Wikileaks

[Taz]

I don't know what going on with Wikileaks can you give me a link or something?
I've heard about it and all but i don't know whats really going on.

[C0FFINCASE]

Government transparency is important and wikileaks provided an important check on the government in a lot instances but the media and services like wikileaks have changed over the years and gone from being free, unbiased, and providing a useful check on the government into a sensationalist, liberal, blabbermouths that release all kinds of information they shouldn't. Wikileaks with this last big release put a ton of US officials in danger, has stoked the flames in several tinderbox areas(including Korea and the Middle East) and further weakened the US position on the world stage just as it was starting to recover. Responsible journalism is needed these days and such leaks and those perpetuating such instances need to be dealt with harshly so as to discourage this kind of thing.

[Slash]

They released a report showing how US Tax Dollars helped pay for child sex slavery in Afghanistan.
So yes, I think they should continue to be allowed to report.

Although, conspiracy theorists have been telling me that the government created wikileaks in order to gain more control over the internet. I guess we'll find out if they are right soon enough. xD

[shiboleet]

Times just wrote a great article on Julian Assange and named him runner-up person of the year. The article is HERE. I thought it was interesting that Visa and MasterCard still process donations to the Ku Klux Clan but won't do anything for wikileaks. Also, if Julian Assange is just passing on information (he didn't hack it himself, it was just given to him) then the Attorney General is also going to have to prosecute not only Assange but journalists and papers like the NY times for also posting the info.

[C0FFINCASE]

They released a report showing how US Tax Dollars helped pay for child sex slavery in Afghanistan.
So yes, I think they should continue to be allowed to report.

Although, conspiracy theorists have been telling me that the government created wikileaks in order to gain more control over the internet. I guess we'll find out if they are right soon enough. xD

That is a gross misrepresentation of the actuality. The US places money in the hands of officials in Afghanistan, if those official end up doing terrible things with it its not the US's problem. Plus the slave industry is large and profitable industry that is alive and well in every country and every country there for funds it with tax dollars.

Times just wrote a great article on Julian Assange and named him runner-up person of the year. The article is HERE. I thought it was interesting that Visa and MasterCard still process donations to the Ku Klux Clan but won't do anything for wikileaks. Also, if Julian Assange is just passing on information (he didn't hack it himself, it was just given to him) then the Attorney General is also going to have to prosecute not only Assange but journalists and papers like the NY times for also posting the info.

The KKK isn't a security risk to the US possibly placing US citizens and officials in danger. They won't prosecute the media simply because the press will use their involvement as part of a free speech defense, but Julian being in the military technically has commuted treason and we still kill you for that. Wikileaks itself is arguably not part of the press and the fact its not run in the US per say means the government can censor it. I'd rather the media realize they shouldn't press such issues and not give the government a reason to start censoring the internet.
Wikileaks if literally stoking the flames of the larger internet control debate that's going on and is going to lead to bring the end of the modern net era much fater than it would have otherwise.

[Souleater]

The whole wikileaks situation needs to be contained. The fact is, the documents that he is posting is putting a lot of good people in danger, not to mention furthering the deterioration of the view of the US and its people. Any document he might have that are considered "DECLASSIFIED" aren't that big, but can still damage the national security. If he were to post anything higher, lets say something classified as "CONFIDENTIAL" or for instance a "SECRET/TOP SECRET" document, he would be in prison faster than a drunk college chick will experiment.

[Souleater]

I believe that the whole Wikileaks thing was blow way out of proportion. People have betrayed their country before, and it has lead to great things and it has lead to bad things. I think he should be locked up, but when they provide a crime that he actually committed. Sure, people could say hacking, treason, aiding and embedding, but other people have did worse. The media reports everyday with things that could potentially kill important people. People that are innocent, yet with the media's interpretation of words and events, have been cast out and targeted. Then, when they are called on who their sources are, the Shield law protects them. I think that he should be arrested, but only with the correct conviction, not some new law made up just for this one incident.

~Fluxo

Here is a good charge: Treason. He is posting potential volatile information on a website for all people too see. Any one that purposely posts something that is damaging to Nation Security is subject to charges of treason. I say that would be the best charge to throw at him, as it is the easiest to stick. then once he is in jail, build a bigger case against him with all of the other "trumped up" charges they can.

