WikiLeaks Will Unveil Major Bank Scandal in Early 2011

Okay, I'm bored with the wikileaks hype machine now. If you're gonna leak something go ahead and leak it, don't build it up for months on end and then reveal something disappointingly prosaic, like you have the last few times.

&#62; He confirmed that WikiLeaks has damaging, unpublished material from pharmaceutical companies, finance firms (aside from the upcoming bank release), and energy companies, just to name a few industries.<p>The thing that I dislike most about this is Wikileaks alone gets to choose the conversations we have based solely on what they decide to publish. While it was understandable for anything that might actually be life threatening, it doesn't feel right for other types of information.<p>I don't believe Wikileaks is an objective enough steward to get to decide all of the conversations we are going to have about information that was leaked to them. If you want me to believe you are impartial, dump it all; otherwise, you are trying to manipulate me just like Fox News does.

World Events To Unveil Major Bank Scandal in Late 2008

The full-article version of this is currently on the front page: <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1952037" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1952037</a>

I'm having a hard time imagining what could be more scandalous than enriching the super-rich, looting the middle class and leaving the US economy in the shitter for years to come. That's old news.

Are there good reasons to wait to release the documents other than to maximize publicity and fund-raising abilities?

If this doesn't literally bring down a major bank, it's already been overhyped (and it was just announced).

Leaking US Government data could seen as a threat to US interests. Now leaking business information could be seen a threat to many interests.<p>Now It's easy to play the shift blame game if anything happened to the people behind Wikileaks. In the beginning it would have been easy to assume it was the US government taking convert action. Now who knows how many ways this could be twisted to hide the actions of any acting party.<p>Governments love secrets. Corporations love money.<p>If your going to play information warfare you might want to do a little bit of risk assessment.

I'm sad they didn't release this first.<p>Despite all the shouting, I haven't hear of anything terribly scandalous in the diplomatic cables.<p>I strongly suspect that despite the revelations of 2008, the banking system would yield some notably juicy tidbits.

&#62; He confirmed that WikiLeaks has damaging, unpublished material from pharmaceutical companies, finance firms (aside from the upcoming bank release), and energy companies, just to name a few industries.<p>It's almost as if Forbes is sending out a big heads up to various Republican power interests to say, "Ok, he's coming after you guys next." Could serve as a call to action for some.

Oh Wikileaks, first we learn that the USA thinks poorly of Iran, and now we learn that the banks are corrupt.<p>Shock. Horror.

The solution to the wikileaks hype parade: Someone needs to start leaking stuff from wikileaks.

What worries me is that while the government may inefficiently try to haul Assange into court and call him a terrorist, the banking &#38; finance elite may just decide he should have an "accident." I wouldn't put it past them.

Hilarious to see the questions about Mudge in there. The interviewer is a sharp guy.

Waiting for WikiLeaks clones all around the world!

Haha, Error establishing a database connection.<p><a href="http://img.skitch.com/20101130-brk11r16h3cy86ryxd9sbitr7e.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://img.skitch.com/20101130-brk11r16h3cy86ryxd9sbitr7e.jp...</a>