Slashdot Mirror
UK Asks News Outlets Not To Publish WikiLeaks Bombshell, US Prepares For Fallout
Stoobalou writes "The UK government has issued Defense Advisory Notices to editors of UK news outlets in an attempt to hush up the latest bombshell from whistle-blowing web site WikiLeaks. DA Notices, the last of which was issued in April 2009 after sensitive defense documents were photographed using a telephoto lens in the hand of Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick as he arrived at No 10 Downing Street for a briefing, are requests not to publish, and therefore not legally enforceable."
This news comes alongside a raft of articles detailing the US government's preparations for the release. Officials are warning allies that the documents will be more damaging than previous releases, to the point of potentially damaging diplomatic relations with countries like Turkey. The Vancouver Sun wonders if this will lead to a change in the way diplomats communicate.
Is Julian Assange trying to blackmail the US and UK governments into strong-arming the Swedes into letting him free?
... if its will change the way countries actually behave... oh wait who am I kidding
I'm of two minds on this one. Private communications from diplomats to their masters at home are often rather brutally honest, as they have to be. To leak, intentionally, such communications is a risky venture. Think Franco-Prussian War here for a good example of just that sort of thing.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
That's insane... What is there to hide people? One thing is for certain... We - the people - need this information. Maybe now it will become clear to anyone what sort of 'friend' the US really is. (For your US-dotters, I - like a lot of people - truly hate your politics. But, I like the regular American Joes and Janes... So don't take it personally. Not even if you have mod points.)
Hello Censorship, my old friend,
You used to be suppressed by Free Media. But now I think you're needed again. People shouldn't know everything - especially if the truth will hurt them. In fact, people knowing things is stopping us from doing whatever we want - without any bad reprecussions.
Lots of Love
Me.
If Wikileaks can get this stuff, imagine what foreign intelligence agencies can do. The U.S. government needs security proportional to the value of the data.
Sack this imbecile commissioner and hire someone competent enough to use a BRIEFCASE.
If you don't treat your own security with any respect, why would anyone else?
And this is how freedom dies. With open and blatant moves by the ELECTED representatives keeping the public in the dark about their wrongdoings. Right up to the betrayal of the very ideas those countries were founded upon ....
The appalling part is that, they are no longer doing this secretly. They have no issues going about in the open and being open about trying to keep people in the dark about what wrongdoings are committed. They slap 'national security' tag to it, and think that this is a magic word that totally stupefies the public and makes them impossible to understand wrong things are being committed....
Read radical news here
before ALL of these, come the question that whether the administration of a country is BETRAYING its FOUNDING ideals, or not.
Read radical news here
Don't want to end up red-faced?
Then don't engage in pointless wars started over lies. It's that simple.
yeah, usa is INDEED a STRONG ally to those countries that are strategically important to it.
so strong an ally that, it doesnt refrain from setting up secret organizations that are committed to assassinations, creating scandals, and even fake terror organizations in order to protect 'western interests'. naturally, you can understand that, western interests coincide with u.s. interests, as u.s. sees it fit.
See how STRONG an ally usa is below :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio
Read radical news here
News at 11.
The truth will set you free.
in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
Might want to take another look at what the penalty is.
after sensitive defense documents were photographed using a telephoto lens in the hand of Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick as he arrived at No 10 Downing Street for a briefing,
Well dammit, tell him to get the telephoto lens out of his hand...
Don't tell me to get a life. I had one once. It sucked.
A lot of us up here in Canada are looking forward to this release. Not because it might damage relations, but simply because it'll be a damn good read. What does the US government REALLY think of their northern neighbor? You don't get truth like this very often.
Get a big bowl of popcorn out and enjoy the show!
