[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Beebs

So I was just thinking; those news outlets that are calling for the head of anybody with Wikileaks are actually being quite hypocritical as they are doing essentially the same thing Wikileaks did.

Wikileaks just posted information that somebody else had stolen; the news outlets are running stories containing the information from the leaks that are newsworthy, while on the editorial page calling for the blood of Wikileaks.

In reality, if the information was just on the Wikileaks site in it's original and raw form, the public at large would not actually take the time to read it and sort it to get to the controversial parts.

Clearly it is not exactly the same, but the news outlets are posting information from the leaks, which they are criticizing Wikileaks for.

Although again, I place Manning as the villain here, with Wikileaks being more ambiguous.

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Rape case aside, it's been said the US is going to charge him of spying. How is that going to work when there are myriad other news companies (which is what wikileaks is) that also posted leaked information?

SWHAT I'M SAYIN DAWG