• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

My HUGE problem with Wikileaks

bit_pattern said:
There are easier ways, dontchya you know?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks#Notable_leaks
Click to expand...

So out of their Notable Leaks, I count 7 instances that I would consider actual whistleblowing. That is out of how many documents they have published?

As I said earlier, I have no problem with actual whistleblowing. I do have a problem with them leaking things that aren't. Such as the Afghan War documents.
 
ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
I had read some documents and was well aware of them prior to this latest incident. And I was and continue to be underwhelmed.
Click to expand...


The Kaupthing loan leak brought the icelandic government down and you are underwhelmed? Sure.

ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
So what is their "new" strategy? Publish a bunch of crap and hope there is something there that is relevant? That's what it looks like. I'm not sure how that differs from their old strategy.
Click to expand...


The new strategy is to maximize the impact of specific documents they release - also by giving exclusive access to them to "traditional" media for a timeframe - instead of simply releasing a huge stream of them with the effect that the information becomes worthless because nobody takes a look at it.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
The Kaupthing loan leak brought the icelandic government down and you are underwhelmed? Sure.
Click to expand...
Uh, that's pretty much the overstatement of the year. The previous government resigned on January 23 2009, the new government was elected on April 25, the documents were released on July 30 :boggled:
 
Childlike Empress said:
The Kaupthing loan leak brought the icelandic government down and you are underwhelmed? Sure.
Click to expand...

In the sense that this is utterly untrue, yes I am underwhelmed. I do think the Kaupthing bank exposure was legitimate since they appear to have exposed a crime. Which I already said I am fine with.

ETA: Looks like KDLarsen beat me to it
 
Last edited:
Well, actually you've got me there. But it ensured that the new government was forced to really go after the banksters, after they seemed reluctant to do so in the beginning. Doesn't change the point i was making.

btw, i just googled "impact of kaupthing leak" and hit two was - my own post #202. Always scary.
 
Last edited:
So many lives wouldn't have been lost in past wars, had there been a more full disclosure.
I find something noble in Assange's efforts. I wish we'd had something like it before the U.S. went to Vietnam. In retrospect, do you think that war was a good idea?

The war in Iraq could have been avoided, or at least a lot of corruption and war profiteering, once it began, with more disclosure. Some of us may feel that most covert operations are essentially negative. Its not just the U.S. covert operations.
It would have been nice to know what Idi Amin was up to.

Similarly, a lot of the economic meltdown could have been avoided with more whistle blowing.
 
Last edited:
It would have been nuce to have something similar in the lead up to the Iraq invasion, what with all the lies and spin that got us into that mess.
 
Ya, because no one spoke out against the invasion of Iraq prior to it.

And stop trying to confuse the issue. This twit released documents that didn't contain any new or ground breaking info except IDENTIFYING DETAILS ABOUT PEOPLE COOPERATING WITH US FORCES!

You think it was a secret that elements in the Pakistani government were working with al Queda and the Taliban? Or that they hide behind civilians during attacks? Or that warlords in the region play both sides from the middle?

No, anyone paying attention knew these things. They were even reported in the MSM.

Ya, he's so brave dumping this info out and then threatening to dump more. Why didn't he dump it all if he didn't think it was really harmful?

If it does need to be sanitized, why threaten to dump it?

This creep is a bigger fraud than Che. And his fans are just as big losers as Che's.
 
Donal said:
Ya, because no one spoke out against the invasion of Iraq prior to it.

And stop trying to confuse the issue. This twit released documents that didn't contain any new or ground breaking info except IDENTIFYING DETAILS ABOUT PEOPLE COOPERATING WITH US FORCES!

You think it was a secret that elements in the Pakistani government were working with al Queda and the Taliban? Or that they hide behind civilians during attacks? Or that warlords in the region play both sides from the middle?

No, anyone paying attention knew these things. They were even reported in the MSM.

Ya, he's so brave dumping this info out and then threatening to dump more. Why didn't he dump it all if he didn't think it was really harmful?

If it does need to be sanitized, why threaten to dump it?

This creep is a bigger fraud than Che. And his fans are just as big losers as Che's.
Click to expand...



If nothing else, he has exposed vulnerabilities in security systems. This will force a finer level of computer scrutiny and finesse. If Assange can do it, Bin Laden can do it.

If this was a movie, we'd find out that Assange was working deep cover all along...and that the data released was merely bait and false information, cleverly designed to be credible to our enemies.

I'm sick of my government running secret stuff behind my back.
It offends democracy. Let's be done with that funky stew .