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
An agency such as yours must treat all the information it has with equal priority -- it is the only way to be neutral and unbiased. Otherwise you risk undermining the confidence of people everywhere -- the same people you rely on to effect the tangible changes that we all desire. Herein now lies the current problem with wikileaks.org. You have at some point taken your previous database entirely offline. Before you became well known you were a nexus of information on nations around the globe. Now, there is access only to Iraq Diaries and Afghan Logs. A google search on wikileaks for Asia, Africa, and Europe reveals thousands of documents previously linked to that are now inaccessible. These must be restored immediately.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
The elected officials who are about to be embarrassed are in for one hell of a shitstorm from those who elected them. I bet they're going to be pissed to find out that the reason so much of the world hates US is because of the fucked up way they've been supposedly "representing the American people".
This may be a good thing for the people of the USA. Hopefully they'll remember what The Constitution and Bill of Rights is about, start letting the govt know who is boss and what they've done "in the name of the American people" is not acceptable and hopefully getting rid of the arseholes who are responsible for turning world opinion against what was once universally regarded as a great nation.
And hopefully our government in Britain will get to realise they've been fucked over for the last decade and start growing some fucking balls in regards to the so called "special relationship".
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
The people in the US and UK are routinely subjected to various kinds of surveillance and scrutiny - like the US warrant-less wiretaps and TSA peep-shows - and told by our governments and pundits, "If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide." I say that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I suspect our governments have been very bad at times and indeed have things to hide - not only from others, but from their own people.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
we have a lot of tea partiers in this thread.
Read radical news here
I'm not as religious as I used to be, but I couldn't help but be reminded of some Bible verses:
"God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil" Ecclesiastes 12:14 (New International Version)
"On the day of judgment, men will render account for every careless word they utter." Matthew 12:36 (Revised Standard Version)
"Everything that is hidden will be shown, and everything that is secret will be made known." Luke 12:2
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
excuse me.
what part of the irrelevance in between
"diplomatic dispatches arent released publicly"
and
"betraying a country's founding ideals"
you dont understand?
and the unfathomable importance of the latter ?
so, diplo dispatches of a country should not be released publicly, because, what, precisely ? so that their administrators can safely betray their founding ideals ?
well, that was what they have been doing behind the pretense of national security for close to a century now. apparently, THAT DOESNT WORK.
it seems its better if they are released publicly.
Read radical news here
or the fact that the Generals had said that the first waves ashore in operation Olympic would be facing 98% wastage - you can see why they used the Bomb
Personally, I thought they were damn good ideas, but "sticking to founding ideals" for its own sake personally sounds like a horrible idea to me. The founding fathers were innovative politicans...not prophets.
then lets abolish equality, freedom of speech, freedom of choice, reinstitute slavery, reestablish feudalism, and repeal declaration of human rights.
Read radical news here
Our governments may all suck, but I've joined the tens of dozens of people who enjoy FlashBlock with their browsing experience! FlashBlock, now available for Chrome and other major browsers, lets you block stupid marketing tools that wake up your roommates with unexpected sounds. FlashBlock! Don't browse the web without it! (endorsement not paid for by anybody, unless they want to)
... maybe you should stop being such a douchebag?
The last release was marketed as definitive proof that the US military actively practiced murder. The big "bombshell" was a video in which people on the ground have clearly visible rifles. Then it appears one peeks around the corner with an RPG and points it at a US helicopter.
The US soldiers radio back and ask permission to engage. They don't engage until permission is given. There are some individuals that are shot, but survive. The US soldiers don't initially shoot again to kill. They wait for further orders, and then see a van pull up, trying to grab the wounded individuals. They are given permission to open fire again.
The questionable aspect of the whole scenario is opening fire a second time on wounded targets, even if they are being taken away from the scene. But if you truly believe these targets were going to open fire on you by firing an RPG on you in a restricted area, then anyone assisting those targets are targets themselves. In a combat zone where the enemy doesn't wear a uniform, the lines are not clear. The actions are not 100% defensible, but it was also a far cry from the random murder of innocents that it was marketed as.
Soldiers should be accountable for their actions. They are not above the law. But care must be taken when making snap judgments about them, when they are being asked to make rapid decisions of life and death. Most of the people making judgments have no understanding of what it is like to be in those circumstances. And while I was never deployed in a combat zone, I'm a Marine myself. So I've at least put some serious thought into what it means to take a life in the defense of another.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Wikileaks claims all information should be in the open, everyone deserves to be judged, and that no one is above the law.
