I guess something good came from Wikileaks after all

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You know, what you just pointed out, OS, did answer some of it. Domestic news agencies.

I'll leave the word credible out, though.

[mikegideon]

I've found that it's just better to wrap the word news in quotes these days.

[JayC]

I don't see wikileaks as a 'credible' news source... but I see the information they're posting as news and of the public interest... I don't think tabloids in the check out isle are credible news sources either, but every now and again they come across a valid news story (aka Presidential candidate having love child while wife is dieing of cancer)... This information at least rises to that level.

They've already tried the whole Espionage Act in the past, remember a little case called the Pentagon papers? SCOTUS ruled the press can use any information it's given as long as they didn't steal it... There is no evidence that would indicate that Wikileaks had any involvement with the theft of data. BTW, if we're going to charge this one guy, what about all the other old school news papers who leaked the material with wikileaks? What about the New York Times when it gets leaks from somebody in the white house? Where exactly does it stop? What makes this one strange Aussie so special?

As for the entire enemy combatant idea... That is just plain crazy... He's not attacking the US's computer systems, he's not stealing any of the data he's releasing to the public... He's not sitting on a battlefield with an ak47 shooting at our troops... The TRUTH can NEVER be "information warfare"... no matter how embarrassing it is to us and the government we elect.

I'm not going to labor this to death because you and I see this as different things, JayC.

You seem to think Wikileaks is some kind of credible news source. I don't.

However Assange gained the information that he released to the public, he knew it was an illegal act.

The 1st Amendment doesn't give a damn about a foreigner, especially on foreign soil. It may be that

Assange is never tried, and I doubt he will be, but he had information he shouldn't have and there

is talk of using the Espionage Act against him, or naming him as an enemy combatant.

I view this as the guy that has received stolen goods. He became part of the crime.

Other than that, we'll just have to disagree, okay?

It seems that more crap is becoming okay, when in the past it wasn't. I have a problem with that.

[Guest mikedwood]

The shear volume of the leaks is what amazes me. I can't fault Wikileaks for that. They got the information and posted it without opinion. Yes the people who turned it over are at fault but there is a huge problem with the intellegence system if that much infomation gets out. I suppose on the plus side there is so much information most people won't even bother reading it. I mean it's not like they leaked the winner of dancing with the stars or survivor.

(Sorry for the typos came in from outside and my hands are freezing!)

[Guest 6.8 AR]

So, what is their purpose, not being a credible news source and not being the National Inquirer,

for posting this so-called "not illegally obtained" information. Is Julian Assange just looking out for

all us little people? We should send him flowers. Thank you, Julian. Sweet boy!

I'm going to have to find out more about this Soros connection Beck found and exposed. I think

there may be much more to Wikileaks than just some informational fodder coming from hackers.

I think OS already gave a good enough answer about the Pentagon Papers and SCOTUS.

We'll just have to see about the rest.

It's obvious our secrets are not being kept, and that's a huge problem.