WikiLeaks

[CAV of Gang Green]

Articles found here.

 

Here.

 

Here.

 

And here.

 

What do you think about this?

 

Personally, I am siding with Julian Assange (founder and director of WikiLeaks). America has the right to know the truth. People died for those rights. And when we are denied of our rights, those people died in vain.

 

Not to mention, if the government doesn't want people to know about these things, don't do it in the first place. Rather, people will want to find the truth, they WILL find the truth, and you will have dug your own grave.

 

This reminds me of the guy that posted Youtube videos revealing government secrets, then got deported. It also reminds me of the guy that sent letters to Obama, and got banned from America.

 

These are just some raw thoughts that I have. Discuss your thoughts, and please be respectful for other peoples' opinions, especially with a delecate topic like this.

[jesse_rocket]

I tend to disagree. Not entirely, I believe in freedom of speech and all that basic stuff, and believe that the site has a right to exist and certain things should be out in the open, for sure. But other things "revealed" by WikiLeaks are pointless and stupid and just causing trouble for the sake of it.

 

For instance, the various things said about world leaders. Onoes, Berlesconi is vain and arrogant. Sarkozy is thin-skinned. Shocking revelations indeed. What possible relevance to the "truth" that the world should know, do these bear? All that sort of thing has done is bring about a quiet passive-aggressive ill will between the leaders of allied nations, who are at the end of the day only human. Of course in an official stance there's the whole "ha ha, we don't care what they said about us, we're all still pals", but really? You think Medvedev is going to shrug off being diplomatically referred to as "Robin" and act just the same in foreign relations towards the US? This isn't a matter of "The public must know", this is a matter of personal opinions which should be kept private.

 

The world would of course be a much better place if everyone was open about everything all the time. It'd be great. But it's not. The world literally cannot work that way, even if there was some sort of magic ray that caused all the nations of the world to agree to do that, so as not to show up national weaknesses to enemies. Even if that were the case, eventually someone in power would say "Hey you know what would be cool? If we didn't tell those guys about this thing. Then they'd NEVER KNOW!" and it'd snowball from there.

With this in mind, I think a great deal (although, not all) of what WikiLeaks is doing is spiteful, and hideously irresponsible.

[FabKiwi06]

I think WikiLeaks has been blown out of proportion a lot. I'm all for freedom of the press and freedom of information, but to be honest... I haven't heard anything out of Wikileaks that wasn't being talked about already. And, as Jesse_rocket put it, a lot of it does seem to be causing trouble for the sake of causing trouble.

 

I feel like this, along with EVERYTHING else in America these days, it getting played out through politics and twisted around to fit each sides' argument without actually looking at the big picture and doing what's right. And that's a shame.

[CAV of Gang Green]

For instance, the various things said about world leaders. Onoes, Berlesconi is vain and arrogant. Sarkozy is thin-skinned. Shocking revelations indeed. What possible relevance to the "truth" that the world should know, do these bear? All that sort of thing has done is bring about a quiet passive-aggressive ill will between the leaders of allied nations, who are at the end of the day only human. Of course in an official stance there's the whole "ha ha, we don't care what they said about us, we're all still pals", but really? You think Medvedev is going to shrug off being diplomatically referred to as "Robin" and act just the same in foreign relations towards the US? This isn't a matter of "The public must know", this is a matter of personal opinions which should be kept private.

 

Once again, why did the government bother to describe the other world leaders when they know fully well that it could get out into the public? There are many holes and flaws in the government, where something like that can get out very easily.

 

I think WikiLeaks has been blown out of proportion a lot. I'm all for freedom of the press and freedom of information, but to be honest... I haven't heard anything out of Wikileaks that wasn't being talked about already.

 

I feel like this, along with EVERYTHING else in America these days, it getting played out through politics and twisted around to fit each sides' argument without actually looking at the big picture and doing what's right. And that's a shame.

 

Actually, there are things there that I didn't know or hear about until now. Don't bother going there now, the site won't load up.

 

It is a crying shame. And the end result is that things backfire on you like how the government did a bunch of things and now it's being backfired on them.

[FabKiwi06]

I could go in to the political finger pointing, but that would just end up with loud typing and caps locks at some point =P

 

The way I see it, is that this guy who created wikileaks - and the more we find out about him, the shadier he seems.... isn't there an Interpol arrest warrant out for him right now due to sex crimes? - he happened to get a hold of information, whether it was from people who felt some things needed to be public, or by other means. Having that information gave him power. I see this as a whole big power play and this WikiLeak guy wants to be in control. Problem is... even though the unsuspecting public might not know (or care) what's going on, all the world leaders and politicians know this stuff already.

 

I don't believe the government thought things weren't going to backfire. I think they thought they'd get out of office before it backfired. Some of them did. Some of them didn't.

 

I think it's a suckish situation. Nothing released was really a surprise though... even if I hadn't heard it confirmed before. There has been enough other stuff to allude to many of these leaks that it's pretty easy to fill in the spaces.

 

 

(and politics is like sports to me... i follow news like people track ESPN scores - just a little disclaimer if I get over excited about this =P)

[CAV of Gang Green]

Actually, he claims that he doesn't want power.

 

The former computer hacker said, essentially, that he was doing the Lord's work in publishing leaked secret and classified documents.

 

"By being determined to be on this path, and not to compromise, I've wound up in an extraordinary situation," he said.

 

I have no idea where religon gets into this, but whatever. It's his word. If it's true or not has yet to be seen.

 

But if he didn't want power, it's too bad because he has it.

 

As for the sex crimes, I have no idea. I wasn't there or anything. And that's Sweden's problem. The US' problem is WikiLeaks. Besides, what are they going to do? Deport him to the moon? They can't really do a whole lot that would be fitting for this "crime".

[Rae]

Part of me, as a curious person who still likes to gain knowledge, that Wikileaks is a good idea. Another, smaller, part of me feels that as an American we have the right to know what is going on with our government. My father still has a secret clearance with the government... I'm not even sure if I'm allowed to say that, and there are a lot of things that he knows that he is not allowed to tell anyone. Including his family. He has always said that there are things that the government doesn't want us to know, and it has always angered me to the core. WE are supposed to elect our officials, and WE are supposed to SELF GOVERN in a lot of ways.

 

With that said, NOW is not the time to be putting everything out there. I refuse to read the articles for now, so I'm not sure what they include, but what if there was something in there that could help the enemy destroy us from within? I 100% disagree with this war, and I have heard several figures about civilians that have been killed in this war, but that doesn't mean I want all of our secrets out there for the WORLD to read. It's not like that site is just accessible by American citizens. Anyone could read that, including people that might want to attack us.

 

Sorry that this might not be written terribly well, I'm in math class pretending to pay attention while I write this.

[CAV of Gang Green]

Part of me, as a curious person who still likes to gain knowledge, that Wikileaks is a good idea. Another, smaller, part of me feels that as an American we have the right to know what is going on with our government. My father still has a secret clearance with the government... I'm not even sure if I'm allowed to say that, and there are a lot of things that he knows that he is not allowed to tell anyone. Including his family. He has always said that there are things that the government doesn't want us to know, and it has always angered me to the core. WE are supposed to elect our officials, and WE are supposed to SELF GOVERN in a lot of ways.

 

EXACTLY!

 

It's "We the people". We are suppose to be running the government. And that means we should know the things that are going on inside the government. Keeping these things secret and not telling the people who elect you in the first place is basically a slap in the face, and completely defeats the the purpose of America. It completely ticks me off as well

 

Just feel the need to throw this out there. Someone stated that if you support WikiLeaks, you are a terrorist.

 

So I'm a terrorist? I must ask when this kind of logic entered the human mind.

[jesse_rocket]

Once again, why did the government bother to describe the other world leaders when they know fully well that it could get out into the public? There are many holes and flaws in the government, where something like that can get out very easily.

 

Why does anyone ever say anything? In the case of these diplomatic cables that were leaked, these were communications and observations made for posterity. Regardless of how flattering or unflattering they may have been, internally they served a purpose, particularly with regards to how to deal with an individual, or things that may influence a foreign policy towards a nation.

 

On a smaller hypthetical scale, I might say to a friend "when you go talk to that guy about that favour you want, be aware that he had a weird speech impediment, don't laugh when he does it, he'll get mad". I wouldn't say to "that guy" that he talks funny, and I would not expect my friend to then go ahead and tell "that guy" that I told them not to mention how he talks. Chances are he knows he talks funny, and is sensitive about it, but dude, he doesn't like to think everyone's talking about it. But I want to make sure that my friend gets that favour they want, so I want to warn them in advance, that this is a thing about "that guy" that they should be careful about. If "Person X" nearby overhears and goes and tells "that guy", that's not like, my punishment for not being open and going and insulting "that guy", that's "Person X" with some sort of agenda. "Person X" isn't helping anyone, "Person X" isn't fixing how "that guy" talks, all "Person X" is doing is ensuring that everyone involved feels bad, my friend doesn't get the favour, and "that guy" probably doesn't want to talk around me anymore. And maybe some of that is my fault for even noticing that "that guy" talks funny, but the fact is, human beings are different and need to be treated differently accordingly.

 

My analogy is flawed, I know, but with regards to the latest set of leaks (and only those, not WikiLeaks as a whole), they're basically advice and notes carried between US embassies, and carry little practical relevance to the rest of us other than as gossip, but can be harmful to foreign relations, which at this time, it seems to be very important to keep sweet.

[Unstream]

Well, first off, I'd like to point out that we're not a democracy, we're a democratic republic, where we elect leaders how govern for us. So, no, we don't really govern, and we don't really control government. We can only pick the people that do control government. (In response to CAV and Rae)

 

Personally, yes, I think the person who released all of this info on WikiLeaks should be arrested and at least sent to jail for life. I think Jesse's analogy with the man who talks funny is a good one, and the release of those documents doesn't really increase our knowledge at all and only hurts diplomacy.

 

Plus, ever heard of the phrase, "Knowledge is power"? It really is, and information can win a war. Unfortunately, we're in a war, and this information will hurt us. Did you know there were documents where Pakistani and Palestinian officials expressed concern over Iran's actions? The problem is, Iran trusted them, and now they don't. So we lost that vantage point on the Iranians. Other top secret military documents were revealed, which is of course, bad, because our enemies can find it. Some politician said something along the lines of Assange having blood on his hands, which I agree with, because regardless of the direct effects of these documents, the war is inadvertently prolonged, positions and plans of military troops are revealed, and American soldiers will die because of that.

 

Oh, and it's not like this information was easily accessed. No, Assange actually had to go through a lot to get it (though how he got it I'm sure they're keeping a secret so nobody else tries).

[CAV of Gang Green]

Well, first off, I'd like to point out that we're not a democracy, we're a democratic republic, where we elect leaders how govern for us. So, no, we don't really govern, and we don't really control government. We can only pick the people that do control government. (In response to CAV and Rae)

 

So it's "We the People, choose who bosses us around and tells us nothing." I don't remember that being in the constitution. Last I checked we were supposed to be a democracy. And if we elect the leaders, we are going to feel betrayed when something is kept from us. It will one day lead to anarchy.

 

The corruption of the government hurts us more than these documents.

 

So I'm still a terrorist for siding with Assange? I should also get life in prison? If so, then I'll wave hello on TV when I go to court just for siding with a man.

[FabKiwi06]

I still question this guy's motives for coming forth with this information. If he was really "concerned", then the last set of leaks - which are really just gossip - wouldn't have any need to be released. He wants to stir the pot.

 

I understand why SOME things need to be kept secret in government, and I think once upon a time that was ok. But that was back when it was a little easier to trust politicians. Now, I don't trust anyone in charge, and I'm sure they're hiding stuff that we probably should know. We've seen evidence of that, with the whole Gitmo issue and the WMDs and in that sense WikiLeaks is really important. We should know if we are torturing our prisoners of war. We should know why we declared war on certain countries. It seems now that any sense of trusting politicians to do the right thing, and trusting the public knows the politicians will do the right thing have disappeared. It's a very broken system.

[Unstream]

So it's "We the People, choose who bosses us around and tells us nothing." I don't remember that being in the constitution. Last I checked we were supposed to be a democracy. And if we elect the leaders, we are going to feel betrayed when something is kept from us. It will one day lead to anarchy.

 

The corruption of the government hurts us more than these documents.

 

So I'm still a terrorist for siding with Assange? I should also get life in prison? If so, then I'll wave hello on TV when I go to court just for siding with a man.

Way to look at a small portion of my post and ignore/not respond to the main points <_<

 

Well think about it. A true democracy would mean that everybody votes on everything. Did you go to Washington and vote on Health Care? How about the Stimulus package? No? Well who did? Oh yeah, the people we elected to vote on legislature (which means they control our government because they establish the rules).

 

And no, the documents don't really reveal too much about corruption. Corruption is easily visible of you decide to read legislature passed by Congress with tons of senators' earmarks and pet projects. No, secret diplomatic/military plans don't really reveal much about corruption - they just damage our relations with other countries and compromise the safety of our troops.

 

And, uh, did anybody call you a terrorist? No. Did you know that you're only quoting one guy who the most of America would probably disagree with? Probably not.

 

 

@Kiwi: I agree with you, and I'd be perfectly fine if Assange looked through the documents that he had stolen and decided not to show the stuff that was irrelevant to us. Sure, those things are worth knowing, and we do now (not because of WikiLeaks), but most of the things that were revealed in those documents shouldn't have been.

[Secre]

As far as I'm concerned, the public has a right to know. We elect politicians into positions of power, and if theyare going to act like idiots or abuse that power then we do have a right to know. It needs to be that they should be the ones serving us, not the other way around. And we should always have the right to kick them out of power if they get out of line.

 

I don't agree with state secrets unless there is a very, very good reason for them. And then they should be released in ten-fifteen years when there is no immediate danger anymore. At no point should state secrets be kept purely due to the embarrassment of the government. Our UK government has faced backlash over this kind of attitude recently in respect to David Kelly's death and on a larger scale, the war.

 

Secrets tend to be kept because they will embarrass the government, not because it is a matter of national importance. And as I said, if it is a matter of national importance they should be made public after a ten-fifteen year period of time.

 

I doubt this set of WikiLeaks will cause an international issue. IOt's not a lot more than gossip and personal conversations. It's of no major importance and it's been overblown massively.

 

However I do completely agree with the idea of WikiLeaks and the principles behind it.

 

I'm completely ignoring the issues regarding the founder of WikiLeaks and his personal/legal issues as I think they have little or no bearing on the case in hand. It's about the leaks not him personally. And no, I do not believe he should be prosecuted or jailed for the leaks. Any other legal issues are a seperate matter.

[CAV of Gang Green]

I perfectly agree with Secre. We have a right to know, especially when we get them to the power in the first place.

 

Way to look at a small portion of my post and ignore/not respond to the main points <_<

 

Just like how everybody does that to me. Don't like how it feels? Think about how I feel when someone doesn't read my entire post.

[jesse_rocket]

 

Just like how everybody does that to me. Don't like how it feels? Think about how I feel when someone doesn't read my entire post.

 

That's not really conducive to a good discussion though, you must admit.

[Secre]

That's not really conducive to a good discussion though, you must admit.

 

Agreed. The debate has suddenly turned personal, instead of a debate on politics...never a good way to have a debate. Bows out!

[FabKiwi06]

Quick... everyone eat a cupcake... cupcakes make everyone happy!

 

I concur with the argument that we have a right to know what's going on in our government. I think the idea behind WikiLeaks is a good one - show the people what is going on. But, there is a time and place for that and throwing ad hominem attacks, or in this case loose lipped gossip, isn't really to anyone's benefit, and really doesn't come as a shock. Kim Jong Il acts like a spoiled child?... well, anyone who has seen Team America: World Police can tell you that. I guess Trey Parker and Matt Stone had access to classified documents while they played with puppets?

 

The leaks about Gitmo and WMDs were needed because those proved that politicians were being dishonest and lying to our faces, and those facts needed to be leaked. Now it's just gossip, and I think it's being "let out" to just stir the pot.

[elvenstrawberry]

I think that it's indicative of what journalism and the media has become in this country that wikileaks isn't being praised to the moon. The kind of thing that they're doing used to be what every journalist did. Do you think that Nixon would've been outed for Watergate without nosy journalists? The media should be keeping the government honest, not going to bed with it.

 

I don't believe that we should endanger the lives of our troops in this attempt at making our government less opaque, but as far as I've heard it hasn't, and the site has even held back some of their material because of this concern. However, I think that wikileaks is protecting our freedoms, and what America stands for (as cheesy as that sounds).

[Fever]

Be prepared for possible strong Republican/Conservative outbursts throughout this post..

 

First off might I state that WikiLeaks is complete un-Constitutional, and illegal. There IS in fact a law that says that no-one may do things (such as make websites/etc) that contains and publicizes information that could endanger the United States (army, government, entire country, et cetera). There is also the point of the Constitution about freedom of speech. So there is a problem about the constitution cancelling itself out.

 

Secondly, I'm pointing out the fact here that WikiLeaks spreads around information that could completely endanger not only the author of the website (secret service, terrorists, or other various mad things), but he also is endangering the entire USA. I am sure that people who probably shouldn't see those top secret bits of information have already seen them. Wouldn't the Iraq enemies LOVE to see some cracks in the United States' armour?

 

Quick question, too. How on EARTH did the founder of WikiLeaks get access to the often top-secret information displayed on WikiLeaks? Most likely through some form of illegal method, which isn't good. Even if the actual founder didn't gather the information HIMSELF, that would mean the MEMBERS of his website are gathering information illegally (most likely). So that's not good either.

 

Personally, I think that WikiLeaks should be shut down, and that the founder should be arrested for endangering the United States.