[Hellsome]

Here is a good charge: Treason. He is posting potential volatile information on a website for all people too see. Any one that purposely posts something that is damaging to Nation Security is subject to charges of treason. I say that would be the best charge to throw at him, as it is the easiest to stick. then once he is in jail, build a bigger case against him with all of the other "trumped up" charges they can.

Well "treason" technically means that he's betraying his nation's government, but since he was born in Queensland, Australia, treason isn't a valid charge, hence why he's wanted for sexual assault or somewhere along those lines. I'm expecting him to be put in jail for sexual assault and tax evasion.

I dislike Wikileaks because it's saying one statement:

"Our right to information is more valuable than the lives of possibly tens of thousands of other human beings, along with the bonds that tie the nations together."

That is just wrong, for Assange is giving the human life a specific value. There is typically a fine line between protecting the rights of oneself and protecting the rights of others. In this case, Assange crossed that line.

[chowchig]

I think the media is just blowing this out of proportion, just like the Mosque in NYC.

Also, I just thought this Comic fit with this topic.

This also involves the "anonymous" who tried to defend wikileak's actions.


xkcd.com

[Ego]

I don't even know where to begin with this.
The documents are important because not only has Wikileaks illustrated time and time again that we aren't all rainbows and sunshine, but that a lot of our rights are openly being violated.

Think about the fact that the US Government forced Amazon to drop Wikileaks from their web service. Regardless of the content of the website, the US government should not have the right to play cyber police and decide what is and isn't fit to be on the Internet, an international property. Furthermore, the fact that the government was willing to go to such measures over content that they felt was inappropriate sets a horrible precedent for policy regarding the Internet.

The whole wikileaks situation needs to be contained. The fact is, the documents that he is posting is putting a lot of good people in danger, not to mention furthering the deterioration of the view of the US and its people. Any document he might have that are considered "DECLASSIFIED" aren't that big, but can still damage the national security. If he were to post anything higher, lets say something classified as "CONFIDENTIAL" or for instance a "SECRET/TOP SECRET" document, he would be in prison faster than a drunk college chick will experiment.

No, they aren't. Did you even look at what the cables are about?

The cables show the extent of US spying on its allies and the UN; turning a blind eye to corruption and human rights abuse in "client states"; backroom deals with supposedly neutral countries; lobbying for US corporations; and the measures US diplomats take to advance those who have access to them.

This document release reveals the contradictions between the US’s public persona and what it says behind closed doors – and shows that if citizens in a democracy want their governments to reflect their wishes, they should ask to see what’s going on behind the scenes.

The only person in any actual danger is Assange himself for releasing these things.

The most commonly cited statute by those who advocate prosecuting Wikileaks is Section 793(e) of the Espionage Act. In August, former Bush speechwriter Marc Theissen linked to this section in an article for the Washington Post when he wrote that Wikileaks is “a criminal enterprise” whose founder, Julian Assange, should be arrested by U.S. forces on foreign soil, international law be damned.

But this provision does not apply to those who publish information.

Section 793(e)reads “Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document…relating to the national defense…willfully communicates… the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it…[s]hall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”

As made clear in the Pentagon Papers case, the word “communicates” was never meant “to encompass publication” or to affect the press. Congress included the word “publish” in three other sections of the Act but intentionally left it out of 793. As the legislative history of this provision states, “Nothing in this Act shall…in any way to limit or infringe upon freedom of the press or of speech as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.”

-------

Regardless of the specificity of Section 794, there is no proof the documents have led to any harm of U.S. soldiers. Although Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen said Wikileaks will have “blood on its hands,” the Pentagon later admitted, “We have yet to see any harm come to anyone in Afghanistan that we can directly tie to exposure in the Wikileaks documents.” Admittedly, that U.S. forces haven’t be harmed by the publication of these documents yet is not guarantee against a harm yet to come. Still, it is worth noting that despite the hysteria of the conservatives, and their predictions of disaster resulting from Wikileaks’ leaks, we know of no ramifications from the publication whatsoever.

