Thread: Wikileaks

Is wikileaks a threat to national security, or just an annoyance. What about Julian Assange?

I don't know what to really think of it. On one hand, i would say there are things that need to be kept secret for good reason. And god forbid if they got ahold of something that was top-secret or anything. On the other hand, news medias like the New York Times and Time and released worse secrets.

Julian has just released information that is highly embarrassing for the American Government. He's not really done anything wrong, which is why they're arrested him for an unrelated incident (one that he was previously released on).

Every government keeps secret files on other countries. It's part of what they do. And I'm sure most of them would be embarrassed if they were released. But keeping them, or having them released isn't illegal. Which is why the government is trying for the terrorism approach, it's the closest thing to a crime they can think up for Julian. I don't think it'll stick.

Already we're seeing companies strike out against Julian, and those that support him. One of the recent ones is with specific banks not transferring money donated to Julian. And a range of internet 'hactivists' lashed out and DDoSed them, causing their websites to crash.

What we're really facing here is how ready we are to let governments and companies control us; both by keeping their activities secret (especially when they have negative repercussions to the population), and by dictating when we can or can't support/believe in something.

My fear about this is how quickly it's starting to look like a police state...

It's already a police state, Kris. When companies like Paypal cut off the right for people to donate to Wikileaks, that's what confirmed the existence of a police state. Assange hadn't been charged with any crime at that point. What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? They had no right to freeze payment to his site. They did so because the government pressured them.

I for one am glad that Assange is releasing these documents, because it shows exactly what the governments around the world are doing behind the people's back. It's about time the people made a stand against the global elite.

It's their claim that he "Puts lives at risk" which I find most absurd, when it is patently their own double dealing, secrecy and backstabbing that puts lives at risk, indeed leads to lives being lost on a regular basis, and his activities are likely to curtail theirs. What they seem to mean is he is putting their lives (or livelihoods) at risk rather than that of un-named, un-known innocent nobodies, you can have as many of them die as you wish.

I wonder if anyone here's going to voice a strong opinion in favour of Julian being put away... I am curious as to what their arguments could be.

Poor man. I hope he gets out of this crap. I sure as heck would not want to go up against the kind of people he pissed off.
As for the rest, I agree with Sam.

it's not commendable, but not condemnable. if he released top secret documents, or documents that actually posed a risk to people, it would be different. though there seems to be that stigma that follows him. just the fact that he did it, legal or not, has caused so many companies to disassociate themselves with him .

Originally Posted by Eluixa

Poor man. I hope he gets out of this crap. I sure as heck would not want to go up against the kind of people he pissed off.

In an odd way, the people that he's frustrated now have their best interests in keeping him alive. If he suddenly has an accident, it'll be further 'proof' that the government is up to shady dealings; meaning, it'll be America that gets the blame for his termination. So it's really in their best interests to have him stay alive and in jail.

I get an odd little sense of glee at the thought of the American government placing agents about to make sure he doesn't suffer any misfortune.

"I hate you, but by god, don't you dare die on us!"

i love those julian assange pardoies they do on SNL. "remember, even if i die of natural causes, i was murdered"

My only real standpoint is that we have finally, as a people, found out how far we can go before we hit the line. Now the next step is to find out how far past that line we can go.

I've heard alot of this and that about wikileaks but never really bothered to check it out for myself. So I figured I'd do so before forming an opinion. I'm still looking through it though I did come across this special report... which I though was pretty cool.

WikiLeaks

I enjoyed that, Blood, thanks for posting.

Good find Blood, Hilary reminded me of a real time clip from the sixties of an American general discussing battlefield nuclear weapons in Europe. He was talking about "Acceptable levels of damage to the civilian support system" took me a second to realise he meant us, in my youthful innocence I thought the military supported the civilian population, not visa versa.

Governments must absolutely hate the internet.

Recently the British government said they need to pressurise the servers into 'taking more responsibility' (as in -away from the parents) by stopping homes having access to porn sites. I thought 'That's just the start'. If they had their way, everything would have to be condoned by government first. From deciding whether Amazon could sell a certain book, to whether the Telegraph could print a certain story. Erm...in the electorates best interests, of course.

We've got something of an internet censure here in Australia. It mostly notice it when I try to watch something online and I get a notice saying "This content isn't available to your country". Frustrating..

But I'm thinking that this type of system could easily be modified to suit other purposes. Such as when people talk about <content blocked> or <content blocked>.

I'm wondering just how far the governments will have to push before the people stand up to them. And whether we'll be capable of standing up to them at that point. If we have to play by the rules, we're at a disadvantage, because it's them making the rules. In a big way, the internet hactivists are making a show of the general disappointment in how the governments have been running things. It would be nice if we could simply hold a peaceful protest and disassemble the entire system, starting again from the ground up (with new people making the choices). As it is, the current system has become self-supporting; it's so deep in its own laws/processes/policies/regulations/etc that it can only make moves in the direction it's already going.