censored or UNCENSORED?

I comment in response to Helia G.'s post.

Oh WikiLeaks, how amazing you are! What better way to receive news the UNCENSORED way. Wait, that's how news to use be right? Honestly, if the Government acts with true altruistic intention and to help its own people, then such classified documents should be able to be viewed by the public and for the public the uncensored way. With the way how WikiLeaks operates, you can get documents in the most uncensored way possible. This kind of all goes back to making informed decision back at around Exam 1/Exam 2'ish. Give the public something to vote on and gather the results. Educate the public again and then have the public re-vote on the topic and compare the results.

So turn time back to the present, if we could ask the public to give an opinion about a topic and then gather the response, would the response be completely different after reading uncensored documents? What does the government really have to hide? I mean really, what are they so afraid of? That the public would step up and over through the Government completely and create a new? Probably.

In a time like the 21st century, it is truly almost impossible to hide anything from the public. I believe WikiLeaks exist to shine light on documents that are hidden from the public eye. Presenting news in it rawest form was what we all used to hope for from our government. No wonder we're so skeptical of our Government because you can't believe anything that's on the news anymore. Everything is so biased and skewed. One can only hope that documents like these will either destroy a society or completely give the public more credit than we really do deserve. BRAVO Julian Assange! Cheers to a new future way of war.