Poll Question: Wikileaks is '.....' for democracy:
dstieger
Monday, October 31, 2016 10:27:18 AM
Holds governments accountable? Or hostage?
zitotczito
Monday, October 31, 2016 10:35:29 AM
Not in favor but when you have corruption this deep how else do you bring this out.
jjanecka
Monday, October 31, 2016 10:45:36 AM
It's good and bad. Like I hated how Snowden pretty much set back American cyber security 25 years. That dude is a traitor to this country. By that same token, Hillary is also a traitor to the United States and exposing her is probably a good thing.
gummy jones
Monday, October 31, 2016 10:52:29 AM

Holds governments accountable? Or hostage?

dstieger wrote:

when the gov (read oligarchy) holds the citizens hostage it seems pretty reasonable

DrafterX
Monday, October 31, 2016 10:54:11 AM
I have mixed feelings as well.. but Hillary coulda prevented this.. cracks me up when the Hillary camp complains about all this illegal activity is being discovered thru illegal means... 😟
bob-o
Monday, October 31, 2016 11:03:25 AM

It has filled the role that the media used to fill. It's necessary. And in that sense, good.

For those who complain with Snowden...corruption doesn't know party. It is what it is. You don't get to choose what is lawless. The only caveat is that we are dependent on what Wikileaks determines is to be published--and we could be missing out on distilling that information ourselves. Which is why we need more of these types of agents like Wikileaks.

Jack

dstieger
Monday, October 31, 2016 11:05:55 AM
As someone who spent a good deal of time responsible for safeguarding TS SCI secrets, I'm very disturbed and angry at Wikileaks, and Snowden, especially. I, too, have mixed feeling to some extent....in that I acknowledge that in time, we will probably have been fortunate that some of the Snowden stuff was made public...much as that admission pains me. Governments will all have secrets. People, even public people will have private stuff that should remain private. It is up to us to put leaders in place that we can trust with that responsibility. (That isn't a not-so-subtle slam on HRC....I wasn't even thinking about her when I made this poll.) I just think that despite the fact that Wikileaks will publicize some stuff that probably should be public -- I cannot approve of them. At all.
gummy jones
Monday, October 31, 2016 11:13:16 AM
i think we need a better definition of terms here

correct me if im wrong, but snowden and wikileaks are different things.

just as hilary's exploits are different yet

wikileaks may be the commonly used vessel but the acts themselves are mutually exclusive

tonygraz
Monday, October 31, 2016 11:23:23 AM
Wikileaks seems to have an agenda which seems to have made them less trustworthy in what they release.

Anyone who thinks Snowden is not a traitor may have to explain to us where that line is crossed.

Gene363
Monday, October 31, 2016 11:29:25 AM
Like the ACLU, you don't always agree with what they say and do, but you know they come with freedom.
Gene363
Monday, October 31, 2016 11:39:08 AM
FWIW, what sort of idiot puts anything they want kept secret on an electronic device, let alone one connected to the Internet?

I expect our government to keep legitimate secrets secret and their business in the sunshine, they appear incapable of doing either. I don't like that our secrets have been exposed, but the incompetent SOBs that exposed our secrets and do corrupt things while in government service cannot be allowed the cover of secrecy. The integrity of our government is more important than keeping secrets about meddling in other countries governments and spying on our own citizens.

Stinkdyr
Monday, October 31, 2016 11:39:24 AM
Corruption dies in the light of day.

🌫

MACS
Monday, October 31, 2016 12:35:40 PM
As Dave said, as a person who held a clearance I understand the dilemma of this. Secrets involving national security are supposed to be protected. Government corruption needs to be exposed, however; so I can't hate the leaks, entirely.

What HRC did, though... is something for which a military member would have been court-martialed. And that is a cold, hard fact.

opelmanta1900
Monday, October 31, 2016 12:44:42 PM

Wikileaks seems to have an agenda which seems to have made them less trustworthy in what they release.

Anyone who thinks Snowden is not a traitor may have to explain to us where that line is crossed.

tonygraz wrote:

I don't think he's a traitor... if I was president I'd grant him instant immunity...

if he is a traitor, who did he betray? Evil politicians? A government breaking its own laws? I guess disobedience to the devil is still disobedience... I'd have a hard time calling it treason but I guess the devil wouldn't...

ZRX1200
Monday, October 31, 2016 12:49:41 PM
Less trust worthy because they're not outing W....

LMAO

opelmanta1900
Monday, October 31, 2016 12:53:13 PM
^My thought exactly... suddenly they have an "agenda"... lmao indeed...
cacman
Monday, October 31, 2016 12:56:13 PM
Snowden revealed illegal surveillance techniques used by the US guberment against its own people and worldwide. Most techniques are deemed unconstitutional & illegal, and the programs are halted. Yet Snowden is still the "bad guy" for being a whistle-blower, and living in exile in Russia. Yeah... it pays to rat-out the US guberment.
DrafterX
Monday, October 31, 2016 1:08:54 PM
I got an email from some Russian chicks wanting to come here... they were HOT..!! 😍
teedubbya
Monday, October 31, 2016 1:34:01 PM
Felony
cacman
Monday, October 31, 2016 2:15:24 PM

Felony

teedubbya wrote:

Or oxymoron?

Having to break the law in order to prove the US guberment is breaking many laws?