Anonymous distances itself from WikiLeaks

Crowley

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
7,249
That was not a link about people who have died because of Wikileaks, it was a link about people blustering about people dying, but not actually pointing to any occasions where it has happened.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/08/02/taliban-seeks-vengeance-in-wake-of-wikileaks.html
Late last week, just four days after the documents were published, death threats began arriving at the homes of key tribal elders in southern Afghanistan. And over the weekend one tribal elder, Khalifa Abdullah, who the Taliban believed had been in close contact with the Americans, was taken from his home in Monar village, in Kandahar province’s embattled Arghandab district, and executed by insurgent gunmen.
 

w1z4rd

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
49,636
Releasing the cables is not why people are upset, so not sure why you folks are debating over it. The people who dislike the American cable leaks would NOT be singing the same tune if it had been Russian or Chinese cables that had been released. To give you an example.... no one cried foul when Syrian information was released, only when American data got released. Think about that for a bit.

People are not happy with the way Julian has totalitarian control over wikileaks.
 

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
Releasing the cables is not why people are upset, so not sure why you folks are debating over it. The people who dislike the American cable leaks would NOT be singing the same tune if it had been Russian or Chinese cables that had been released. To give you an example.... no one cried foul when Syrian information was released, only when American data got released. Think about that for a bit.

People are not happy with the way Julian has totalitarian control over wikileaks.

Well the gaga / assange sex tape is due any moment.
 

zippy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
10,179
Wiki leaks and Anonomous are answerable to nobody. They reject transparency when it comes to them, yet they demand it from everyone else.

I don't trust the government, but at least we know who is fu###g with us.

We have no idea who this lot is. They can do whatever they like. But for some people, as long as they occasionally make the yanks look stupid, which isn't that hard, they don't mind being f###d by them :)
 

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
Wiki leaks and Anonomous are answerable to nobody. They reject transparency when it comes to them, yet they demand it from everyone else.

I don't trust the government, but at least we know who is fu###g with us.

We have no idea who this lot is. They can do whatever they like. But for some people, as long as they occasionally make the yanks look stupid, which isn't that hard, they don't mind being f###d by them :)

So you have no issue with governments lying to us because we know they do, but some random organization telling us the truth is worse?

I sense a bush supporter :D
 

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
57,853
I'm sure the number of those killed is fairly significant. Unfortunately we will never know the true number as many of the deaths will go unreported, or will form part of suicide bombings, or will be attributed to other motives. But the fact that Al Qaeda said they would act on the information is threat enough. They do regularly assassinate people. They even tried to assassinate a teenage girl the other day. If you want proof, just Google for "Al Qaeda kill...." and you will get many news articles. But as usual, that kind of proof is "not enough" for those who defend these pigs and support their efforts.

Asking for proof of claims that appear to have little substance, is not remotely 'defending those pigs and supporting their efforts'.

One thing is for sure - There are way more documented instances of the USA murdering innocents with unmanned drones, than there are alleged deaths as results of the leaks. Funny how the outrage is aimed...
 

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
57,853

While it is unknown whether any of the men were indeed named in the WikiLeaks documents, it’s clear the Taliban believes they have been cooperating with Western forces and the Afghan government.

So in all the time since the leak happened the best we can come up with is one person, and there's no evidence he was named in the documents in any event? Let's not forget the Taliban are generally a bunch of fruitcakes who shoot girls for trying to read - It doesn't take much to set them off...
 

LazyLion

King of de Jungle
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
104,624
Asking for proof of claims that appear to have little substance, is not remotely 'defending those pigs and supporting their efforts'.
One thing is for sure - There are way more documented instances of the USA murdering innocents with unmanned drones, than there are alleged deaths as results of the leaks. Funny how the outrage is aimed...
So in all the time since the leak happened the best we can come up with is one person, and there's no evidence he was named in the documents in any event? Let's not forget the Taliban are generally a bunch of fruitcakes who shoot girls for trying to read - It doesn't take much to set them off...
So on the one hand you think that Taliban are fruitcakes who can go off quite easily, and then on the other hand you need evidence that this actually happens? :confused:
 

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
Yup one person but gary stated otherwise.

