Wikileaks exposes China's order of cyber-attack on Google.

KlokWyze

Diamond Member
Sep 7, 2006
4,451
9
81
www.dogsonacid.com
Associated Press Link

BEIJING (AP) — A leaked U.S. government cable shows sources told American diplomats that hacking attacks against Google were ordered by China's top ruling body.
The cable said that according to a source, the Chinese government coordinated the attacks on Google late last year. The cable says the intrusions were directed by the Politburo Standing Committee.
The cable was released by WikiLeaks to The New York Times and The Guardian newspapers.
A separate cable released by WikiLeaks showed a Politburo member demanded action against Google after looking for his own name on the search engine and finding criticism of him.
The cable did not identify the leader. The New York Times reported it was propaganda chief Li Changchun, the fifth-ranked official in the country.

Very short article, but I'd like to point this out. I think a lot of the wikileaks stuff has been pointing out American corruption a lot because we are simply the most, or one of the most powerful countries around, not necessarily the worst in terms of corruption.

If wikileaks consistently pointed out other countries corruption, I sincerely doubt there would be any American uproar. Wikileaks is what journalism is supposed to be. What it used to be. Sad that citizens who get screwed over by secretive corrupt governments attack media outlets that our looking out for our interests.

Where are we supposed to get news from if outlets are attacked for bring out the truth? Ridiculous. :thumbsdown:
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
Which leaks exposed American corruption?

Also, it doesn't expose China's ordering of the attacks. Just because some diplomat writes a cable doesn't mean that it's necessarily true. They're possible events from that diplomat's viewpoint.
 

HeXen

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2009
7,831
37
91
people are afraid of the truth. thats why their attacked. You can see that much from reactions of others if you point out some painful truth to them. i think the whole wikileaks thing and everyones reaction is hilarious.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
people are afraid of the truth. thats why their attacked. You can see that much from reactions of others if you point out some painful truth to them. i think the whole wikileaks thing and everyones reaction is hilarious.

Some are afraid of the truth while others are afraid of grammar!!!!!!


Anyways, the goal of "Wikileaks" is still very reckless and very harmful. You can only sit on your Lazy Boy and say what you say because you're not one of those who is trying to do the right thing yet who's life is threatened because of this anything-goes exposing culture by cowards who haven't the first clue in how to conduct productive relationships with other people, with other cultures.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Where are we supposed to get news from if outlets are attacked for bring out the truth? Ridiculous. :thumbsdown:

Are you really *that* short-sighted?

For example, back in 2008 the Tribune Company in Chicago was preparing a piece on Blagojovich, including revealing the ongoing FBI investigation. Instead of putting out what information they had at the first instance of receiving the info, they were in talks with the FBI and came to the conclusion it is better to hold off exposing "the truth". They gave the FBI more time to build a better case to convict him on.

Often exposing "part of the truth" early prevents the full truth from coming out, as well as the guilty facing their due consequences.


Wikileaks can be described as many things, but it is most definitely *not* "journalism".
 
Last edited:

KlokWyze

Diamond Member
Sep 7, 2006
4,451
9
81
www.dogsonacid.com
Are you really *that* short-sighted?

For example, back in 2008 the Tribune Company in Chicago was preparing a piece on Blagojovich, including revealing the ongoing FBI investigation. Instead of putting out what information they had at the first instance of receiving the info, they were in talks with the FBI and came to the conclusion it is better to hold off exposing "the truth". They gave the FBI more time to build a better case to convict him on.

Often exposing "part of the truth" early prevents the full truth from coming out, as well as the guilty facing their due consequences.


Wikileaks can be described as many things, but it is most definitely *not* "journalism".

I like your absolute surprise @ my extreme short-sight. Man I AM that dumb.

So all journalists (by your definition of course) should always consult the government before releasing information about anything or just when it doesn't serve their interests? D:

While I can understand not exposing certain pieces of information that would CERTAINLY be risky. People that decide to break the law lose that understanding... especially when the majority of the media outlets turn the other cheek to blatant corruption.

Sucks that I'm not as intelligent as you. BUMMER. :'(
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
Which leaks exposed American corruption?

Also, it doesn't expose China's ordering of the attacks. Just because some diplomat writes a cable doesn't mean that it's necessarily true. They're possible events from that diplomat's viewpoint.

communist apologist right here! ^^^^

And you call yourself an American. More like a little bitch.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
communist apologist right here! ^^^^

And you call yourself an American. More like a little bitch.

No his motivations are much simpler. ONLY Europe ever does anything wrong. The US and non-Europeans are never to blame. He's used the same logic to blame Japanese WW2 atrocities on Britain.


Quick! Someone bring up Europe, and what a great continent it is :cool:
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
No his motivations are much simpler. ONLY Europe ever does anything wrong. The US and non-Europeans are never to blame. He's used the same logic to blame Japanese WW2 atrocities on Britain.

And try as he might he's yet to convince anyone that his views are correct and he's been doing it for years here.
 

cyclohexane

Platinum Member
Feb 12, 2005
2,837
19
81
Are you really *that* short-sighted?

For example, back in 2008 the Tribune Company in Chicago was preparing a piece on Blagojovich, including revealing the ongoing FBI investigation. Instead of putting out what information they had at the first instance of receiving the info, they were in talks with the FBI and came to the conclusion it is better to hold off exposing "the truth". They gave the FBI more time to build a better case to convict him on.

Often exposing "part of the truth" early prevents the full truth from coming out, as well as the guilty facing their due consequences.


Wikileaks can be described as many things, but it is most definitely *not* "journalism".

Except, you know, that Blago WASN"T CONVICTED! Terrible example.