Wikileaks

[Something Amyss]

I'd rather see the people and press resume that role than fairly reckless idealists like Assange & Co.

And ideally, they would. But as you yourself point out, this is not a perfect world. As more news sources trade integrity for access, we will see the rise of more folks like Assange solely because there's a vacuum of necessity. I'm not condoning him, but the point remains.

Meanwhile, Assange has offered to work with the US Government on redacting information about current operations and supposedly isn't publishing anything along those lines anyway. I think he's a little less reckless than you give him credit for, even if one argues that it shouldn't be his call.

 

[Ham_authority95]

I'm indifferent. The leaks about the government being shady bastards shouldn't surprise anyone.

Also, I doubt that the leaks will hurt international relations because any good foreign intelligence agency should already know that the US government does bad things already.

I guess we'll wait and see whether this is a triumph for free speech, or an inglorious dump on foreign relations.

 

[Duskwaith]

i totally agree with there being watchdogs for the average citizen against the gov't. but...this guy isnt what we need.
you want to expose dirty spending by big banks? swell! you want to expose war-crimes, so those responsible for dishonoring the mantle of a soldier are brought to justice? right on, buddy!

you want to expose the names of gov't informants, who are helping are soldiers fight the guys they really wanna be fighting, who provide information that, in some cases, prevents civilian casualties, prevents military casualties, and may even decrease enemy casualties by increases the chance of capture, rather than the killing, of terrorists and insurrectionists, possibly leading to a another (albeit, detained) informant?

and do you want to do this, knowing full well that these individuals, who would have had it easier if they had kept to themselves, or worse yet, aided terrorists, yet decided that the right course of action, whether you agree or not, was to aid the coilition forces, in the hope of a more prosperous and stable home, if not tomorrow then prehaps someday, for their family, for their children, and for future generations--expose them by name and location, knowing full well they and their entire family, even their children, potentialy face death at the hand of merciless, indiscriminate, slaughtering butchers?

go.
right.
the.
fuck.
to.
hell.
you.
worthless.
disgusting.
bottom-feeding.
scum-sucking.
piece.
of.
dogshit.
bastard.

i dont care what phoney charge they slap on this monster. he's not the champion of democracy or the free-exchange of ideas. we need one, but this cretan isnt it.
i hope he rots in a secret prison for the rest of his life for the soldiers and innocent civilians hes put at risk. maybe its not the ideals i should be standing by as an american, and i tend to be more idealistic than most of my fellow citizens. but the only fair thing would be worse; slaughtering HIM. preferable making it last an hour for each life that came to an end because of his leaks.

but that wouldnt be a precedent i could stand behind, even as applicable for this prick as it might be. a precedent i can get behind: themistoclese. his lie saved democracy. i can support a lie that gets this dispicable stain at least a modicum of the punishment he deserves.

i hope the day they catch him is the last day he ever sees the sun again.

Glad to know I'm not the only one who thinks this way about this guy running WikiLeaks. I'm frankly surprised the government doesn't shut him down and imprison him for treason; he's threatening to reveal information that could kill our citizens and likely anyone else they've associated with.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/12/05/wikileaks-ready-release-massive-insurance-file-shut/

And then there's this. How exactly does this guy get away with blackmailing the U.S.? In any sane world, he would arrested and if he launched the files, put to death in front of the firing squad.

So, no, this isn't free speech. Not when you're blackmailing a government.

People you are kidding me. Revealing human rights offences, harsh appraisals of foreign leaders and generally showing how curropt the American regime is puts no one at risk other than the fat cats and barons who's balls are on the chopping block

Name me one good group of people put in danger by these leaks? Military and civilian, last i checked they hadnt posted battleplans or defence procedures

Fox news is hardly the best source to be backing facts up with, its so biast to one side its got a 90 degree bend in it

 

[JWAN]

I believe that there are somethings that civilians do not/should not view and if wiki-leaks releases them they should be subject to the same punishments as anybody else who releases sensitive data.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm all for it, don't misconstrue that however.

I believe that in order for countries to have a relationship that means something, as with couples, it has to be based on honesty.

But thats just what i think, i realise my point of view is heavily flawed in many aspects, but who knows? maybe this website will help countries solve their issues to attack a common enemy, which in this case is Juian Assange.

A lot of the "diplomatic" issues are kind of pointless, anyway. This is stuff that's common, frequently understood or assumed, and so on. It's not so much a surprise the US is encouraging spying on the UN so much as it is a loss of face to be caught at it. I bet most countries are in a similar boat. Political opinions of other leaders? Oh, now they're not gonna sit with us at lunch.

It's kind of like the Emperor's New Clothes, but sort of in reverse. Everyone knows the Emperor is naked, and knows everyone else knows he's naked, but nobody wants to be the one to make the proclamation.