Yet they won't disclose all leaks given to them.
They refuse to acknowledge where their funding comes from.
They have little to no transparency as an organization,
Their leader is currently under investigation for breaking the law.
And while "rape" has a very different connotation in Sweden (reports have it that he slept with two women in a short period of time, refusing to use a condom and didn't disclose to the other there was a second woman), it is still breaking the law.
Could Wikileaks stand up to the same scrutiny it wants everyone else held up to?
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
early pioneers also had to formulate the representative democracy in the embodiment of the king. because, else, they would have been beheaded.
there would be no constitution by the founding fathers, had they not been able to incorporate slavery, unfortunately, into the constitution.
Read radical news here
not to mention that, they have explicitly said and advocated during their life that, slavery should be ended, and even if it was a radical change, it could still be done incrementally. numerous of them bought land to settle the slaves they freed, this includes lafayette, if im not mistaken, he partnered with franklin or washington.
Read radical news here
If you want to help, setup a Tor Relay (make sure you have the DirPort (9030/tcp) and ORPort (usually 443/tcp[windoze] or 9001/tcp[linux]) forwarded in your router/firewall - or use uPNP. Make sure you have at least 20kb/sec outbound bandwidth. I am donating 200KB/sec both ways. You can download Tor from http://torproject.org/
I recommend downloading the full Vidalia Bundle which includes Tor, Polipo, and Tor Button for FireFox. You do not have to be an exit node if you do not want to take on the risk.
Relay Information: https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-doc-relay.html.en
If you plan on using Tor as a client, I recommend EFF's HTTPS Plugin: http://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
And not to photograph sensitive documents with it.
Great, a government telling the media to not report on something. That will squash all public interest in the topic!
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
there were even royalists among the lot who rebelled. every man is not created equal. some are brighter suns than others.
ideals, however, are always what they are.
Read radical news here
We need an unregulated media to keep them in check.
No, we need a well informed electorate to keep them in check. Historically that has been best achieved with an unregulated media but, with the rise of companies such as Fox News, that model seems to be under increasing strain. Indeed at an absolute minimum we need regulations to prevent media monopolies.
then they won't care if people see what they have been doing in secret.
The truth will set you free.
The insight into the cynical way governments cover this stuff up is maybe more interesting than the contents of the leak itself.
> Or maybe people in those countries don't send Wikileaks stuff to publish? They're not an investigation organization, they just publish them protecting the identity of the source.
Good point.
They may also have better information security than we do. The very *idea* of having so many diplomatic communiques accessible enough that [presumably] one person can copy so many speaks to a massive technical security failure.
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
People who actually do something are anything but wimps.
Hop to man; wikileaks can't cover everything, they have their niche. Open up "BhCompyLeaks" and get started. Show wikileaks how it should be done.
...just because you disagree with something, does not make it "flamebait".
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
The fact that this information is released, even in this capacity, shows that our government is far more free than those of, let's say, China.
Not really - what it does show is that there are Americans who are disgusted with their government (and believe that other will be when they see what it is up to) and who also believe that they can be held accountable to their fellow citizens. The first provides motivation for wanting the government to change and the second means that they believe that making everyone aware of the information is the way to achieve it.
In China this would be pointless because why would the government care what their people thought?
Perhaps your wives relatives should have inserted smileys into the conversation. A sense of humour requires nurturing, not just a conditioned response to a laugh track.
As the linked stories point out, the main reason Spc. Manning was able (allegedly) to pack away so much material is because post-9/11, the Federal Government stopped stove-piping the various intel info streams, one of the issues that made 9/11 possible.
This incident points out one of the rationale for stove-piping intel: compartmentalization to reduce the likelihood of giving away the entire store to adversaries. As a result of this case, there has/is/will be reconsideration of the degree of information sharing between departments... hopefully with the result that the benefits are considered worth the risk.
