Why are links to Wikileaks dot org banned?

http://__._/

Seems like a strange site to ban considering the subject matters discussed here.

Yes thats odd..a reply to: freelance_zenarchist

a reply to: freelance_zenarchist

I'm curious as well. Seeing as it was a dialogue between us that raised the question. :-p

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

a reply to: Zaphod58

But we can link to fox? A known misinformation propaganda machine?

gawker.com...

aattp.org...

www.politicususa.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

I can go on...

originally posted by: freelance_zenarchist
http://__._/

Seems like a strange site to ban considering the subject matters discussed here.

Yep, that looked like ... "SPY-vs-SPY!".

OR

"Oh MY! Don't go to that World-Wide-Website!" ... ( then if they can't, then they'll try doing a contol-limit ? ).

It's getting to be like ... "ANYTHING WITH 3-LETTERS IS FORBIDEN !!!" ... ( like "WWW" ??? ).

AND THEREFORE

I can easily ENVISION many eventually deciding to go back to the ... Old-Style Dial-Up Bullentin-Board Systems.
.
Suspecting-Observation: ALTER-COMM ???

a reply to: Justwatchingyou

The difference is that Fox uses information acquired legally. ATS could get into trouble for linking to sites with illegally acquired information.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Justwatchingyou

The difference is that Fox uses information acquired legally. ATS could get into trouble for linking to sites with illegally acquired information.

You're going to have to keep saying that because people don't understand classified communications being stolen is inherently illegal. I mean, cmon folks...the name has LEAKS in it. LEAKS is not slang for information readily available to the public

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.

Even if that information is vital to uncover corruption and the misbehavior of our governments? If it is the true side of a lie told to us at some other time.

Sometimes its impossible to get hold of information that would shed light on wrong doings in a legal way. But then, you know that is because its those bad people who are making the laws to stop you finding out about it.

So we can come here to deny ignorance. But only under certain circumstances and not regarding anything of any real substance?

When uncovering crime is considered a criminal offence...We're all doomed.

Just keep linking to the bullsh!t that MSM churns out. Should anyone accidently stumble across anything of any real importance ATS doesnt want to know. Dont want to upset the fat cats

I thought better of ATS

a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

not to mention there are threads here on ATS, about information Snowden leaked, complete with "stolen" slides...

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.

origia little sted 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.

I hardly believe ATS would get "shut down" for linking information.... If that was the case than thousands of other sites that "link" to wiki leaks would be shut down to. Besides is it illegal to "link" a site? I can understand storing leaked material .. But linking?

a reply to: LightningStrikesHere

It may not, but again, ATS isn't going to have the protections a journalist or news site does.

There's also revenue to keep the site running to look at as well. A number of sponsors may pull their advertising over it, and that's lost money for the site.

Ultimately though, we don't pay the bill for the lawyer or the legal fees if the site was taken to court over it. It's up to the site owners, as they will have to deal with the consequences.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: LightningStrikesHere

It may not, but again, ATS isn't going to have the protections a journalist or news site does.

There's also revenue to keep the site running to look at as well. A number of sponsors may pull their advertising over it, and that's lost money for the site.

Ultimately though, we don't pay the bill for the lawyer or the legal fees if the site was taken to court over it. It's up to the site owners, as they will have to deal with the consequences.

See protecting " big Advertisement" sounds more logical to me ..
Heck why would ATS want to risk losing it's main revenue generator?
But at the end of the day I hope ATS understands that its "we" the members also drive revenue....
So the question is who's best interest does ATS have in mind?

a reply to: Zaphod58


Nevermind I am over thinking this....lol

I would just hope that if there was world changing stuff, like the cure for cancer and/or a new energy technology that can end oil dependence, ATS would say to hell with the rules. The importance of the leak should be taken into consideration in my opinion.

What if wiki leaks, leaked information that all conspiracy websites will be shut down by the govt. . Would ATS allow wiki leaks?

We aren't able to link to the site.

We are able to post threads and comments on anything interesting from the wikileaks site.

Enter 'wikileaks' into the ATS search engine.

hmm. YouTube show illegal stuff. if you click on it and download it it is you that break the law. is it spitefulness or what.

Self edited. I"m not going to go there ....

This isn't complicated.

ATS isn't going to put it's entire business at risk so that you can talk about how great wiki leaks is and link to it.

Every story regarding wiki leaks releases get talked about on ats. Because they use links from legal sources and websites.

It's nothing to do with anything, other than not putting ATS at the whim of the government and justice department.

How anybody could see that as anything but smart site policy is beyond me.

~Tenth