|
Wikileaks about to stir sh!t up again... and Julian Assange - Asshat or Hero? (pg. 40)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by d-miurge
2 billion to private security entities that support pedophilia? |
:conf: The catholic church??? |
|
|
| EgosXII |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
What?
Sorry, but you are not "investigating" ... You realize that diplomatic cables usually are between TWO countries right? Even if most of these are internal diplomatic cables, what insight are you getting?
Nothing really incriminating has been revealed yet, the only thing maybe, is the spying at the UN, which we don't even know the extent of or if it was even carried out (is there a document that maybe refutes that in the 250k, would Wikileaks release that one if there was?).
Name one thing that been revealed that has incriminated the US in some sort of huge "OMG" scandal.
The problem with wikileaks is that the trust between the governments we do business with is being exploited by wikileaks to try and create international tension. |
if there's nothing incriminating why the are you against it you idiot???
the whole time you've been saying it shouldn't be leaked etc.... :wtf:
ffs: I even said that nothing incriminating had been posted and you disagreed, and said it was a huge crime! |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by EgosXII
if there's nothing incriminating why the are you against it you idiot???
the whole time you've been saying it shouldn't be leaked etc.... :wtf:
ffs: I even said that nothing incriminating had been posted and you disagreed, and said it was a huge crime! |
... think harder.
Nothing incriminating means nothing that is like "OMG WE DIDNT KNOW THE US DID THIS ITS EVIL AND VIOLATES INTERNATIONAL LAW!!!"
It is still wrong because these documents expose US intelligence agents, informants in war zones that help the US, strategic and economic assets of the US and its allies, and information that compromises the US strategic and economic positions that it holds.
There is no reason to release these documents other than to destabalize the US and its relationships with foreign nations as well as destablize potentially allied nations of the US with each other. Assange's stated goals is total transparency or just as good a increase in the censorship and secrecy of the governments that it targets.
Is that something you want? You think what wikileaks is doing is going to make the US transparent, or your country more transparent? No, in fact its far more damaging to the move towards transparency over the last 30 years that a lot of major western powers have made than it is helpful because now governments are going to lock down tight, close up, and make it harder for you to figure out whats going on and make the whole process less effecient for them (wasting more of your money and probably being less effective advocates for the well being of its citizenry). |
|
|
| Lews |
| quote: | Originally posted by EgosXII
if there's nothing incriminating why the are you against it you idiot???
the whole time you've been saying it shouldn't be leaked etc.... :wtf:
ffs: I even said that nothing incriminating had been posted and you disagreed, and said it was a huge crime! |
I'm against it because it's a breach of security and I don't believe classified information and government secrets should just go out to everyone. If it's classified it should remain secret until FOIA releases it. We all love freedom and openness (I think), but this isn't the way to do it.
Also, I'm ashamed to be on Joss' side on this. He makes all of us who believe in security look like cunts :( |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lews
I'm against it because it's a breach of security and I don't believe classified information and government secrets should just go out to everyone. If it's classified it should remain secret until FOIA releases it. We all love freedom and openness (I think), but this isn't the way to do it.
Also, I'm ashamed to be on Joss' side on this. He makes all of us who believe in security look like cunts :( |
Lews thats not really a valid argument against wikileaks since they didn't cause the leak...
I am mad at wikileaks because they have an obvious agenda and no care on if their information ends up costing people their lives. They have no moral or ethical guidelines like traditional media usually do.
Look at the this splinter organization that is starting up, OpenSecrets or something like that. They are all former wikileaks staffers who feel that the organization is going down the wrong path in terms of how it operates. |
|
|
| netroM |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Look at the this splinter organization that is starting up, OpenSecrets or something like that. They are all former wikileaks staffers who feel that the organization is going down the wrong path in terms of how it operates. |
OpenLeaks |
|
|
| Moongoose |
You know, if you continue to spin this any further, a FOX scout might acknowledge your talents for BS offer you a job at FOX News.
The line that they dont care about lives lost for instance is full of such bs. To the point that they asked the US government for help in redacting any sensitive info (which they refused), for just that reason. Also, a (good) argument could be made that the absence of leaks like this is what costs lives in the first place!
And if you listen to the man behind OpenLeaks youll know why it got started. Firstly, too much focus on american sources and leaks @ WL (though understandable since most of the known stuff came from there) and secondly that at WL the focus has shifted from the info leaked to the man himself. And even Assange admits that the latter is a hindrance to the cause and that it would be better if the focus went back to the leaked information. |
|
|
| Lews |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Lews thats not really a valid argument against wikileaks since they didn't cause the leak...