At the same time, there will be reconsideration of how best to discourage future Mannings. Step 1: screw the Specialist up the ass. He will be getting out of Leavenworth about the same time as Jonathan Jay Pollard.
It's unfortunate that an evidently immature Sgt presented such a major data dump on Wikileaks. I think the service has real value, but I don't think they yet enjoy the level of editorial judgement to handle it, and will suffer for it.
Luke, help me take this mask off
Isn't it just such a sad idea that our diplomats might actually be forced to learn the fine art of telling the truth and talking straight! Oh! Rue the day. How can we hope to live in a nation that lies less and makes its real motives obvious to all? What's a liar to do?
Why no leaks for china :P too much to loose?
While I do agree with this, I don't think that it's the over all problem/concern.. Everyone knows (and elsewhere as well) that practically every large industry, including the government in the US is corrupt - hell, didn't the financial industry (banks -> walls street) almost take out the financial industries of countries all over the world through a domino effect?
These kinds of leaks *will* come back to bite us, although I'm starting to wonder if this is some kind of rebellion starting - with all the corruption with these very large industries, including the legal system and government which is suppose to prevent it, it seems next to impossible to change anything and gain control of our country again - so what's left? Tell the world what is really going on, hand them proof and let the 'best friends' of the elite tell them where to go and what they can do with 'X'.
What are 300,000,000 people to do when 90% of everything they are told is 'crafted' and/or 'fabricated' - and mind you not from the government, but from the for-profit news industry, the advertising that is constantly bombarding them and the legal system that is turning into for-profit only as well..
Corporations run the United States, not the government, and it's corrupt - I can very much see how one could view that the 'normal' process of how to change things could take wayyyy to long, and in the mean time more corruption occurs and gets worse. If your at a loss - what else can you do than to air the dirty laundry of those in power to the world, and let the other 5.7 billion inhabitants help you fight - by having their government(s) telling those in power of you to f' off, and with a big 'F'...
They refuse to acknowledge where their funding comes from.
Ever thought that some people do not enjoy being considered an enemy of the state? They already give you enough trouble if you don't try to fight back, if they know you do they won't hold back.
Their leader is currently under investigation for breaking the law.
Wrong. He's under investigation for being accused of breaking the law. He's innocent until proven guilty.
And while "rape" has a very different connotation in Sweden (reports have it that he slept with two women in a short period of time, refusing to use a condom and didn't disclose to the other there was a second woman), it is still breaking the law.
Yeah, breaking a silly law. If he had killed someone I would care, but I don't give a shit if he's a man-whore or not.
> The kind of language used in these dispatches is extremely frank.
Thanks for this appraisal of leaks you haven't seen.
So, we should let war crimes be hidden because we don't want to hurt Prime Minister Clown's feelings (within his lifetime) by letting him know that idiot Bush thought he was a moron?
Dude, get over the petty squabbling, there are massacres and other human rights violations going on.
Expert in software patents or patent law? Contribute to the ESP wiki!
From the poison pen of xmas past.
Colby Cosh: Some apparently unwelcome candour on Canada
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/radio4/transcripts/Lord-Moran.pdf
As a Canadian with a reasonably good recollection of 1984, all I can say is "ouch" and "damn straight". I've lived in five provinces (BC, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia). He has a point about the fetish in Toronto/Ottawa for loading the international penis ruler onto their iPhones. It's a bit of a culture shock for a Canadian to show up in Toronto and discover other Canadians taking themselves seriously.
Back when I was in eastern Canada, there was a lot of talk about changing the rules to allow mergers among our five large banks, so that bankers in Toronto could have bigger international wieners, and then after the party, collect state welfare like the big American banks they so bitterly envied.
On the flip side, Toronto does have a kick ass film festival, so I didn't totally feel like I was living in a foreign country.
Governments have been making secret diplomatic deals as long as there have been governments. I've very amused by the fact that everyone thinks this is somehow a novel concept.
It could happen!
