dil8

Yes, learn as much maths as you can...

I don't dispute that this if convicted is a criminal offence. I guess I was coming from the angle that the children who are the victims should be the priority...

I was thinking the same thing... While I agree that hosting cp is definitely a problem. Going after the service provider does not get to the root of the actual problem. Having said that, the story is quite young so I guess we will have to wait and see what transpires.

I think that the 'nothing to hide' crowd don't understand that the concept of things to hide could grow and grow unless the surveillance power are kept in check. Today, only terrorists have 'something to hide' tomorrow it could be activists, then journalists and so on, until they 'nothing to hide' people become the victims. http://rt.com/usa/justice-department-admits-spying-228/

People need to look at this long term and realise that abuses of power will continue to intrude larger and larger sets of the population unless they are stopped now.

Its a sad day for truth... and a sad day from democracy

It is good to see that some politicians still have the balls to speak truthfully about this issue...

An absolute disgrace that a so called democracy can have a list of people its going to kill...

Yeah, I noticed that too haha

A great article from a couple of days ago http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/01/cyber-in...

I have been reading about this story of late, and the my impressions are that Brown was in the progress of doing some real investigative work on the these security/intelligence companies and their links with the US gov.

And based on the severity of the charges against him, it seems that this is yet another case of DoJ going after people for political reason.

The small amount of detail that was uncovered seems to be the tip of the iceberg. Are any other journalists looking into?

This is exactly the problem with monopolised payment systems. There is absolutely no due process in these decision. These large corporations can change their so called 'policies' to financially cripple entities that they do not agree with. And it seems the burden of proof falls to the party that has been banned, which is absolutely ridiculous.

I completely agree... It has almost become impossible to 'demand change' from within the system, unless off course the change is within the acceptable norms.

I am really surprised at how great the gap has become between the US Government's rhetoric and actual policy on human rights, foreign policy and government transparency.

I just hope that Americans realise this and demand change sooner than later.

At the federal election, people vote for a candidate in the lower house and party or candidate for the upper house. The party with the majority of seats in the lower house forms government.

The upper house (or senate) seats are allocated to parties based on proportion of total votes by state. My understanding is that wikileaks is hoping for a seat in the upper house as do most minor parties is Australia. So the government needs to negotiate with the minor parties for legislation to pass the upper house.

Thanks...