I am mad at wikileaks because they have an obvious agenda and no care on if their information ends up costing people their lives. They have no moral or ethical guidelines like traditional media usually do.
Look at the this splinter organization that is starting up, OpenSecrets or something like that. They are all former wikileaks staffers who feel that the organization is going down the wrong path in terms of how it operates. |
No, but they're spreading it the information much further than the original leak. I do agree, however, that Assange seems more interested in destruction and being a celebrity than in openness. |
|
|
| EgosXII |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
... think harder.
Nothing incriminating means nothing that is like "OMG WE DIDNT KNOW THE US DID THIS ITS EVIL AND VIOLATES INTERNATIONAL LAW!!!"
It is still wrong because these documents expose US intelligence agents, informants in war zones that help the US, strategic and economic assets of the US and its allies, and information that compromises the US strategic and economic positions that it holds.
There is no reason to release these documents other than to destabalize the US and its relationships with foreign nations as well as destablize potentially allied nations of the US with each other. Assange's stated goals is total transparency or just as good a increase in the censorship and secrecy of the governments that it targets.
Is that something you want? You think what wikileaks is doing is going to make the US transparent, or your country more transparent? No, in fact its far more damaging to the move towards transparency over the last 30 years that a lot of major western powers have made than it is helpful because now governments are going to lock down tight, close up, and make it harder for you to figure out whats going on and make the whole process less effecient for them (wasting more of your money and probably being less effective advocates for the well being of its citizenry). |
so it would be fine if there was incriminating in the leaks?
| quote: | Originally posted by Lews
I'm against it because it's a breach of security and I don't believe classified information and government secrets should just go out to everyone. If it's classified it should remain secret until FOIA releases it. We all love freedom and openness (I think), but this isn't the way to do it.
Also, I'm ashamed to be on Joss' side on this. He makes all of us who believe in security look like cunts :( |
i'm all for sovereignty and security, but i'm also for transparency and democratic rights
despite what the US and other ridiculous states would have you believe, the two are not mutually exclusive.
The US has been dodgy as all hell for a long time, imo its good that they get a bit of a shake up: For the first time since the end of WW2 your government actually has to think before it acts, because its actions might become known!
For a state that powerful i really don't think its bad. Power corrupts, and the US has been the sole power in the international realm since the end of the cold war... |
|
|
| Lews |
| quote: | Originally posted by EgosXII
i'm all for sovereignty and security, but i'm also for transparency and democratic rights
despite what the US and other ridiculous states would have you believe, the two are not mutually exclusive.
The US has been dodgy as all hell for a long time, imo its good that they get a bit of a shake up: For the first time since the end of WW2 your government actually has to think before it acts, because its actions might become known!
For a state that powerful i really don't think its bad. Power corrupts, and the US has been the sole power in the international realm since the end of the cold war... |
I'm all for transparcency and democratic rights, but I'm also for sovereignty and security :p
I don't think they're mutually exclusive at all. I just don't think leaking classified and secret state information is the right way to go about making the U.S. more open.
A lot of this stuff was only supposed to be seen by people with certain levels of security clearance. Until it has been legally made available to everyone else through the FOIA I just don't think it should be public knowledge. |
|
|
| EgosXII |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lews
I'm all for transparcency and democratic rights, but I'm also for sovereignty and security :p
I don't think they're mutually exclusive at all. I just don't think leaking classified and secret state information is the right way to go about making the U.S. more open.
A lot of this stuff was only supposed to be seen by people with certain levels of security clearance. Until it has been legally made available to everyone else through the FOIA I just don't think it should be public knowledge. |
is there a more readily available means though, or is that exactly what you're always told, so you just stop worrying about it?
the point of wikileaks is: The state is not living up to their end of the deal.
they say they're transparent, honest and good, but this is proof they are not, and it SHOULD be seen by those responsible for taking action, and punishing them: i.e: the people.
nobody would know how messed up some of the they're doing is without leaks, because they simply cover everything and lie, and you find out about it after everyone responsible is dead and they've been re-elected a few times... what's the use of that?
the leaks don't change anything (theyre not going to bring the US government in a minute), they open up options, and let the people know wtf is being done in their name. without the leaks we're all just plebs who don't have jack all idea of what our government is really doing 'on our behalf'
the legal argument is discredited only because its bringing illegality to light... illegal actions in order to make people aware of far greater and more important illegal activity |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| nothing to see here, move along... |
|
|
|
|
