Watching defenseless people get shot is hard to watch, especially knowing that 2 were just journalists.
Knowing that our government wouldn't allow information like this out makes me support wikileaks even more.
While I think the gossip parts of the diplomatic cables didn't necessarily need to be released; Hillary Clinton wanting DNA samples of other diplomats is important and albeit wierd enough for the public to know.
my main issue with wikileaks is that they are shown to have their own Agenda. They are becoming a gloabal political entity, and while many of the things they release are "good", how do we know what they have, and what they don't. How do we know how they decide to release things, and when...what is their agenda? They have already threatened to release the "thermonuclear weapon of information" if Assange is convicted or killed. its already been deployed to several hackers around the globe. As it has been said many times before:
3 comments:
Watching defenseless people get shot is hard to watch, especially knowing that 2 were just journalists.
Knowing that our government wouldn't allow information like this out makes me support wikileaks even more.
While I think the gossip parts of the diplomatic cables didn't necessarily need to be released; Hillary Clinton wanting DNA samples of other diplomats is important and albeit wierd enough for the public to know.
my main issue with wikileaks is that they are shown to have their own Agenda. They are becoming a gloabal political entity, and while many of the things they release are "good", how do we know what they have, and what they don't. How do we know how they decide to release things, and when...what is their agenda? They have already threatened to release the "thermonuclear weapon of information" if Assange is convicted or killed. its already been deployed to several hackers around the globe. As it has been said many times before:
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Who watches the watchemen?
@blacktain
cosign
@chloe
cosign as well
Post a Comment