Has Wikileaks caused physical harm to anyone?

[robert9712000]

Im not sure why theres alot of libertarians/tea party people wanting this guy assassinated.

http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/it-business/3251386/sarah-palin-says-target-wikileaks-julian-assange-like-the-taliban/

While shes not the prime example of a libertarian ,alot of tea party people support her,so she represents atleast one segment of the tea party.

People love to use the phrase "If you have nothing to hide then you shouldn't care" in reference to the government intruding into peoples private lives.But when that analogy is reversed with someone making the US government accountable to scrutiny from the people then people cry for his death.

That cry is mainly on the basis that hes putting American troops and other peoples lives in jeopardy,but i dont see how.Can someone show me how since from what i understand he didnt release names.

More importantly can anyone find me any story just one where someone has been physically hurt from the information hes released.

[awake]

Appearances are often deceiving... People call themselves all kinds of things to deceive other people... Libertarian is quite a popular term these days.

Assange is the messenger... And he has hurt no one that can be proven in a court of law. The psychopaths and criminals are on parade calling for his head on a platter.

[Kludge]

The Tea Party is a distinctly conservative movement, not a libertarian one.

Huckabee, Palin, Hannity -- They certainly aren't libertarians (Joe Scarborough isn't either, for that matter).

Libertarianism is the fusion of social liberalism with fiscal conservatism. If you only have fiscal conservative, you're still just a conservative, and if you're only a social liberal, you're still just a socialist.

Tea Partiers shouldn't be held to the standard of accepting the NAP, which even many libertarians don't accept. Many will not even discuss ending our military occupation of over 60 nations around the globe while 30-55% the federal budget is spent on "defense", so it's questionable to even call the Tea Party movement fiscally conservative.

[fisharmor]

The TEA in "tea party" means "taxed enough already".
They even went so far as to mess up their name.
I'm not "taxed enough", I am taxed too much.
They aren't libertarians - they're statists.
They only complain when the state isn't doing the improper, illegal, immoral, and tyrannical things that THEY don't approve of.

[hazek]

Isn't some country from Africa going to sue Dick Cheney for corruption cause of the leaks?

[lynnf]

no, but, sniff, sniff, whimper, whimper.... they might. (bats big puppy-dog eyes)

lynn

[thorin]

I suspect this is a wedge issue between "Tea Party" leaders and those that show up at the rallies for less government.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Government Harms, Injures, and Kills everyday... it's their social engineering that has the American Sheeple willfully accepting their bullshit.

[LibForestPaul]

Other than th coming WWIII, nah.

[Xchange]

no

[tangent4ronpaul]

I'm pretty sure they have. Hillary, Liberman and their ilk are probably having an epidemic of ulcers and high blood pressure.

-t

[speciallyblend]

The Tea Party is a distinctly conservative movement, not a libertarian one.

Huckabee, Palin, Hannity -- They certainly aren't libertarians (Joe Scarborough isn't either, for that matter).

Libertarianism is the fusion of social liberalism with fiscal conservatism. If you only have fiscal conservative, you're still just a conservative, and if you're only a social liberal, you're still just a socialist.

Tea Partiers shouldn't be held to the standard of accepting the NAP, which even many libertarians don't accept. Many will not even discuss ending our military occupation of over 60 nations around the globe while 30-55% the federal budget is spent on "defense", so it's questionable to even call the Tea Party movement fiscally conservative.


Then i guess the tea party and the gop is screwed then!! I guess i need to dump my tea out asap!

[ElCount]

What saddens me is that the public isn't outraged that the same people that are outraged at the leaks, parroting the "Innocent people are going to die because of Wikileaks" line, had and have no problem with the deaths of thousands of Americans, Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, etc...both soldier and civilian. To hear anyone that vehemently defends the National Security and Permanent War State cry about an innocent collaborator who might die because of a possibly flawed redaction process that's already scrupulous, is quite disgusting.

And it can't be more worth noting the letter Robert Gates sent to Senator Levin, stating the Wikileaks dumps didn't reveal any sensitive information that could have compromised someone's life. These people can't point to a single life that was lost or could be lost as the result.

[rprprs]

What saddens me is that the public isn't outraged that the same people that are outraged at the leaks, parroting the "Innocent people are going to die because of Wikileaks" line, had and have no problem with the deaths of thousands of Americans, Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, etc...both soldier and civilian. To hear anyone that vehemently defends the National Security and Permanent War State cry about an innocent collaborator who might die because of a possibly flawed redaction process that's already scrupulous, is quite disgusting...

That "disconnect" is really the biggest story here and yet so few have even begun to recognize or address it. All the documents revealed by Wikileaks combined don't equal the newsworthiness of this one phenomenon.

[robert9712000]

I just found the real reason Sara palin wants him assassinated

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks

Sarah Palin's Yahoo email account contents
Main article: Sarah Palin email hack

In September 2008, during the 2008 United States presidential election campaigns, the contents of a Yahoo account belonging to Sarah Palin (the running mate of Republican presidential nominee John McCain) were posted on WikiLeaks after being hacked into by members of Anonymous.[178] It has been alleged by Wired that contents of the mailbox indicate that she used the private Yahoo account to send work-related messages, in violation of public record laws.[179] The hacking of the account was widely reported in mainstream news outlets.[180][181][182] Although WikiLeaks was able to conceal the hacker's identity, the source of the Palin emails was eventually publicly identified as David Kernell, a 20-year-old economics student at the University of Tennessee and the son of Democratic Tennessee State Representative Mike Kernell from Memphis,[183] whose email address (as listed on various social networking sites) was linked to the hacker's identity on Anonymous.[184] Kernell attempted to conceal his identity by using the anonymous proxy service ctunnel.com, but, because of the illegal nature of the access, ctunnel website administrator Gabriel Ramuglia assisted the FBI in tracking down the source of the hack.[185]

[muzzled dogg]

how is that even possible? maybe if their server catches fire or something

[Anti Federalist]

Has Wikileaks caused physical harm to anyone?

Ulcers maybe.

The powers that be are getting off lightly if that's all the pain they get.

I'd as soon wish them boils all over their bodies.

[pcosmar]

Ulcers maybe.

The powers that be are getting off lightly if that's all the pain they get.

I'd as soon wish them boils all over their bodies.

Hemorrhoids and lice.
Frogs and locusts and jungle rot.
:(