1. Welcome to the new boards! Details here!

The Wikileaks incident

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Gonk, Nov 29, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JediSmuggler

    JediSmuggler Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Jun 5, 1999
    I think that weakening or hindering the United States is what Assange wants. He couldn't care less if Tsvangirai is killed or facing treason charges.
  2. GrandAdmiralPelleaon

    GrandAdmiralPelleaon Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Oct 28, 2000
    Yea, about the whole "Wikileaks releasing cable ..." It's not entirely accurate, is it?

  3. Kimball_Kinnison

    Kimball_Kinnison Jedi Grand Master star 6

    Oct 28, 2001
    The only problem with your argument here is that WikiLeaks still provided the cable to the Guardian.

    WikiLeaks still released the information that put Tsvangirai at risk. Just because they filter it through the Guardian and other newspapers doesn't relieve them of responsibility for their own part in it.

    Incidentally, WikiLeaks is now [link=]providing[/link] $15000 towards PFC Manning's defense. This could be used as evidence of a quid-pro-quo and work against Manning's defense.

    Kimball Kinnison
  4. Ender Sai

    Ender Sai Chosen One star 10

    Feb 18, 2001
    Take this, dead horse.

    OK so, I will agree with the argument that Wikileaks has been at best, petty, and at worst, downright malicious in the way it has irresponsibly risked lives. Part of the reason I had issues with the cables coming out was that, back when I worked for the government, we were constantly using cables to speak to overseas posts and vice versa. They're highly important, frank assessments and I don't buy that there's a public interest in releasing all of them, unedited, especially when sources are named. It's not like Collateral Murder, which had a public interest dimension; in not vetting and filtering these documents, lives were wasted for one man's ego.

    What's worse than all of this, however, is the hysteria in the US towards Assange. Firstly, Bradley Manning guys - heard of him? Secondly, calling for his death or suggesting, in a fairly insipid after-school special tough guy voice, that "he declared war on [face_flag], now it's time to paaaaaaaaaaaay" smacks of emotional immaturity. You want to plug leaks, get tighter on security, because it's a widely known secret in intelligence communities that if you want to know something about the US government, just ask someone with access. Assange was merely the messenger, the failure of US security to first properly restrict access to cables that realy should be Top Secret or higher, and then to vet those with access, is a much larger culprit.

    Like anything, the leaking of cables has two sides to it, a positive and negative one. I'm not a fan of it because I don't believe that they should be public but having said that, they are, so let's look at what came out of them and deal with it.

    (Also, I apologise if I'm waffly, I'm a bit sick at the moment so not thinking clearly. Also, [face_love] farrie)


  5. SirakRomar

    SirakRomar Jedi Master star 4

    Mar 30, 2007
    I actually found it to be exteemely interesting and very educating to read which German politic talked to the US and which one didn´t and what the US demanded of them and why it did not happen. Actually it revealed that much of German politics is a skillful deception. And one so good, you don´t even expected it. hidden among the amateurish, obvious decpetions politics usually pull of, so to say.

    A strange coincidence that Germanys most popular politician . . . our Superstar . . . fell over some minor affair regarding his Doctor-thesis (what? he had a Doctor? Didn´t know) oly weeks later. And almost nobody helped him through it. Of course nobody, NOBODY made any connection to his wikileaked good relationships with the US and how it might have corrupted his way to do his job. Politics are strange. I enjoyed reading about them from such a unique point of view. But that was Germany. Nothing dangerous came out of it. I think they should have kept the Iraq and north Korea stuff for themselves. To make sure no lifes were endangered. All the true scandals where in the western-world cables, anyway.
  6. Rogue_Ten

    Rogue_Ten Chosen One star 7

    Aug 18, 2002
    [link=]Julian Assange: House Guest.[/link]

    tbqh this is pretty much what I imagine having any one of a good majority of senate floor regulars stay at your house would be like.
  7. DarthIktomi

    DarthIktomi Jedi Padawan star 4

    May 11, 2009
    Could be, but it all depends on how you consider this stuff. I mean, look at the history with the Iraq war; at this point, it's difficult to picture a leak that won't help spread democracy.

    I mean, really, it comes down to the question of if you believe people should be allowed to deny crimes against humanity. Americans have never heard of Mordechai Vanunu, but he's an example of this kind of whistleblowing. (Vanunu leaked the Israeli nuke.) Same with Dedi Zucker, a member of the Knesset who leaked info about biological weapons.
  8. Kawphy

    Kawphy Jedi Master star 4

    Aug 17, 1999
    I, along with Glenn Greenwald, was listed in Aaron Barr's .pdf file (as one of the 'leaders' of anonymous, lol). I'm happy to answer any questions.

    I believe Wikileaks is protected by the 2nd amendment, and that they are doing the world a huge favor. I see the official reaction to be bordering on tyranny.
  9. DarthBoba

    DarthBoba Manager Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Jun 29, 2000
    So...the NRA will be representing PFC Manning at his trial, along with any potential investigation into Wikileaks?
  10. Jabba-wocky

    Jabba-wocky Chosen One star 9

    May 4, 2003
    Please explain how this issue is related to gun rights. At all.
  11. Mr44

    Mr44 VIP star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    May 21, 2002
    It's not. The NRA isn't really defending Manning. If I had my guess, Boba was "making a funny" at the guy above who said that "Wikileaks is protected by the 2nd Amendment," which of course is the right to bear arms.

    The 1st Amendment is what covers free speech/press, which is what I think the original person meant. (at least it's what I hope he meant... [face_worried] )
  12. Jansons_Funny_Twin

    Jansons_Funny_Twin Jedi Knight star 6

    Jul 31, 2002
    Right, because releasing the information of Iraqis and Afghans who've helped US Armed Forces really did the world a favor.

    As with many organizations, Wikileaks started off with a noble goal until an individual high up in the ranks decides that they wanted to use their power for personal self-aggrandizement. Assange is an attention whore, and he doesn't care who has to die to get that attention.

    And tell me, what actions in your book rate as "tyranny" on the government's part?
  13. DarthBoba

    DarthBoba Manager Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Jun 29, 2000
    Mr44 is correct.
  14. Jabba-wocky

    Jabba-wocky Chosen One star 9

    May 4, 2003
    Ye gods. I should hope I have a better reputation around here than that.

    I knew that the NRA thing was a joke. I was asking why the original poster thought this was a Second Amendment issue.
  15. DarthBoba

    DarthBoba Manager Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Jun 29, 2000
    Yeah, I thought you were talking to me as well.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.