 

[JWAN]

Who do you think is right in the case of Wikileaks versus The Government?

I personally think that the governments are allowed to keep documents for themselves; not everything is meant for civilians.

But that's my opinion so let me know yours!

My opinion is that your post had a hell of a lot of grammatical and punctual errors.
O.T. Wasn't there a law where any citizen could ask to see any government document they want? It's why the important/ secret documents are almost entirely blacked out or no longer exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_legislation

No, the government can still put sensitive or "Top Secret" documents away.

 

[FalseMemorySyndrome]

I'm all for exerting your freedom of speech.

I'm not all for causing major political problems simply for a sense of anarchy.

 

[HT_Black]

I'm with Wikileaks. If your government is stupid enough to let a classified video of your helicopter shooting civilians fall into the hands of a disgruntled soldier AND THEN let him paste it all over the internet, then you kind of deserve to have your shit wrecked. Same thing with secret communiques and profiles. They need to leave Assange and his crew alone.

 

[DaJoW]

The latest stuff is mostly "the US says one thing, thinks another" and that's perfectly fine to show IMO. If this starts happening more often, it'll just force governments to be more honest.

 

[thethingthatlurks]

Seeing as my paltry job now pays me enough to force me to pay taxes *shakes fist*, I believe I have a right to know what the people whose salaries I provide do. If you disagree, you have either never paid taxes, are 14, or are a colossal retard (no exception). So kindly tell me how what Wikileaks is doing is in any way wrong? International secrets? Don't make me laugh! Revealing the location of so called national security targets? If you believe that, you probably lack the mental capacity to walk and breath at the same time. Souring of international relations? Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's not really an issue anymore...

 

[Gigano]

...
And ideally, they would. But as you yourself point out, this is not a perfect world. As more news sources trade integrity for access, we will see the rise of more folks like Assange solely because there's a vacuum of necessity. I'm not condoning him, but the point remains.

We're in complete agreement on that stance.

Meanwhile, Assange has offered to work with the US Government on redacting information about current operations and supposedly isn't publishing anything along those lines anyway. I think he's a little less reckless than you give him credit for, even if one argues that it shouldn't be his call.

I would hope so, but my suspicions are still that their idealism will - at least potentially - trumph international relations with unstable states to a greater degree than I'm comfortable with. He's admittedly done nothing so far I'd deem particularly harmful to such valid counter interests - ruffled a few feathers at the most, which I don't really object to - but the uncertainty of how far they'd take it bugs me.

 

[Caspertjuhh]

I support wikileaks, because the people should know that the army isn't just killing enemies, civvilians too. I mean, all realist already knew that, but some idealists now also realize.

 

[D_987]

If FOX isn't credible, why then are many of these sites using their news piece?

Because they scan the internet for stories, usually automatically, from the bigger news sites and copy and paste them to try and gain views. It's not rocket-science. and a large number of smaller sites do it...that or they hold their own agenda, as Fox news does too.

Fox aren't a good source of news, at all.

snip

Do you have any evidence that actually proves people are at harms risk thanks to this information? Have you seen the Wiki-leaks posts? Have you heard any stories about anyone being affected by these leaks [bar the government(s) involved of course]?

I bet the answer is no, because you're just quoting media sensationalism that doesn't really exist...

 

[TehIrishSoap]

I support Wikileaks, 100%! If the U.S government claim to have nothing to hide, why are they getting into such a fuss about it?

 

[Thedutchjelle]

I think that it's juvenile and immature of the governments to be uttering insults and whining about other countries and their authority figures behind everyones back.
And I'm amused at their panicked reactions as everything they've said is revealed to the whole, wide world.

However, this is obviously taking a strain on the countries relations and shit, because so much information was leaked at once(from how I get it, they mention a new thing every day in the newspaper from wikileaks) and that isn't really a good thing. However, I think the leaks will be positive in the end, because the governments need to stop faffing about.

a vital communication line between holland and US got leaked i live very close to that line in holland. do we now see this as a possible terrorist target? opinion please

The existance of that cable was never a secret. The document just admitted the US thinks it's important.

I think wikileaks is doing a fantastic job. The job of the citizen is to control it's govement, not the other way around. The media is supposed to be the watchdog, not the puppet of the goverment. Wikileaks is showing in it's documents that goverments has been hiding things for us that they should be fair and transparent about.

There are people going around with 'Wikileaks is endangering lives!'. If even the Pentagon admits that none of the documents are endangering anyone I think it's safe to assume no one will die because of this. Aside from Assange.

I think a lot of media-stations have been pressured by goverments to put this thing into bad light. Even his Pay-pal and Swiss bankaccount got suspended. Why?! If this man lived in China, we would call him a freedom fighter. And here some people think of him as a terrorist?

