WikiLeaks...Thoughts?

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]brnforce wrote:
I think the problem of wikileaks will be solved soon enough with the recent interpol actions. There is a difference between this and transparency. Take the whole Pakistan situation. Numerous countries were working together in order to get Pakistan to cooperate. Part of this deal was to make Pakistan look good to the public so that they will come out of the situation ahead of where they started.

Now that a lot of this information has been leaked, giving Pakistan a black eye, it ruins a lot of work that these people have done. This causes the process to have to start over which takes time. This extra time causes more troops to be in danger for longer periods of time which is unfair to them.

I just think the whole of wikileaks got blinded by their own ideology and are going too far. Their point is already made, stop hurting people.[/quote]

So people wanted to make Pakistan look good thru deception/secrecy? or do you mean like collateral damage, by association?[/quote]

They were trying to show the world that Pakistan was playing the whole world politics thing even though they were only doing it very slightly. There may have been other deals also tied with this that now are gone. Additionally, this causes additional tension in that region leading to longer term destabilization. We don’t all need to know everything. Some things need to be kept a secret in order to function.

[quote]brnforce wrote:

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]brnforce wrote:
I think the problem of wikileaks will be solved soon enough with the recent interpol actions. There is a difference between this and transparency. Take the whole Pakistan situation. Numerous countries were working together in order to get Pakistan to cooperate. Part of this deal was to make Pakistan look good to the public so that they will come out of the situation ahead of where they started.

Now that a lot of this information has been leaked, giving Pakistan a black eye, it ruins a lot of work that these people have done. This causes the process to have to start over which takes time. This extra time causes more troops to be in danger for longer periods of time which is unfair to them.

I just think the whole of wikileaks got blinded by their own ideology and are going too far. Their point is already made, stop hurting people.[/quote]

So people wanted to make Pakistan look good thru deception/secrecy? or do you mean like collateral damage, by association?[/quote]

They were trying to show the world that Pakistan was playing the whole world politics thing even though they were only doing it very slightly. There may have been other deals also tied with this that now are gone. Additionally, this causes additional tension in that region leading to longer term destabilization. We don’t all need to know everything. Some things need to be kept a secret in order to function.[/quote]

But most things dont and they are swept under the very same rug were the necessary secretgs are.

[quote]Tex Ag wrote:

Can you be disciplined for your online activity assuming no laws broken? Or would this be considered trying to access classified information?[/quote]

Well, the email, about halfway down, cited some Army reg. At that point though, I was just skimming through the email (I get these mass emails regularly).

I would assume that since the info on WikiLeaks is considered classified, military personnel viewing the website are essentially trying to access material they may, or may not be authorized to view.

I tend to think that US state secrets are best kept to the US State Department. For all of his talk of screening the documents to protect people, I am inclined to think that the United States government is in a better position to judge what is best left classified and what is not than some Aussie hippie.

As an aside, I think that the fact that this is the most shocking stuff pulled out of the state department’s classified documents is rather telling. Where are the assassinations, the domestic espionage, the 9/11 cover up? Psychological profiles of political leaders and security assessments of countries with nukes? This stuff is so tame, the State Department could have orchestrated the leak to throw people off their tail.

Oh God, a new line for the interweb conspiracy theorists to run with. Sigh.

Interestingly all other Middle Eastern countries are arguing for a military solution for Iran… apart from Israel, the country leftist commentators have been saying is the most militaristic of the lot. Israel was the only country asking for a diplomatic solution.

I think the fundamental question you have to ask yourself before you can really say whether this was good or bad is this: Should we be interjecting ourselves in the affairs of others around the world while trying to project our agenda and vision for the world on them? If you think we should, you probably think WikiLeaks was a really shitty thing. If you don’t, then WikiLeaks just helped expose how the government really operates and will hopefully shame them into acting better.

[quote]Bambi wrote:
Interestingly all other Middle Eastern countries are arguing for a military solution for Iran… apart from Israel, the country leftist commentators have been saying is the most militaristic of the lot. Israel was the only country asking for a diplomatic solution.[/quote]

I noticed this too.

Looks like the latest Wiki leaks has several on the left greatly upset with the President.

Wikileaks Heartbreak for (Former) Obamaniacs Who Hate Bush

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Isn’t it strange that the government can have secrets from us yet they do everything in their power to keep us from keeping secrets from them?[/quote]

Well yea, it’s for ummm national security and stuff. How do you sty on top? Keep others down.

[quote]kilpaba wrote:
I think the fundamental question you have to ask yourself before you can really say whether this was good or bad is this: Should we be interjecting ourselves in the affairs of others around the world while trying to project our agenda and vision for the world on them? If you think we should, you probably think WikiLeaks was a really shitty thing. If you don’t, then WikiLeaks just helped expose how the government really operates and will hopefully shame them into acting better. [/quote]

I understand the spirit of the post, but our government has no shame to speak of.

Other than that, this is quite likely a very good observation.

For the most part I think he is doing right by releasing everything that he has. I just wish his site was better organized. Its nearly impossible to find anything if you are looking for something in particular.

speaking of which, I have not been able to get to wikileaks in days now. is anyone else having problems?

[quote]koffea wrote:
For the most part I think he is doing right by releasing everything that he has. I just wish his site was better organized. Its nearly impossible to find anything if you are looking for something in particular.

speaking of which, I have not been able to get to wikileaks in days now. is anyone else having problems?[/quote]

The site got shut down. Will probably be back with another name sometime soon.

No, the site is still online, you just have to go there via it’s I.P. address now: http://213.251.145.96/index.html

Edit: and it’s only the .org suffix, these are still usable: .de - .nl - .ch - .me.uk - .cat - .eu - .at - .cc

What’s happening with the fake rape charges?

[quote]kickingking wrote:
What’s happening with the fake rape charges?
[/quote]

Why doesn’t Assange publicly address them and put them to rest if they are fake? Since he is big on transparency he should tell us exactly what happened.

I have mixed feelings about the whole thing.

He did say what happened: he had sex with the women without a condom.

"Everyone assumed it was for rape.

But it turns out it was for violating an obscure Swedish law against having sex without a condom."

http://www.reddit.com/search?q=assange+condom

[quote]ephrem wrote:
He did say what happened: he had sex with the women without a condom.

"Everyone assumed it was for rape.

But it turns out it was for violating an obscure Swedish law against having sex without a condom."

http://www.reddit.com/search?q=assange+condom[/quote]

That isn’t the way it is being reported. I will read up on it. Thanks.

[quote]John S. wrote:
All of his leaks have been run through by his team and others and any names that could cause people to be endangered have been blacked out.

I like what he is doing.[/quote]

i heard reporting to the contrary. Only after the first round of releases did they go back and do this. Which if true is utter jackassery.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Isn’t it strange that the government can have secrets from us yet they do everything in their power to keep us from keeping secrets from them?[/quote]

I would say the free market is much more after your privacy than the gummint. For the targeted advertising revenue.

[quote]ephrem wrote:
He did say what happened: he had sex with the women without a condom.

"Everyone assumed it was for rape.

But it turns out it was for violating an obscure Swedish law against having sex without a condom."

http://www.reddit.com/search?q=assange+condom[/quote]

Im no expert but I think in many countries that would be considered rape. I read that article this morning and I think it had a slight bias in favor of assange.

There was a thread recently about consensual intercourse becoming rape if consent was obtained under false pretenses.

Anyway, thats shady as hell even if its ‘an obscure swedish law’