It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why are links to Wikileaks dot org banned?

page: 2
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

And what if that gets ATS shut down in the process? Now what have you accomplished? ATS doesn't get the protections that a journalism site or journalist gets.

Fox, or the other MSM get protection if they link to that information, ATS doesn't. Where they can print those stories and get away with it, ATS could get in trouble and potentially shut down for the same thing.



And whats the point in being "Above Top Secret" and "Denying Ignorance" if you cant actually deny any real ignorance or show anything of any real secrecy. Only unsubstantial cr@p.

If you wouldnt show the truth because someone up there says its illegal then shame on you. I mean, that's the reason many of us are here. Because we dont trust Fox or any other MSM outlets.

Disappointing!
edit on 3023Sunday232014-05-18T09:23:30-05:002330 5 by Silicis n Volvo because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

And you can still link to the information, you just can't link directly to the site itself. The information doesn't change just because it's not directly from the site.

edit on 5/18/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

And you can still link to the information, you just can't link directly to the site itself. The information doesn't change just because it's not directly from the site.


How do I link to information on Wikileaks without linking to Wikileaks? Do you mean I can take the info from there and display it here? If so what's the difference?



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
IIRC it's a legal issue. Links to sites that have information acquired in less than legal ways aren't allowed.


Which is Ironic considering the website focus


Above top secret? Well if the information secret its not legal to hold in the first place.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Rats. I remember when ATS Members were encouraged to sort through Wikileak's original big dump for important information. Now, TPTB define whistle blowing as treason, so we can't link to the site without putting ATS at risk and threatening our site with a shutdown. Sucks.

But we can still check out Wikileaks on our own and talk about the issues here, right?



PS. Thanks for the heads up.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

As was stated on the previous page every story on Wikileaks has been discussed on ATS. The information was taken from legal sites and links.

As tothetenthpower said, this keeps ATS out of the sights of the Justice Department.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

As long as it's not linked directly to Wikileaks then you are welcome to discuss anything.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

And you can still link to the information, you just can't link directly to the site itself. The information doesn't change just because it's not directly from the site.

I've just sparked up Google and typed in "wikileaks."

They linked directly to the Wikileaks site.

Is Google about to be closed down by TPTB?

Hmmm....



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: PheonixReborn

Does ATS have the money for a platoon of lawyers to help fight the Justice Department?

Hmmm....



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: PheonixReborn

Does ATS have the money for a platoon of lawyers to help fight the Justice Department?

Hmmm....

You just need enough money to hire a lawyer who can say the word "precedent."

Then you can let Google's lawyers do the hard work for you.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: PheonixReborn

I don't think its that simple.

USA has some pretty draconian laws and if they wanted too they could shut the whole site down under some BS claim of terrorism or hurting national security.


Google gets away with it due to it lucrative business it brings to the USA.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: PheonixReborn

I don't think its that simple.

USA has some pretty draconian laws and if they wanted too they could shut the whole site down under some BS claim of terrorism or hurting national security.


Google gets away with it due to it lucrative business it brings to the USA.


Of course it does.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

BTW... I do hope you're not suggesting that bringing money into a country exempts a company from the laws of the land?



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: PheonixReborn

Or even easier, don't link directly to Wikileaks.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
How many people here were following Wikileaks before they decided to go on a full time crusade against the wars?

Remember the manuals out of the TSA that were still pending release when the Cables and War diaries came to blow the crap out of everything Wikileaks had ever been?

They transformed from an all purpose and largely international clearing house for whistle blowers to operate safely ....to a 100% full time focus crusade against Iraq, Afghanistan and Bush.

Well.. There are hundreds of sites that do that very same thing. There are only a half dozen, IF that many, which do what Wikileaks USED to do. To cross into the world of black, they have up everything they were or ever would be.

I'm glad we have folks here who will never make that trade-off in sacrificing the whole for the narrow interest....however compelling the single interest is. I really miss what Wikileaks had been. There is still nothing quite like it online for a replacement.
edit on 18-5-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: PheonixReborn

Does ATS have the money for a platoon of lawyers to help fight the Justice Department?

Hmmm....


It must earn enough money to put busines before morals.

You should do what is right not what is legal or what makes the most money.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: PheonixReborn

Or even easier, don't link directly to Wikileaks.


Rules are rules and I would never intentionally break them.

I still think it sucks, though.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

And how are you going to do what is right if you are shut down and bankrupted trying to fight the legal battles?



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: PheonixReborn



BTW... I do hope you're not suggesting that bringing money into a country exempts a company from the laws of the land?


And I hope your not naive enough to not believe that?

Money talks BS walks.
edit on 18-5-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: PheonixReborn



BTW... I do hope you're not suggesting that bringing money into a country exempts a company from the laws of the land?


And I hope your not naive enough to not believe that?

Money talks BS walks.


Naivety is the last thing I can be accused of.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

And how are you going to do what is right if you are shut down and bankrupted trying to fight the legal battles?


But you are already not doing the right thing either to avoid legal issues or to continue to make money or both so it makes no difference

I think we'l have to agree to disagree because I very strongly believe the law should be ignored if it contradicts decent or moral behavior. And releasing or linking directly to daming evidence of government corruption should take priority over the legal issues or the money the site makes.

I understand you're point of view I just disagree with it whole heartedly.
edit on 0507Sunday072014-05-18T10:07:05-05:000705 5 by Silicis n Volvo because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join