The real meaning of WikiLeaks

"For someone who was watching Iraq and Afghanistan with some care over the previous years, the leaks might have provided interesting details but they would not have provided any startling distinction between the reality that was known and what was revealed. If, on the other hand, you weren’t paying close attention, and WikiLeaks provided your first and only view of the battlefields in any detail, you might have been surprised."

That proves that the more you do to threaten and shut WikiLeaks the more interesting it gets also for people who do not care and do not understand about war or politics.
What everybody understands and doesn´t like is the thought of being told one lie after the other, of being manipulated and brainwashed.

"First, how significant were the leaks? Second, how could they have happened? Third, was their release a crime? Fourth, what were their consequences? Finally, and most important, is the WikiLeaks premise that releasing government secrets is a healthy and appropriate act a tenable position?"

The question should be this: Has the Government have ANY right to have "government secrets"? Shouldn´t people know what is going on?
Isn´t it the people´s right to KNOW what the Army is doing in Iraq?
Shouldn´t they be entitled to have their own opinions, their own moral view?
Shouldn´t they be entitled to say no to something they think immoral?
And LAST, isn´t that the reason why THOSE were secrets?
Because the Government knew that people wouldn´t have approved?

Isn´t it the right of the people to KNOW what the ones who were elected do?
And shouldn´t the ONES who were elected DO WHAT the people who elected them want them to do?
WikiLeaks is the voice of the unknown, worthless man on the road.
It is the voice of right versus wrong, is the real Democracy, not the empty word they use to wash their mouth to justify ALL they do.