wiki leaks founder

should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for treasonous activities, remember the star whackers.

75.216.216.120 (talk)13:30, 2 December 2010

Treasonous? Has he released Australian documents?

209.156.215.98 (talk)18:38, 2 December 2010

Yes, actually; in particular, the A.C.M.A. proposed blacklist springs to mind.

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)19:18, 2 December 2010

And he should continue to do so; our government is hideously corrupt.

124.188.171.7 (talk)15:15, 3 December 2010
 
 

It is interesting how America calls itself a free nation and a democracy and yet still believes in treason. If America valued free press, then they would praise Assange's leaks. It's very clear that the rape allegations are a cover for prosecution for "treason". Julian never raped anyone and I'm outraged that people are thinking of arresting someone so brave. It's not about national security or lives, all that is a excuse. It's just about politicians preserving their dignity, relationship with the rest of the world and their dark secrets. People need to know the truth and someone needs to speak it. To be balanced, it was a surprise and it did embarass the big shots. But how important are the politicians compared the people?

ZooTycoon2 (talk)21:44, 2 December 2010

Im an american and I praise Assange's leaks.

76.106.11.173 (talk)00:29, 3 December 2010
 

How do you know?

98.250.168.229 (talk)18:23, 3 December 2010
 

Same here, I support Assange in this case (though not necessarily about the two war leaks), and I'm American as well.

98.227.182.174 (talk)00:21, 4 December 2010

Really, I'd have it the other way around. I cannot see how publishing sites tagged as vital for US security is in the general publics best interest. The same could be said for the vast majority of the cables leaked so far; most ppl may have guessed that people have poor opinions of other people - before the cables were leaked these poor opinions were at least respectfully kept in private.

I think with the latest cable leaks wikileaks may have lost a few suppporters. I cannot see how it is relevent and for a change can definitly see how it could endanger innocent lives as the powers that are continually saying. Sorry Julien

Mcchino64 (talk)08:55, 7 December 2010

It's very clear that you are in favour of oligarchy rather than democracy. That's okay, that's your opinion and i respect your right to it. Not everyone has to like democracy, that wouldn't be very democratic now would it. The problem is that if you support oligarchy, your opinion is functionally irrelevant, unless of course you are a member of the the oligarchy itself.

67.142.172.22 (talk)10:38, 31 December 2010
 
 
 

oh you silly conservative sheeple, you lot will believe anything coming from the government's mouth.

153.107.97.154 (talk)02:26, 6 December 2010

Even if the government is that of Barack Hussein Obama?

Kitch (talk)13:57, 6 December 2010

Apparently so.

If Barack Hussein Obama tries to prosecute, apprehend or in anyway intimidate Wikileaks, He is violating his Oath of office:to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

67.142.172.22 (talk)10:45, 31 December 2010
 
 

It certainly appears that Wikinews dba Wikipedia are quite sympathetic to Julian Assange. DO NOT DONATE TO WIKIPEDIA

24.175.211.170 (talk)03:51, 6 December 2010

They certainly look similar, with Jimmy Wales' face all over Wikimedia and Julian Assange's face all over WikiLeaks. They look like personality cults.

Kitch (talk)13:58, 6 December 2010