dunno!?
Why has the “Good News” never been successfully published?
This nought as funny as folk.
RE: Pentagon Papers vs. some of the things WL has leaked - the PP were about Johnson lying to congress. Gov’t corruption in a very bad way. Publishing them was good journalism. Revealing a list of sensitive targets which are important to national security, where there is no associated case of corruption to be made is different. I agree, the line is not always obvious or clear, but it is in this case, isn’t it? Most of the stuff Wl has published so far seems well within the parameters of journalistic ethics, but when the gov’t is doing what it should do, and needs to protect sensitive information, and that information is published, that’s unethical. I can’t see how they could charge the WL fellow with any crime, but it goes beyond what is ethical.
I’m really interested in the criminal charges against him. I mostly expect they are trumped up, but then again, it’s Scotland Yard we’re talking about. They have integrity, don’t they?
Check out the SNL skit of WikiLeaks - pretty funny stuff 
It’s looking like the founder of WL is going to be arrested (today maybe).
back to my original intent - what has been posted id the truth. The jack wagons hiding the truth are just as guilty to me. But that’s just my opinion and looks like few share it. And that too is fine.
Oh, I have sympathy for your position, Poppa. Almost all of the stuff that has been posted I think has been useful - some of it very, very useful in the cause of freedom - and is consistent with journalistic ethics. But what do you think about the most recent stuff, in which he published information about US “sensitive foreign assets”? A lot of it is already public knowledge, but then again, did he know that?
I haven’t read the latest Tom - but you know me I ike to take it case by case - somethings are fine and some thing probly deserves a nut-cuttin’. Still it’s stuff that the thief or the poster did not create. I have lived my life for years under the philosophy that "there are no secrets - everything will sooner or later some to light. The one exposing to the light is not the source so I have trouble in that area. If there was a wikileak from PM’son this forum I would tend to diss the author not the revealer.
"Nut-cuttin’ " - ooh, that’s a bad image… 
In this case there is no reason to criticize the federal folks involved - they were doing something that needs doing, trying to get a handle on vulnerabilities that terrorists could exploit. In this case, it is sort of like someone on the side of the Allies telling the Axis powers where our lines are weak. Certainly the Allies needed to know that sort of thing, but not the Axis. If Wikileaks is really on the side of justice and freedom, then the only inference is that Assange and Co. view the USA as hostile to justice and freedom.
Believe me, you know I’m pretty left politically, so I cheer for people and organizations like Wikileaks in general, but this one strikes me as a wrong.
X
Folks need to be able to speak-converse-communicate candidly for the sake of argument and noodling through all the possibilities before making final decisions and taking actions. Without that kind of anonymity and freedom of thought things may not go as well as hoped ultimately…
Aside from that, it’s not always relevant how or why a decision was made as much as the decision itself and the ramifications thereafter.
…and where is he, or whoever, getting these docs?
This is only my opinion. Though one can take a lot of conspiracy theories with a grain of salt, this should tell us that each day our individual freedoms are being taken away. There are more and more laws and rules made by people we vote into power or don’t vote into power. If people are not allowed to expose the mass corruption that is going on, then what hope is there for us. So, who is the real terrorist?