Scary how uninformed some folk are, read more RT.com gents :D.
 

LazyLion

King of de Jungle
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
104,624
Yup one person but gary stated otherwise.

Scary how uninformed some folk are, read more RT.com gents :D.

Nah, thanks... I think you'd get more reliable info off the bathroom wall at the Harry's Pub and Eatery, on Langebaan street, than from RT.com. ;)
 

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
57,853
So on the one hand you think that Taliban are fruitcakes who can go off quite easily, and then on the other hand you need evidence that this actually happens? :confused:

Come again? :confused:

I know the Taliban are nut-jobs, who doesn't?

Which is why I take with a pinch of salt the claim that Wikileaks is to blame for a swathe of deaths, due to the leaks. In all the time since the leaks have taken place, the best anyone can offer is that possibly one person was maybe killed perhaps due to Wikileaks, but probably not specifically because they were named, but because the Taliban are a bunch of angry loons to begin with.
 

LazyLion

King of de Jungle
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
104,624
Come again? :confused:

I know the Taliban are nut-jobs, who doesn't?

Which is why I take with a pinch of salt the claim that Wikileaks is to blame for a swathe of deaths, due to the leaks. In all the time since the leaks have taken place, the best anyone can offer is that possibly one person was maybe killed perhaps due to Wikileaks, but probably not specifically because they were named, but because the Taliban are a bunch of angry loons to begin with.

Flawed logic at it's best.

What you are basically saying is "Yes, I know the Taliban probably kill a lot of people for various reasons, because they are the type of people who go off like a shot very easily, but I don't believe that they killed anyone as a result of the Wikileaks release (even though they said they would), because there is no evidence for it"

So on the one hand you provide no evidence that the Taliban are actually mass killers, but you are willing to accept it on face value, because they are a bunch of fruit cakes.
But on the other hand you are not willing to accept that they actually killed any of the people that they explicitly said they were going to kill because there is no hard evidence for it.

umkay...... :whistling:
 

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
They said they would kill anyone but thus far there is one case of it happening.

The US receives intelligence daily and uses that intelligence daily to drop bombs and kill people, how is it any different other than this time the taliban have intelligence they can use.

Besides the taliban have infiltrated the nato army in afghanistan, now i would imagine that could be more of an issue than wikileaks but for the average LA times reader it may not sink in initially :D.

Wikileaks revealed information about many countries, so they never targeted the US. It just so happens the US is at war with many countries so the information is bound to be huge regarding the US.
 
Last edited:

zippy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
10,179
So you have no issue with governments lying to us because we know they do, but some random organization telling us the truth is worse?

I sense a bush supporter :D

Which part of "I don't trust governments" confuses you?

And I'm not a bush supporter.

Always thought your senses where suspect.
 
Last edited:

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
57,853
Flawed logic at it's best.

What you are basically saying is "Yes, I know the Taliban probably kill a lot of people for various reasons, because they are the type of people who go off like a shot very easily, but I don't believe that they killed anyone as a result of the Wikileaks release (even though they said they would), because there is no evidence for it"

No:

By all means, back that statement up.

*edit*

It could well be true, obviously, I'd just like to see some evidence of it.

I made it crystal clear that I was not insisting it had definitely not happened (how could I know?).

So on the one hand you provide no evidence that the Taliban are actually mass killers, but you are willing to accept it on face value, because they are a bunch of fruit cakes.
But on the other hand you are not willing to accept that they actually killed any of the people that they explicitly said they were going to kill because there is no hard evidence for it.

umkay...... :whistling:

No. Again, I did not say that. All I asked for was evidence to back up a claim made. This does not mean I reject the potential of the claim being correct, all it means is I'd like to know for certain, as specific claims were being made.

As for the Taliban being killers, this is well documented, and not remotely debatable.
 
Top