63 replies to this topic

[Jacki O.]

you can't have a democratic society without transparency. end of argument.

Wikileaks is not releasing documents that put undercover agents in harm's way (like the valerie plume incident for instance) or threaten any country's sensitive infrastructure information that would harm innocent people.


interesting discussion on Wikileaks and Julian Assange on the Diane Rehm show this morning

all the panelist were skeptical of the charges against Assange

they also all commended wikileaks for providing transparency. and on an interesting side note, one of the panelist thought wikileaks was good for showing many governments that their security systems were inadequate, therefore actually HELPING governments strengthen their security systems.

the only thing negative they had to say was that it embarrassed certain governments and diplomats.

BFD

and comparing a movie star to Assange is irrelevant. one guy does horrible movies, the other release sensitive diplomatic wires on the internet. Heck Ted Kennedy was involved in a car accident that killed his mistress and he fled the scene and then had an illustrious political career. no one gave a shit about that when he finally kicked it last year.

wikileaks has become a gold standard for the media - every major newspaper and media outlet has relied on wikileaks documents in recent years.

One panelist even argued that had wikileaks been around in 2001, we might not have entered into the Iraq war. because the public would have had access to secret documents and could have seen that the WMD threat was inaccurate/false/made-up

[jeremx]

http://zunguzungu.wo...e-government”/#

[Jacki O.]

Forbes interview with Assange


In a rare, two-hour interview conducted in London on November 11, Assange said that he�s still sitting on a trove of secret documents, about half of which relate to the private sector. And WikiLeaks� next target will be a major American bank. �It will give a true and representative insight into how banks behave at the executive level in a way that will stimulate investigations and reforms, I presume,� he said, adding: �For this, there�s only one similar example. It�s like the Enron emails.�


this will be interesting


if he doesn't get assassinated by the Canadians first:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqtIafdoH_g


and Fox"News" continues "report" the "news":
Fox News to Dumb People: Yes WikiLeaks Is a Terrorist Organization and the Time to Act is NOW

[jeremx]

Fox News to Dumb People: Yes WikiLeaks Is a Terrorist Organization and the Time to Act is NOW..

yet we still hope you're dumb enough not to lift a finger about the fact that your government has been fucking innocent people in the mouth hole for a long, long time.

[MrAwesome]

you can't have a democratic society without transparency. end of argument.

Wikileaks is not releasing documents that put undercover agents in harm's way (like the valerie plume incident for instance) or threaten any country's sensitive infrastructure information that would harm innocent people.


interesting discussion on Wikileaks and Julian Assange on the Diane Rehm show this morning

all the panelist were skeptical of the charges against Assange

they also all commended wikileaks for providing transparency. and on an interesting side note, one of the panelist thought wikileaks was good for showing many governments that their security systems were inadequate, therefore actually HELPING governments strengthen their security systems.

the only thing negative they had to say was that it embarrassed certain governments and diplomats.

BFD

and comparing a movie star to Assange is irrelevant. one guy does horrible movies, the other release sensitive diplomatic wires on the internet. Heck Ted Kennedy was involved in a car accident that killed his mistress and he fled the scene and then had an illustrious political career. no one gave a shit about that when he finally kicked it last year.

wikileaks has become a gold standard for the media - every major newspaper and media outlet has relied on wikileaks documents in recent years.

One panelist even argued that had wikileaks been around in 2001, we might not have entered into the Iraq war. because the public would have had access to secret documents and could have seen that the WMD threat was inaccurate/false/made-up

I'm calling a reversal on your "end of argument" declaration. Honestly I just considered this a discussion, but ok. This isn't about whether or not there should be transparency, it's about where to draw the line when releasing potentially dangerous material.

Everything in the Middle East is completely fucked whether you like it or not. If the Saudi Arabian government tries to encourage the US to make a military strike against the Iranian government to cut off their growing nuclear program then that is something we are going to want to keep secret. Sure, we aren't going to make a strike against Iran but how do you think this country with a growing nuclear program is going to feel about what the Saudis had to say??

Yeah, there is no direct immediate threat to an individual but that does not mean that releasing these kind of documents can not ultimately lead to lives being threatened.

The Ted Kennedy comparison was much better suited for the argument than Matthew Broderick. Thanks though, it really helped to prove my point. Also, fuck you, I like Matthew Broderick's movies!

I'm right, you're wrong. END OF ARGUMENT!!!! INFINITY!!! and I call no reversals, no backsies, and no un-dos!

PS. The Ted Kennedy comparison was much better suited for the argument than Matthew Broderick. Thanks though, it really helped to prove my point. Also, fuck you, I like Matthew Broderick's movies!

[jeremx]

i think the message is that "if you're a backstabbing, dickhead nation, people are going to find out about it. and we're going to help make sure that happens." i learned this in kindergarten when i was advised that if i could not say something nice about someone, that i should not say anything at all (about them that is). i'm wildly in favor of people getting called out for their bullshit.

