Forum

Quoted from Steve

what did he do then ?

all I’ve heard about wikileaks lately is something that was on the belgium news regarding nuclear bombs but that’s about it ..

**sigh**

stop jumping on bandwagons, start reading. That kind of attitude isn’t any better than all these spastic americans talking about how all this “puts the troops in danger” or how he is “putting the lives of other americans at risk!” (you know, ignoring the fact hes actually Australian).

What you just said is exactly what wikileaks is trying to fight.

Quoted from Skyride

[…]
What you just said is exactly what wikileaks is trying to fight.

Well, I’ve barely heard about wikileaks, first time was with that ‘shocking’ airplane-gunner shooting reporters/journalists cause their cameras looked like weapons, 2nd time was this issue in belgium and now this..
excuse me for not really understanding the situation then..

Quoted from Steve

it has been opened
/b/ went insane

lol, no. come back when you know anything about cryptography.

Anonops been quite busy aswell apparantly.

DDoSing Mastercard, A Swedish justice department website, the lawyer of the 2 women involved in the case and they are looking to DDoS twitter/paypal, although they have said paypal might be too big for them to crack.

This infowar is heating up.

Quoted from Steve

[…]
first time was with that ‘shocking’ airplane-gunner shooting reporters/journalists cause their cameras looked like weapons

Riiight. A SLR looking like a gun :D
edit: it’s a bad excuse, really.

On the actual topic of this thread: It’s the same as with nuclear bombs really. The main idea behind is to NOT have to use it so you always have something to threaten others with. Cause once you HAVE used it, it’s useless and you will face the consequences anyway. So in fact, it’s likely it’ll never ever ever be opened.

It’s a 400 000 * 300 000 px coolface.png

Quoted from Waebi

[…]

Riiight. A SLR looking like a gun :D
edit: it’s a bad excuse, really.

As usual, the actual truth is far more nuanced, and not that simple.

Wired.com: Wikileaks presented the incident as though there was no engagement from insurgents. But you guys did have a firefight a couple of blocks away. Was it reasonable for the Apache soldiers to think that maybe the people they attacked were part of that insurgent firefight?

McCord: I doubt that they were a part of that firefight. However, when I did come up on the scene, there was an RPG as well as AK-47s there…. You just don’t walk around with an RPG in Iraq, especially three blocks away from a firefight…. Personally, I believe the first attack on the group standing by the wall was appropriate, was warranted by the rules of engagement. They did have weapons there. However, I don’t feel that the attack on the [rescue] van was necessary.

McCord was one of the soldiers who arrived at the scene of bloodbath after the apache had done it’s evil. He found the children and got them out of the van. Full interview: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/04/2007-iraq-apache-attack-as-seen-from-the-ground/

For me, this part of the interview is as equally (or even more) disturbing than the actual shooting:

After the incident, we went back to the FOB [forward operating base] and that’s when I was in my room. I had blood all down the front of me from the children. I was trying to wash it off in my room. I was pretty distraught over the whole situation with the children. So I went to a sergeant and asked to see [the mental health person], because I was having a hard time dealing with it. I was called a pussy and that I needed to suck it up and a lot of other horrible things. I was also told that there would be repercussions if I was to go to mental health.

And then they wonder why those Apaches are manned by maniacs.

Since the topic is watering down into discussion about some wikileaks relevations and their meaning Im gonna lock this one.