> I assume you're speaking of the war in Iraq. Hmmm... I see a significant difference between a citizen breaking the laws of his own country (as this is what I was referring to) and a country breaking no laws to stop a tyrant who was slaughtering his own people. Wow I'm sure this will be a popular opinion here.
No, I mean the American Revolution.
> Plenty of wikileaks ppl are not Americans -- you cannot expect them to follow your laws.
A more than valid point. I had not considered the community nature of the site, nor the state in which it's owners are based.
> You know, the one where the last time the government got too uppity you decided to kill/exile the lot?
I assume you're speaking of the war in Iraq. Hmmm... I see a significant difference between a citizen breaking the laws of his own country (as this is what I was referring to) and a country breaking no laws to stop a tyrant who was slaughtering his own people. Wow I'm sure this will be a popular opinion here.
> So you believe [...] the government should be allowed to break its own laws against the citizens. [...] if they "Went away" that would mean a vast array of laws would be broken.
Well, I was assuming that if the owners/maintainers of the site went to jail then the site would go away. I was not trying to say that the government should reject 1st amendment rights.
Again I was assuming 100% US citizen involvement in this. It was a bad assumption, granted.