[MrAwesome]

i think the message is that "if you're a backstabbing, dickhead nation, people are going to find out about it. and we're going to help make sure that happens." i learned this in kindergarten when i was advised that if i could not say something nice about someone, that i should not say anything at all (about them that is). i'm wildly in favor of people getting called out for their bullshit.

When you said the teacher was a butt for giving you homework over the weekend and the kid you told that to went and told the teacher then watched you get punished with a big smile on his face saying "Na-na-na-na-na-na, you got in trouble", what was your opinion of that kid??

[Jacki O.]

I'm right, you're wrong. END OF ARGUMENT!!!! INFINITY!!! and I call no reversals, no backsies, and no un-dos!

whatevskis (you didn't call that!)

i still think wikileaks is needed and relevant to society. that's where i stand in this discussion/issue/world.

i'm no middle eastern relations expert either but
some dictator/monarchy in saudia arabia secretly wishes to bomb iran and told the US that but is now like "oh shit....we probably shouldn't have said that" ??? and so we should be encouraging war and death? they just want us to initiate it and take all the losses so they can look like the good guy. i would think people everywhere should know or would want to know this is happening. especially in the US, especially in Saudia Arabia, especially in Iran.

i'm not saying diplomacy should be 100% honest because human beings are never 100% honest so that's impossible to achieve but i'd like to know what the fuck is going on with my government's foreign diplomacy/relations and how they represent me.

a foreign government that secretly wants my government to use my tax dollars to bomb (i.e. murder lots of people) another country is something i'd like to know about.

the fact that we even have to discuss any of this is ridiculous and just shows how much power/money/death/war has been ingrained into our reality. we accept it as part of "national defense"

[jeremx]

When you said the teacher was a butt for giving you homework over the weekend and the kid you told that to went and told the teacher then watched you get punished with a big smile on his face saying "Na-na-na-na-na-na, you got in trouble", what was your opinion of that kid??

i didn't hang with snitches so it was never an issue.

[BornInCrimson]

We had a big discussion in 11:60 about all this on the Minibosses board buuuuuuuuutt...

I'm not convinced that we need total transparency in order to function. The world is not composed of happy kitten land with the big bad USA in the middle of it screwing everything up. As far as I recall several places in the middle east (including Israel of course) want an end to Iran's nuclear program, by military strike if necessary, because if they obtained nuclear weapons they'd be threatened by force to either align themselves with Iran or research the technology themselves. I'd hope everyone here would consider that Iran's government is really not good and that fewer nukes worldwide would be a nice thing.

Moreover, what about this?

http://www.cnn.com/2...x.html?hpt=Sbin

WikiLeaks published a document stating a number of locations that are vital for US security. This is basically a terrorist hitlist and provides pretty much no insight towards any kind of governmental corruption or such, it just gives anyone aiming at us a nice list of places they should strike.

What Wikileaks is doing is inflammatory and it's likely to make less transparency in the end, as we lock up more doors so something like this doesn't happen again. If more transparency is going to be achieved, it will have to be done with caution, not just opening up the floodgates and saying "HEY LOOK AT ALL THIS STUFF!" The world, humanity and especially war are not pretty things and that's a simple fact, but most people are so used to living in their little happy cities and being shielded from the reality of life and unpleasantness that goes on day to day that they get shocked when they hear that there are no such things as 'surgical strikes' or wars in which civilians don't die.

Finally on a technical point, we live in a democratic republic, not a true democracy

[Tony]

The world is not composed of happy kitten land

there is no emoticon to describe how i feel right now.

[joe.distort]

The world is not composed of happy kitten land

there is no emoticon to describe how i feel right now.

I DODNT WANT TO LIVE IN A WORLD THAT IS NOT HAPPY KITTEN LAND

its the only thing that keeps me going some days

[jeremx]

Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this: the peak of your civilization. - the matrix via happy kitten land

[mothrock]

this whole thing is getting crazy.

WWIII

[donald]

this whole thing is getting crazy.

WWIII

WEIRD

I am actually listening to the song WWIII by KMFDM as I read this.





I am all for Wikileaks, I know I will get shit for it, but I am with Jacki.

I think I saw Mr. Awesome mention how Iran is a true threat. There is information (outside of the U.S.) that explains a study was taken in the Arab countries and that the majority (over 70% I don't remember the exact numbers) Consider the greatest threat to the Middle East is the United States and Israel. Less than 10% consider Iran a threat. This is not the information we get here in the U.S. where Iran is truly going to bring on the next apocalypse. I am exaggerating of course but I don't think Iran is much more of a threat than Iraq was when we thought they had WMD's.


There is so much propaganda that is going on that would slow down somewhat or maybe be just a little less prevalent if we had more transparency. Thank you Wikileaks for doing what nobody has the fucking balls to do.