I've lived through some of the pointless history of our need to lie.
I believe that the analogy stands:

You can't really make friends with anyone if you aren't honest; genuine; up-front. So far, all the expensive and embarrasing covert stuff that I've lived through has been incredibly expensive; brutal; environmentally disastrous; and a complete failure as per the notion of the mission.

Deception is what I fear. Guys getting on a plane to blow it up, yet dressed as something else. Pundits on the radio extolling the virtues of the freedom we chose to express with more and more surveillance.

Values.
(Hi, Glenn!)

Honesty is the simplest virtue. It doesn't take math skills. Everyone knows when they are lying, unless they are brained damage.

Hence, honest people want full disclosure. We want to vote for the person that is actually the person we voted for. The covert crap undermines the very heart of this.

Don't even bother posting the endless anecdotes of people (your innocent children, etc.) that would have been killed had there not been high level deception going on. If you want to kill 2 million people for the hell of it, and poison the surviving off-spring, whilst running up an astronomical bill...Vietnam works. We had to do 2 go-rounds with Iraq. I guess we forgot that earlier one, where we bragged on the smartness of our bombs on tv.

Yet, they came back! I demand an anti-brag from my government about that; maybe a tax rebate.

My uncle fought in the Korean war.
That wasn't cheap. Didn't quite work, either.

I'm willing to risk transparency in government. There would be pain, but not as much. Assange's crimes might lead to new rules. Or better computer protection.

I want full disclosure on the stuff I buy at the grocery store. I resent products that force me to ignore the big letters to find out the ingredients.

Down with dishonesty. Up with honesty. This basic ethic should not be incompatible with an enlightened, democratic government.

(Spank me now.)
 
Very lovely talking points that bear no relevance to the point at hand. Assange didn't reveal any black bag ops or anything. He reiterated stuff we already knew and exposed sources.

You can't really make friends with anyone if you aren't honest; genuine; up-front.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Society encourages us to lie to our friends and loved ones. The closer you are to someone the more likely you are to lie to them.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Well, actually you've got me there. But it ensured that the new government was forced to really go after the banksters, after they seemed reluctant to do so in the beginning. Doesn't change the point i was making.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that point. Like I said, if they are legitimately exposing a criminal activity, I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with them publishing "leaked" documents for any other reason. There is nothing in the Afghan War Diaries that has come out that has revealed illicit or illegal activity.

Julian Assange might think the public needs to know operational details about the Afghan war for political reasons, or for some general principle of transparency, but neither of those is whistle-blowing. And neither of those strikes me as a legitimate reason to encourage people to violate the laws that our society has agreed to. They're essentially saying, "Screw the rest of you, our opinion is more important than your democratically agreed-upon laws."

At that point, how is Wikileaks any different than the people who exposed Valerie Plame?
 
Last edited:
Bring on the light; the exposure.

We should refuse to live in a world of sleeze.

Should we lie to our mates? Will it make for a better relationship?

Some say yes. I say no.

Once the lies begin, there's no stopping it.

Can't we be satisfied with conquering the world?
Must we feign moral high-ground too?
 
quarky said:
Bring on the light; the exposure.

We should refuse to live in a world of sleeze.

Should we lie to our mates? Will it make for a better relationship?

Some say yes. I say no.

Once the lies begin, there's no stopping it.

Can't we be satisfied with conquering the world?
Must we feign moral high-ground too?
Click to expand...

Okay, you start. Give me access to all of your e-mail accounts, Facebook, financial records, personal diaries, home videos. You can send them to me via PM if you like.

You want to step up and set the standard right? I'd hate to see you feign the moral high-ground here.
 
If your government has a reason or grudge to investigate you, they have access to all that data and more. I think we are heading towards a time of far more "transparency" in general, and WikiLeaks, who are sometimes dubbed the "intelligence agency of the people", helps to create a level playing field.

Anyway, like it or not, that jeannie is out of the bottle and will never be put back, simply because of the technical development. Even suiciding Assange, who isn't the founder of WikiLeaks and never claimed so, wouldn't change a thing. Or maybe it would even speed up the development.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
If your government has a reason or grudge to investigate you, they have access to all that data and more. I think we are heading towards a time of far more "transparency" in general, and WikiLeaks, who are sometimes dubbed the "intelligence agency of the people", helps to create a level playing field.

Anyway, like it or not, that jeannie is out of the bottle and will never be put back, simply because of the technical development. Even suiciding Assange, who isn't the founder of WikiLeaks and never claimed so, wouldn't change a thing. Or maybe it would even speed up the development.
Click to expand...

Hence my point... if you believe that, why not make it all public now? Publish all your own documents online today.

(And yeah, Wikileaks calls itself the "intelligence agency of the people." And like so many organizations that claim to be representing "the people," they don't appear to have done much to ask if "the people" really want them.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom