|
Post by Tiger on Nov 28, 2010 14:19:25 GMT -5
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cable-leak-diplomacy-crisiswww.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hpI'm kinda conflicted. On the one hand, I'm all for greater government transparency. On the other hand, the U.S. government claims that this leak places the lives of intelligence agents in danger. On the other other hand, none of it was classified Top Secret and Wikileaks has made efforts with its previous releases to accomodate such concerns... One thing I would like to see is some releases from other governments - particularly the ones with fewer or no free speech protections, like China and Russia. Sure, such releases are more dangerous, but that just makes them all the more necessary.
|
|
|
Post by booley on Nov 28, 2010 14:31:11 GMT -5
OF course governments always say that anything they keep secret is done for the good of the nation, including and especially things that are just embarrassing or evidence of criminal wrong doing by those in government.
Which creates a catch 22 of sorts since the government can't be trusted to be honest about what is and what isn't sensitive material.
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Nov 28, 2010 14:41:19 GMT -5
As has been said, I'm all for government transparency but this is just abuse of that.
Ironbite-btw....has Wikileaks done anyone other then America? I never hear about Great Britian or France getting hit by these guys.
|
|
|
Post by booley on Nov 28, 2010 15:14:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Nov 28, 2010 15:24:31 GMT -5
ahh I see. So the US isn't the only target...just the biggest one.
Eh...Really makes no difference to me if the US keeps getting hit by these idiots. Let 'em keep releasing documents about them. Its no skin off my nose. Of course there are far reaching consequences if some GOP right winger gets it in their head to rile up their base with accusations that Wikileaks is threatening national security with their leaks.
Ironbite-which can never happen....right?
|
|
|
Post by Tiger on Nov 28, 2010 15:25:24 GMT -5
Ironbite-btw....has Wikileaks done anyone other then America? I never hear about Great Britian or France getting hit by these guys. Wikileaks releases classified documents of all sorts, from Kent Hovind's doctoral thesis (which Liberty University, in contrast to every single actual university on the planet, refused to publicize) to Somali assassination orders. Their last three major releases have been from a single massive leak, which is why all coverage of them is U.S.-centric. Of course there are far reaching consequences if some GOP right winger gets it in their head to rile up their base with accusations that Wikileaks is threatening national security with their leaks. Ironbite-which can never happen....right? I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Exactly that has already happened and absolutely nothing has come of it. WikiLeaks has done nothing illegal. Admittedly, that article is from before this latest release, but I don't think anything's changed.
|
|
|
Post by Old Viking on Nov 28, 2010 16:03:09 GMT -5
I give not a damn about the WikiLeaks episodes except for the fact that they seem so pointless. As for revelation of the harsh judgments made at the diplomatic level, it's the unqualified and inept criticizing the unqualified and inept. No real harm done.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger on Nov 28, 2010 16:04:48 GMT -5
I give not a damn about the WikiLeaks episodes except for the fact that they seem so pointless. The releases themselves, or the ensuing shitstorm in the media? If the former, how so?
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight on Nov 28, 2010 16:31:21 GMT -5
I don't know much yet, but if I am to judge from this front page of Der Spiegel, it's all gossip:
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Nov 28, 2010 16:38:04 GMT -5
I can't read German, but there are enough cognates there that I can make out a few of the captions. I especially like the caption for Silvio Berlusconi (the Italian PM). Wild parties? This is what they've got on him? I like to imagine the tense backroom deals made in smoke-filled parlors lit by a single bare bulb regarding who's going to bring the keg and who's going to bring the strippers.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight on Nov 28, 2010 17:22:56 GMT -5
I can't read German, but there are enough cognates there that I can make out a few of the captions. I especially like the caption for Silvio Berlusconi (the Italian PM). Wild parties? This is what they've got on him? I like to imagine the tense backroom deals made in smoke-filled parlors lit by a single bare bulb regarding who's going to bring the keg and who's going to bring the strippers. Wild parties it is. Silvio is Italian, which means wine, not beer, and his taste for girls young enough to be his granddaughter is well known. Nothing new here. Actually, that's the reason people in his own Party (political, that is) is starting to have second thoughts about the man.
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Nov 28, 2010 19:01:37 GMT -5
Ironbite-btw....has Wikileaks done anyone other then America? All the time. Their website used to have a whole list of regions they'd obtained leaked documents from.
|
|
|
Post by wolfgangravenna on Nov 28, 2010 19:21:37 GMT -5
I'm reading a few of the leaks via BBC.
A few, like the Syrian-Hezbollah link and the US doing little about it is unsurprising, but the UN thing caught me a bit off guard.
I think that this, overall, is a good thing. As much as it does put people's lives at risk, they are and will always be, considering America's status in the foreign world, and leaking some stuff, although having an adverse effect on the mortality rate of US diplomat, i think is good for government transparency, and i'm wondering if we can use the term "to make an omelet, you gotta break a few eggs" when it comes to this point. However, i also agree that not just the US should be targeted. I'd like to see documents from all over. Hell, I want to know what Canada is doing. China too.
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Nov 28, 2010 19:44:25 GMT -5
Wikileaks is a product of our times. There was no need for any alternative leaking organisation in the 1970s (for example); the New York Times and Washington Post were exemplary conduits for leaks, investigatory journalism, ect. Even the Senate got in on the action (eg, the Church Committee). Of course, like today, Nixon accused them of threatening national security, without providing any details. Critically, like today, Nixon didn't edit those parts out- he insisted on complete secrecy, as Obama does today.
The media today have been relentless cheerleaders for war. The have abrogated their duty and their job. Wikileaks has decided that they will fill the vaccum. Obviously, this annoys those in power, who were very happy with the previous total lack of public scrutiny. They'd like to return to that situation. That's why, when wikipedia offer to allow them to edit out the supposedly 'dangerous' parts, the DoD (and others) refuse the opportunity, baselessly claim they are murdering people and then demand total secrecy in order to stop the imaginary murders. That's why they arrest leakers and they try to arrest wikipedia frontmen. That's why they launch propaganda wars on people for being good citizens.
Perhaps the DoD does care about lives being threatened. But, since they refused the opportunity to use their vastly greater resources to protect them, they clearly care less for their lives than they do for total public unknowledge. Wikileaks, on the other hand, does everything they can with their (limited) investigatory capacity.
The most hilarious part of this is when high-ranking media people criticise wikileaks. If they were doing their job, there would be no need for any wiki at all!
|
|
|
Post by CtraK on Nov 28, 2010 20:02:05 GMT -5
his own Party (political, that is) Well, this says it all. He's one of the few guys in mainstream politics to actually blur the two meanings. That said, surely his media ownership or his ties with Blair are more concerning.
|
|