WikiLeaks' Assange confronts Australian Prime Minister

"I honestly don't know what he is talking about. I don't know anything about exchanging information about people who work for WikiLeaks. To my knowledge, it hasn't happened," she said.

lmfao, Gillard is hilarious...this is the only response one in her position is SUPPOSE to give.

Of course she ratted them all out. Wikileaks is an enemy to ALL Governments and Australia/EU/US are all allies. She chose a side and here are the results...
 
Of course they are going to deny it.... and so what if they did?

Wikileaks is complaining that someone is sharing secrets on them? That's pretty ironic isn't it?
 
Alan said:
Yeah he's supposed to be a fan of transparency :erm:
Click to expand...

Oh FFS! Are you a complete moron? There's a big difference between exposing the crimes of government being kept secret and illegally giving out peoples' personal information.
 
Valis said:
Oh FFS! Are you a complete moron? There's a big difference between exposing the crimes of government being kept secret and illegally giving out peoples' personal information.
Click to expand...

Hey, all is fair in love and war... and this is an information war. It is all well and good for wikileaks to boast about how they got access to all this secret information, but the moment someone does a search on them they cry foul. Well, sorry. Don't be surprised if these governments reserve the right to expose the exposer. You should have counted that cost before you got into this game.

And by the way... insulting the posters here is not going to prove your point one more percent... all it will do is earn you an infraction. If you can't handle the heat, then stay out of the CA section.
 
Valis said:
Oh FFS! Are you a complete moron? There's a big difference between exposing the crimes of government being kept secret and illegally giving out peoples' personal information.
Click to expand...

As if government documents don't contain personal info.

WikiLeaks, which last month angered the US administration by publishing 92,000 pages of classified documents on the war in Afghanistan, was found to have posted on its website a 1,235-page account of the Belgian police investigation on Dutroux.

"It is an unfortunate publication because the documents come from a dossier that is still covered by judicial secrecy," the prosecutor general from the Belgian town of Liege, Cedric Visart de Bocarme, told state broadcaster RTBF.

The material, compiled by prosecutors ahead of Dutroux' trial in 2004, has actually been on the WikiLeaks website since April 17, 2009, but its presence was only reported Tuesday by Belgian media.

The dossier mentions names, telephone numbers, addresses and bank details of witnesses and people involved in the investigations, including high-ranking Belgian politicians such as Elio Di Rupo, currently leading talks on formation of a new government.
Click to expand...

Hypocrite......
 
Valis said:
Oh FFS! Are you a complete moron? There's a big difference between exposing the crimes of government being kept secret and illegally giving out peoples' personal information.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm so sick of ignorant authoritarian conservative dittoheads making stupid comments about Assange and WikiLeaks that miss the point entirely. I'm confident that in most cases it's on purpose because real transparency will eventually destroy their disgusting elitist ideology and they just can't bear the thought of the unwashed masses hearing about the plans to screw them.

The digital revolution isn't about technology, it's about freedom, so of course the 'haves' hate it. What's weird is the army of 'have nots' they've recruited to fight their fights for them. Think 'Joe the Plumber' types in the US. Poor / working class people who argue for crappier social security and for big business to pay less/no tax. Amazing.

/Ramble
 
Well he should of expected this ,though its a game the government/s should think carefully about.
 
Garyvdh said:
Hey, all is fair in love and war... and this is an information war. It is all well and good for wikileaks to boast about how they got access to all this secret information, but the moment someone does a search on them they cry foul. Well, sorry. Don't be surprised if these governments reserve the right to expose the exposer. You should have counted that cost before you got into this game.
Click to expand...

I believe there is a difference here. Governments are elected by the citizens of a country, they are public servants and their dealings should be transparent to the constituents that elected them. My and your details on the other hand are private, we don't hold public office. We entrust way to many powers to government as it is.
 
ponder said:
I believe there is a difference here. Governments are elected by the citizens of a country, they are public servants and their dealings should be transparent to the constituents that elected them. My and your details on the other hand are private, we don't hold public office. We entrust way to many powers to government as it is.
Click to expand...
Oh really? Then so should private swiss bank account ;) Seems Assange forgot about that too
 
marine1 said:
Oh really? Then so should private swiss bank account ;) Seems Assange forgot about that too
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't follow your logic. Please elaborate.

Governments should ALWAYS be kept under close scrutiny as they tend to grant themselves way more power than their constitutions allow. The yank population are big against government power and rightly so.
 
marine1 said:
He is bitching about his personal stuff being leaked but he wants to leak stuff about people's personal bank details???
Click to expand...

That whizzing noise is the point going right over your head.

Fatcat corporate and government scumbags are hiding the money that should have been used for roads, schools, hospitals, police etc etc and you reckon exposing them is comparable to Joe Shmuck's info being made public? Please say you're joking,
 
So they're an exception to the rule regarding personal privacy now :rolleyes:
 
Alan said:
So they're an exception to the rule regarding personal privacy now :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

there's no such thing as absolute personal privacy. It's a complete myth. In an ideal world there might be the privacy you're talking about. But in an ideal world the megawealthy wouldn't leave the global tax burden on the middle and working class. But it's not an ideal world and it needs to change. The fatcats and tax dodgers sure as hell aren't going to make it happen. so fsuck 'em all if they won't pay their share!

Why should anyone have a secret Swiss bank account anyway? Nobody who earned their money legitimately and who payed their fsucking taxes, that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
ponder said:
I believe there is a difference here. Governments are elected by the citizens of a country, they are public servants and their dealings should be transparent to the constituents that elected them. My and your details on the other hand are private, we don't hold public office. We entrust way to many powers to government as it is.
Click to expand...

So... you don't believe there should be any secrets within governments - everything they discuss should be available to anyone interested? How does your plan fit into national security? Let's not kid ourselves that the wolves aren't waiting at the door.

Then let's say you find a bunch of people who are willing to publish their bos-ups... every one of them, even those which seemed like good ideas at the time. How do you do that without creating an egypt/lybia like situation? Somehow the average joe seems to think they have the answers to all the government's problems and they need to make it behave the way they think it should. Problem is that joe doesn't agree with bob, jane and jill (this forum is a classic example). You can be sure the media won't paint a nice picture of the government... EVER. As a result, the sheep will riot. It's a fine line, I agree that some things should be made public, but who decides which ones?

I am curious about why North Korea, China, etc have escaped Assange's roving eye. It's a bit like the situation in SA where you have poor policing. It's easier to point out that a law abiding citizen has overstepped the mark (takes the law into his own hands for example) than it is to prosecute the criminal... the criminal may not pitch at court - it's not like he fears the law.
 
Last edited:
Aztech said:
there's no such thing as absolute personal privacy. It's a complete myth. In an ideal world there might be the privacy you're talking about. But in an ideal world the megawealthy wouldn't leave the global tax burden on the middle and working class. But it's not an ideal world and it needs to change. The fatcats and tax dodgers sure as hell aren't going to make it happen. so fsuck 'em all if they won't pay their share!

Why should anyone have a secret Swiss bank account anyway? Nobody who earned their money legitimately and who payed their fsucking taxes, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

So if somebody makes money they lose their right to privacy.....:erm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X