Sharrie
"The American Reality"
A Place to Voice Your Political View
Join | Log In
The release of sensitive governmental and military documents by WikiLeak in November of 2010.
< read all 3 reviews
Rating:
This gets dirtier by the minute and I'd rather not know so much about what's happening in the military!!! Despite the fact that it's done in the spirit of truth, some truth we can live without. If it is something which one has no whatsoever influences on and yet depresses one's life or perception of the world, why bother, right?
-3
There is a saying: Curiosity kills the cat! Hacking into the governments' systems posed risks of its own. Julian Assange is now the #1 enemy of the U.S. government! Is he prepared to risk his life? And if so, what does he has to gain out of it? If what he claims to be is real, ie. free press for the whole world, do you think he'd be successful in this revolution that he had begun? In revolutions of all kinds, people has to die before the idea will eventually take off. So, how many will die because of this ideal?
International politics from the bedroom? I'm not sure if Assange is crazy or naive! Sure, there are things that pissed us off, but not everyone is going to be able to go to the world and fight a war simply because one is being pissed off with life! In life, we each fight our own battles and wars, yet this is one war I refused to fight. It's never been a case that an individual or a group of individual can consistently win over a mass of government agents and also an industry of mass media despite the fact that this media might originally been set up by private individual. What Julian Assange has set himself up is to do a "heroic" act or to be a hero. Heroes are often sacrificed and/or died in the process. It's easy to see that from history and they normally become real famous after their deaths! Naturally, if it's something you believe in and that's your goal in life, by all means, set yourself up for it! As for the rest of the people, as with Game Theory, the survivors benefit ultimately. No, you do not want to be a hero. Instead, as with wars, you want to be a survivor!
Yes, go Wikileaks! The truth as far as I'm concerned, who ultimately do we trust? Unfortunately, that answer, even before Wikileaks, (to me) is no one! Call me cynical or call me practical, we cannot trust everything we hear from a third party. Otherwise, there would be no need for lawyers at all!
You know what? No one is even interested in putting up a review here on Lunch. So, I wonder if the American public is ready to believe these leaks and will see it as beneficial to the country. Most likely not. So, as with the past, majority of Americans are probably more inclined to trust and believe its government no matter what. As with the Iraq war in which most people in the world know what it's all about, Americans would choose to believe otherwise!
Speaking of which, it would be interesting to see how long this review will stay published here on Lunch. I don't really care, I'm just curious if anyone is even interested in this matter to begin with! And if yes, who???
What did you think of this review?
Helpful
3
Thought-Provoking
3
Fun to Read
3
Well-Organized
3
Post a Comment
zephyr2050
December 11, 2010
First of all I don't think you have to worry about your review on WikiLeaks disappearing. Lunch is all about fostering positive discussion and the sharing of knowledge, regardless of the subject matter (provided it's applicable in discourse where neutrality and compromise is possible). I actually have been reading every bit of news surrounding WikiLeaks as of late and think it's very enlightening to see what the reactions are from news and media organizations as well as the denizens of the world. I personally am rooting for WikiLeaks because of what they stand for, but not necessarily because of their methods. OpenLeaks may very well be the most desirable alternative to rally the ardent supporters of WikiLeaks who applaud WikiLeaks for their message, but not their strategy for dissemination of leaked documents. I just hope that people see these recent developments as an opportunity for insight into the values that today's society hold dear and what that means for the future.
Sharrie
December 11, 2010
Yes, you are absolutely right! As I mentioned somewhere in the review, as with Game Theory, those who sit around doing nothing (ie. the entire world as a whole) will benefit. There will be some sacrifices among those involved but the general public will certainly benefit.
show text editor
Scotman
December 05, 2010
Actually "curiosity killed the cat" is only part of the expression. The other part is, "satisfaction brought him back." good comments.
Sharrie
December 06, 2010
Thanks!
show text editor
1
More WikiLeaks November 2010 Leak reviews
This site puts the nation at risk and the people that disclose information that puts our nation or its citizens at risk should be tried for treason.
Comment
Compliment
Quick Tip by Sharrie.
December 05, 2010
Lies, more lies & even more lies! Who can we really trust these days? Julian Assange is the hero, or is he really?! Other than being the #1 enemy of the State, he's being touted as the whistleblower of the century. Do you believe his findings? If so, what are you prepared to do? Or is it merely a case of another media report?
Comments (1)
Compliment
About the reviewer
Sharrie (Sharrie)
I'm a traveler at heart & have been nicknamed Travel Queen by friends & colleagues alike. Traveling has been my life passion for the last decade or so. As we enter a new decade, I'm excited … more
Consider the Source
Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.
You
Sharrie
Your ratings:
Recent reviews by Sharrie
About this organization
On 22 November an announcement was made by the WikiLeaks Twitter feed that the next release would be "7× the size of the Iraq War Logs." U.S. authorities and the media had speculated that they may contain diplomatic cables. Prior to the expected leak, the government of the United Kingdom (UK) sent a DA-Notice to UK newspapers, which requests advance notice from the newspapers regarding the expected publication. According to Index on Censorship, "there is no obligation on media to comply". Under the terms of a DA-Notice, "[n]ewspaper editors would speak to [the] Defence, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee prior to publication." The Guardian newspaper was revealed to be the source of the copy given to the New York Times; this was done to prevent the British government obtaining any injunction against publication. The Pakistani newspaper Dawn stated that the U.S. newspapers The New York Times and The Washington Post were expected to publish parts of the diplomatic cables on 28 November, including 94 Pakistan-related documents.
On 26 November, via his lawyer Jennifer Robinson, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange sent a letter to the US Department of State, inviting them to "privately nominate any specific instances (record numbers or names) where it considers the publication of information would put individual persons at significant risk of harm that has not already been addressed". Harold Koh, Legal Adviser of the Department of ...
view wiki
On 26 November, via his lawyer Jennifer Robinson, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange sent a letter to the US Department of State, inviting them to "privately nominate any specific instances (record numbers or names) where it considers the publication of information would put individual persons at significant risk of harm that has not already been addressed". Harold Koh, Legal Adviser of the Department of ...
First to Review
- About Lunch
- Press
- FAQs
- Contact Us
- Terms of Service
- Privacy Policy
- Sitemap
- Report Abuse
© 2013 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.