature. I authorised just last week a number of things to be done so that we can hopefully get to the bottom of this and hold people accountable, as they should be,’ he said.
Mr Assange is still behind bars in London awaiting an extradition hearing on charges that he raped two women in Sweden.
Depending on the outcome of the hearing, the US would then have to launch another extradition bid either in Sweden or the UK.
Although America has extradition treaties with both countries, the process is often lengthy and is likely to take months.
The US has never used the law to charge a recipient who has published classified information.
But a senior legal aide said the government might argue that WikiLeaks is functioning as a kind of storehouse, gathering and maintaining the classified material rather than acting as a traditional media outlet.
Legal experts in Washington claimed an alternative would be to charge Mr Assange with theft of government property. The law makes it a crime for anyone who receives property known to have been stolen with intent to ‘convert to his own use or gain.’
It was used in 1984 to prosecute a US naval intelligence analyst who was jailed for leaking photos of a Soviet aircraft carrier to Britain’s Jane’s Defence Weekly magazine.
Ms Robinson said the WikiLeaks boss is being held in solitary confinement with restricted access to his lawyers.
‘This means he is under significant surveillance but also means he has more restrictive conditions than other prisoners. Considering the circumstances, he was incredibly positive and upbeat,’ she said yesterday.
The latest development emerged as another website claimed it was launching on Monday as a rival to WikiLeaks.
Former WikiLeaks employee Daniel Domschelt-Berg said the new German-based site, called OpenLeaks, would also help anonymous sources publish sensitive material online.
There you have it folks, there is Democracy for you.
:rolleyes:
jester
quote:
Originally posted by hardcore trancer
Just in case you havent heard:
There you have it folks, there is Democracy for you.
:rolleyes:
:haha:
I can't wait for un-redacted info to come out. The blood is on the US hands for not complying with Assange. The US only has themselves to blame for Assange leaking un-redacted info ;)
