I Just Find It Absolutely Amazing That

We Like To Engage In A Normal Publishing Effort, Which Is To Act In A Responsible Manner And Make Sure The Material Is Not Likely To Harm Anyone, That It Is Properly Investigated By Quality News Organizations, And By Lawyers And Human Rights Groups And So On.

Every Law, Every Constitution, Every Regulative Decision Is Based Upon What People Are Discussing In Their Community. It's Based Upon Our Sum Knowledge Of History And The Present.

There Is Nothing New In This World Other Than The History That You Don't Know Yet.

Libya Faces Along To The Mediterranean And Had Been Effectively The Cork In The Bottle Of Africa. So All Problems, Economic Problems And Civil War In Africa - Previously People Fleeing Those Problems Didn't End Up In Europe Because Libya Policed The Mediterranean. That Was Said Explicitly At The Time, Back In Early 2011 By [muammar] Gaddafi: 'what Do These Europeans Think They're Doing, Trying To Bomb And Destroy The Libyan State? There's Going To Be Floods Of Migrants Out Of Africa And Jihadists Into Europe, And This Is Exactly What Happened.

Let's Say That, Personally, I Loved Hillary Clinton. Would Wikileaks Still Publish This Material? Of Course It Would. Otherwise, We Would Be Censoring It. That's Our Mandate. It's Actually Interesting To Think About What Media Organizations Wouldn't Publish Such Material If It Was Given To Them.