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

OK, then. Here's a few other sites that had this news.

http://patriotupdate.com/stories/read/6417/WikiLeaks-Ready-to-Release-Giant-Insurance-File-if-Shut-Down

http://njuice.com/WikiLeaks-Ready-Release-Giant-Insurance-File-Shut-Down

http://birdflu666.wordpress.com/2010/12/07/why-hasnt-the-us-filed-injunctions-over-publishing-wikileaks-stories/

http://current.com/news/92844606_wikileaks-ready-to-release-giant-insurance-file-if-shut-down.htm

If FOX isn't credible, why then are many of these sites using their news piece?

Because they are all under the same agenda as FOX. They're all trying to swing this story into a sensational fear causing paranoia epidemic. And also because FOX News unfortunately has a large population of like minded people that watch it. They've been caught lying about winning Peabody's twice, and their debates are very controlled. That's why FOX News isn't credible, they channel news to people looking for what they want to hear, and not what necessarily all sides are heard from. Seriously if your going to post links that use FOX News, a company known for twisting stories and changing context, as their source then really all you've done is link the echos of FOX News. And all of those links you posted have the same kind of fear mongering content as FOX News.

Tell me why you can't find articles like this on CNN, MSNBC, or any other nationwide news channels? Because those magazines are looking at both sides.

Most of the links you posted just put up a link to the FOX News articles and no input from this sites themselves. Your sources are unreliable.

To better explain it I'll put up a video that dissects a FOX News interview and shows it's unreliability.
<youtube=TwQhsohSGzU>

 

[debramster123]

I support Wikileaks, 100%! If the U.S government claim to have nothing to hide, why are they getting into such a fuss about it?

you have a good point there sir.. you guys have great arguments!!!

 

[Poptart Invasion]

When governments show total disregard for human rights and show that those in charge have interests that exclude mine, I have no desire to side with them. If my country's politicians, who do things in my name as a citizen of my country, do something shameful or harmful, I want to know. I'm fully willing to forfeit some of my safety for the existence of WikiLeaks.

want to forfeit your safety, fine. how do you feel about the families of the informants? think you, or anyone, has a right to forfeit theirs?


"A group of human-rights organizations is pressing WikiLeaks to do a better job of redacting names from thousands of war documents it is publishing, joining the list of critics that claim the Web site's actions could jeopardize the safety of Afghans who aided the U.S. military.

'The letter from five human-rights groups sparked a tense exchange in which WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange issued a tart challenge for the organizations to help with the massive task of removing names from thousands of documents, according to several of the organizations that signed the letter. The exchange shows how WikiLeaks and Mr. Assange risk being isolated from some of their most natural allies in the wake of the documents' publication."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703428604575419580947722558.html

but, you know, im sure Amnesty International, Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict, Open Society Institute, and Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission are all just puppets for the government like the media.

I don't feel that their lives have any more value than anyone else who is endangered by war. I think that their safety was forfeited the moment war started and one of them decided to become involved -- they've been pawns in it ever since. The moment war begins, everyone involved loses.

If a government wants my support in protecting its pawns, it would have to establish trust with me, because otherwise I cannot trust that it won't do what the opposing powers want to do to the informants and their families, but for somebody on the other side. After trust has been established, I'm willing to give up WikiLeaks.

...wow...just wow.

so, its these people fault? based on them sticking their necks out for a powerful force in their country (a force they didnt ask for) because they think this force, whether its true or not, can bring them stability and safety, or hell, even slightly decrease the likelihood of their 8 year old child from being car-bombed on their way to school?

...i have nothing to say to you.

People you are kidding me. Revealing human rights offences, harsh appraisals of foreign leaders and generally showing how curropt the American regime is puts no one at risk other than the fat cats and barons who's balls are on the chopping block

Name me one good group of people put in danger by these leaks? Military and civilian, last i checked they hadnt posted battleplans or defence procedures

Fox news is hardly the best source to be backing facts up with, its so biast to one side its got a 90 degree bend in it

well, i agree about fox news. frankly, their about as unbiased as a grandma talking about the handsomeness of her grandson...at best.

but seriously, Amnesty International doesnt even like this guy. how else could you do anything in opposition to government policy that would rub a group as lovey-dovey-tree-huggy as them the wrong way?

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

I support Wikileaks, 100%! If the U.S government claim to have nothing to hide, why are they getting into such a fuss about it?

you have a good point there sir.. you guys have great arguments!!!

it's not like there are any documents that call out for specific assassinations. it's not like there are black operations being uncovered. and yet people call this guy a terrorist? this is the world we live in.

 

[Chefodeath]

Nothing wrong with seeing the shit get stirred up now and then.