General Discussion

merrily

(45,251 posts)

24. Two and a half years?

Reply to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #23)

Mon Jan 26, 2015, 09:11 AM

Jan 2015

Assuming they're still alive/free, of course.

Oh, I'm guessing they are or the govt would have made an even huger deal of the harm wikileaks allegedly caused.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

WikiLeaks demands answers after Google hands staff emails to US government [View all] malaise Jan 2015 OP

So Wiki leaks complains about authorized leaks of their emails aikoaiko Jan 2015 #1

That's not actually wiki's complaint. Failure to disclose to the public is. merrily Jan 2015 #3

There was a gag order. randome Jan 2015 #4

Maybe to you. Who sought the order? How hard did Google fight it? How long was it in place? merrily Jan 2015 #5

Don't know. So why be outraged at Google? randome Jan 2015 #7

It's not about telling wikileaks but subscribers. And how do you form an opinion without knowing? merrily Jan 2015 #8

Again, why did Google tell them in the first place? randome Jan 2015 #11

Appealing gag orders in favor of the public's right to know is quite common. merrily Jan 2015 #14

Deeper Problem. Octafish Jan 2015 #10

Yeah, well, except for that pesky court system that keeps intruding. randome Jan 2015 #13

Not quite. Octafish Jan 2015 #25

And even judges have questioned whether they have been too cooperative with govt. merrily Jan 2015 #32

Chief Justice Roberts Is Awesome Power Behind FISA Court Octafish Jan 2015 #38

Loyalty to the administration/goverment or the Bill of Rights? Let's see, which is more important? merrily Jan 2015 #39

What does Wikifreaks think that Anybody's rights were threatened? Adrahil Jan 2015 #29

If the government has a classified warrant or FISA warrant...you think the people in the know should snooper2 Jan 2015 #41

"First, don't be evil." Suggested addendum: Second, don't be a hypocrite about being evil. merrily Jan 2015 #2

I think WL has done some good (and some harm) but their complaints are ironic, at the least. nt Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #6

Complaints on behalf of subscribers don't seem ironic to me. merrily Jan 2015 #9

I'm sure the legitimate intel assets that had their covers blown might disagree. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #16

Informing subscribers would not have changed that. merrily Jan 2015 #18

Informing subscribers would have informed wikileaks Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #23

Two and a half years? merrily Jan 2015 #24

The length of time seems immaterial. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #36

It's always material for citizens to know who is snooping on which activities of theirs. merrily Jan 2015 #37

"It's always material for citizens to know who is snooping on which activities of theirs." Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #40

Please see replies 33 and 35. merrily Jan 2015 #44

"Subscribers" would be foolish to think they have privacy when affiliating with Wikileaks Renew Deal Jan 2015 #31

Because the American public almost 3 years ago was on top of this issue? And huh? merrily Jan 2015 #35

After WikiLeaks and Assanges treatment of Chelsea Manning.... NCTraveler Jan 2015 #12

How about the government's treatment of Chelsea Manning? merrily Jan 2015 #15

You got me!!!!!!!!! I fully support it!!!!!!!!! NCTraveler Jan 2015 #17

You might start with your assumption that I am the OP of this thread. I'm not. merrily Jan 2015 #19

Well then, your ommission and admission about Iraq was all in your reply. NCTraveler Jan 2015 #21

Then why even mention the OP? Besides, it was not a non sequitur at all. merrily Jan 2015 #22

I am impressed with the manner you come to conclusions. NCTraveler Jan 2015 #26

I mentioned the government. You attacked me. Now, THAT is, among other things, a nonsequitur. merrily Jan 2015 #30

considering that Google thinks it can examine ALL your emails for content. hobbit709 Jan 2015 #20

Not to mention the NSA. I don't use email or the phone for anything important. merrily Jan 2015 #27

It's both pathetic and hilarious to see Wikileaks whine about privacy. Renew Deal Jan 2015 #28

It's the Center for Constitutional Rights doing the alleged whining on behalf of subscribers. merrily Jan 2015 #34

It says nothing that the Center for Constitutional Rights is making these arguments on behalf of merrily Jan 2015 #33

Some don't think any of that matters any more when ''Homeland Security'' is at steak. Octafish Jan 2015 #42

Then the people who refused to ratify the Constitution absent the Bill of Rights were enemies of the merrily Jan 2015 #43