ChatterBank2 mins ago
WIKILEAKS - DOES IT AGAIN
Whistle-blowing website Wikileaks has released a video which it claims shows the killing of civilians by the US military in Baghdad in 2007.
http://news.bbc.co.uk...echnology/8605055.stm
It is the latest in a long list of "leaks" published by the secretive site, which has established a reputation for publishing sensitive material from governments and other high-profile organisations.
In October 2009, for example, it posted a list of names and addressesof people it claimed belonged to the British National Party (BNP). The BNP said the list was "malicious forgery".
During the 2008 US elections, it published screenshots of the e-mail inbox, pictures and address book of vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
Other controversial documents hosted on the site include a copy of the Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta, a document that detailed restrictions placed on prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.
Does this site provide a useful service or is it an irresponsible trouble maker ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk...echnology/8605055.stm
It is the latest in a long list of "leaks" published by the secretive site, which has established a reputation for publishing sensitive material from governments and other high-profile organisations.
In October 2009, for example, it posted a list of names and addressesof people it claimed belonged to the British National Party (BNP). The BNP said the list was "malicious forgery".
During the 2008 US elections, it published screenshots of the e-mail inbox, pictures and address book of vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
Other controversial documents hosted on the site include a copy of the Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta, a document that detailed restrictions placed on prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.
Does this site provide a useful service or is it an irresponsible trouble maker ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by olddutch. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.With one hat on I can sympathise with companies/ administrations/ governments who might wish that certain news could have been released in a more sympathetic/ sensitive way or at a time when it was less likely to be a spark for dissent or dissatisfaction. With the other hat, I'm afraid that if it's true then the best place for it is in the public domain.
This is the logical endpoint of the journalistic freedom to print/ publish and (possibly) be damned.
This is the logical endpoint of the journalistic freedom to print/ publish and (possibly) be damned.
-- answer removed --
do you honestly think a 'secretive site' is possible to maintain? I cast a wry smile when the first thing i saw on the homepage was a plea to make a 'secure donation'. If they dont get your ip address they'll have your details via online transactons.
I've no doubt all the footage/info is bonafide but they'll only show you what they want you to see. But I just doubt that this site would exist if the US government didnt want it to.
I've no doubt all the footage/info is bonafide but they'll only show you what they want you to see. But I just doubt that this site would exist if the US government didnt want it to.
-- answer removed --
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.