[C0FFINCASE]

I don't even know where to begin with this.
The documents are important because not only has Wikileaks illustrated time and time again that we aren't all rainbows and sunshine, but that a lot of our rights are openly being violated.

Think about the fact that the US Government forced Amazon to drop Wikileaks from their web service. Regardless of the content of the website, the US government should not have the right to play cyber police and decide what is and isn't fit to be on the Internet, an international property. Furthermore, the fact that the government was willing to go to such measures over content that they felt was inappropriate sets a horrible precedent for policy regarding the Internet.

Alright the fact the internet is the way it is, is a fluke. Other countries already censor and control content accessible on the internet in their countries' territories.
The US government has been taking steps to do the same and will eventually regardless of what any one does. That's why Google has become so big. They need that power to maintain their operations despite that push by the government. Actually if Google hadn't been pressing for things to stay the way they are we'd already have big brother deciding what was on the web. Wikileaks harmed US foreign policy. It had several embassies closed and delegates evacuated and severely damaged our relationship with Pakistan, which was already frayed. No country is sunshine and rainbows. Bad shit happens, its how government works and guess what it doesn't work if you go blabbing to the whole world about it. If you put up US private opinions and positions for the world you screw our foreign policy and negotiation. These kinds of stunt are only going to bring the government into the realm of the internet sooner and harder.

[gotxbrain]

Information never hurt anyone. People coming to the conclusion that words on a screen hurt people are stupid. The people who are going to use this information to hurt people are going to do that regardless. If wikileaks wasn't around, they would get their information elsewhere.

Also, arresting assange on a bogus sexual assualt crime just further shows what assange is trying to demonstrate.

[C0FFINCASE]

Information never hurt anyone. People coming to the conclusion that words on a screen hurt people are stupid. The people who are going to use this information to hurt people are going to do that regardless. If wikileaks wasn't around, they would get their information elsewhere.

Also, arresting assange on a bogus sexual assualt crime just further shows what assange is trying to demonstrate.

You have no way of knowing that the information would have been available if not for wikileaks, or that the difficulty of obtaining that information would have been to high for people to bother with it.
Also the dude admitted to having "surprise sex" with the girl so he pretty much admitted to the rape charge any way, its not bogus.

Also for those worried about internet regulation by the government, its now upon us. It was passed quietly. A range of reactions to FCC's new Internet rules | Philadelphia Inquirer | 12/22/2010

[Ego]

Alright the fact the internet is the way it is, is a fluke. Other countries already censor and control content accessible on the internet in their countries' territories.
The US government has been taking steps to do the same and will eventually regardless of what any one does. That's why Google has become so big. They need that power to maintain their operations despite that push by the government. Actually if Google hadn't been pressing for things to stay the way they are we'd already have big brother deciding what was on the web. Wikileaks harmed US foreign policy. It had several embassies closed and delegates evacuated and severely damaged our relationship with Pakistan, which was already frayed. No country is sunshine and rainbows. Bad shit happens, its how government works and guess what it doesn't work if you go blabbing to the whole world about it. If you put up US private opinions and positions for the world you screw our foreign policy and negotiation. These kinds of stunt are only going to bring the government into the realm of the internet sooner and harder.

Alas, our foreign policy's already pretty fucked and the government's already sticking their nose into the realm of the internet.
The more important parts are the cables regarding domestic policy. If someone's been sodomizing you in your sleep, wouldn't you like to know about it?

[C0FFINCASE]

Alas, our foreign policy's already pretty fucked and the government's already sticking their nose into the realm of the internet.
The more important parts are the cables regarding domestic policy. If someone's been sodomizing you in your sleep, wouldn't you like to know about it?

Our foreign policy is fucked because we do nothing and pissed off the world. Now just as things were starting to get better we had our dirty laundry thrown out on the lawn and the rest of the world is pissed again.

[Ego]

Our foreign policy is fucked because we do nothing and pissed off the world. Now just as things were starting to get better we had our dirty laundry thrown out on the lawn and the rest of the world is pissed again.

Dirty laundry that everyone knew about but nobody bothered saying anything about.