I still maintain the list of vital sites was not newsworthy, was not uncovering nefarious government misdeeds.
It was completely and only a dick move. No other reason for it but that he is a prick, and looking for a big media spotlight, and has a particular hard-on against the USA. What was the greater good he was serving on releasing those again? On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Vivec <[email protected]> wrote: > > Except that's a false analogy. > > Here's a better one: > > People working for your company were responsible for murdering 12 people in > a parking lot. > Your company covered it up. > > A newspaper was sent video tape and other evidence showing what happened, > and proving that your company lied that it did not know about the event > when > questioned. > This Newspaper publishes the news. > > Sometime later someone else sends the newspaper emails that appear to have > been passed between your company's directors and the top management and PR > people in your company. > > They contain what the Directors said about your competitors, and your > clients, and some of your shareholders. > > It shows that while your staff and your Directors say one thing, the > company > actually functions quite differently behind the scenes. It shows that your > company was supporting a hostile takeover of another firm, unbeknown to the > shareholders. > > It shows that your company negotiated with Companies previously thought to > be direct competitors, and it shows that your company contributed heavily > to > firms knowing that those firms funded your competitors. > > The Newspaper confirms that these documents which it received are accurate, > and,in association with other media houses, prints it. > Your company's shareholders are shocked and alarmed at these email > conversations. > > You decide to shut down the newspaper. But its broken no laws and there is > no legal way to do so. > > So you decide to go after the newspaper's owner, and force a rape case > through court. When that case is thrown out, you ask a Senator to pressure > a > judge into hearing the case in another state. > You then issue a warrant for the Newspaper owner's arrest, on this rape > charge. > > You use Government Senators to pressure other businesses to drop the > Newspaper. > You threaten their supplier of Ink to drop support for them. > You threaten the trucks that deliver their newspapers to drop their > support. > > You get Credit Card companies to stop all payments to that Newspaper. > > That's a far, far better analogy to what is occurring with Wikileaks than > what you have posted. > > On 7 December 2010 10:59, Cameron Childress <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 9:55 AM, C. Hatton Humphrey <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > And yes, it does remind me of a certain website that has been > > > oft-discussed as of > > > > Glad someone saw the connection. > > > > -Cameron > > > > ... > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:332531 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