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
It is interesting that the leaks "could damage relations with countries like Turkey" and the UK government wants a blackout of the leaks to it's own population - will this blackout stop the so called "countries like Turkey" reading them?
How will stopping your own citizens from reading the leaks fix the problems that could arise? Perhaps the countries mentioned only get their news from the UK too.
Do these leaks contain "dirty tricks" done to the countries mentioned ?
Are they lists of "dirty tricks done by the mentioned countries that our governments are helping cover up?
Since this information will no longer be secret, censoring your own people to information freely available will not fix the fallout.
BM3
My mind is clear, and is now incapable of assessing complex situations, where more than one party has valid needs, or where ideology and impracticality intersect (even slightly). I'm fired up to loudly assert my opinions, especially where others are coming to their own rational conclusions, and assert my ideology as more important.
Hey, do they make What Would The Founding Fathers Do bumper stickers?
Will you be paying the hosting and bandwidth costs of those documents?
No?
Well then we're just going to continue to put up the newest and most relevant documents.
And you can fuck off. Go start your own leaks site. With hookers and blackjack.
Well dammit, tell him to get the telephoto lens out of his hand...
You jest in grammar. But, as I recall a lot of people thinking that he had deliberately displayed that document.
The first odd thing was that he was walking into the building using the very public front entrance used almost exclusively for photo-ops.
The second odd thing was that the document's cover sheet was removed - anyone who has ever seen a classified document knows they have cover sheets to officially label them and prevent accidental disclosure.
The third odd thing was that the event was used to justify pulling in the timetable on a bunch of terrorism raids (the document was apparently part of the investigation) - it's pure speculation but perhaps there had been hesitation on making the raids and this event was a internal political move to force someone's hand. I haven't been able to find out what success, if any, there has been with respect to prosecuting the people raided (even then, the standard of evidence in the UK (and the USA) for such things has been lowered to such a point of ridiculousness that a successful prosecution isn't as meaningful as it once was)
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Wikileaks claims all information should be in the open, everyone deserves to be judged, and that no one is above the law.
What? No, they don't. I'll ignore the last two, which seem random and not really relevant to Wikileaks itself. The former is a snappy shorthand -- like the slogan "information wants to be free." Nevertheless, it does not appear to be the current or even past policy. The only organisation I know which makes serious claims about "all information" is Google, and they just want to organize it.
Their leader is currently under investigation for breaking the law.
How on Earth is that relevant?
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
What's the drivel the Government loves to keep telling us ?
" As far as privacy is concerned, you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide. "
The game isn't nearly as fun when you don't get to exempt yourself from the rules now is it ?
It is rather sad we have to rely on organizations such as Wikileaks to provide some transparency and truth in how our government really operates. The reality being the US government being just as seedy and full of liars and corruption as those we like to dismiss as second rate countries. Apparently we just have a better PR rep than they do :/
“If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.” --Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google Inc.
2019 is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop.
Almost anything could be hiding there and given the volume, the folks at Wikileaks don't even know what all they have. This could easily trigger a major war, if not WW III.
Diplomatic communications that are supposed to be secret but are revealed can have some pretty severe consequences. If it was disclosed that the US was actively threatening Israel if they didn't back off on Iran might actually trigger an attack. To Israel it is almost a lose-lose proposition, so launching their attack might seem to be the only way out for them.
What about the Polish missle defense system? What really happened there? If Russia made it plain, but secretly, that such a thing would never be tolerated it could lead to almost anything. What about Poland being brought back into a Warsaw pact status? Would NATO allow this or go to war over it?
Maybe it is clearly known in diplomatic circles that Iran is going to take over Iraq as soon as the US troops leave. What if Obama is just fine with that as long as the US isn't blamed. Would revealing this force the US to prevent such a takeover by any means necessary?
Come up with your own scenario and see how scary it might be. We could have a very hot war of very big proportions in a couple of weeks because of this and the Wikileaks people would be just fine with that. This sort of thing is incredibly dangerous.
"Officials are warning allies that the documents will be more damaging than previous releases, to the point of potentially damaging diplomatic relations with countries like Turkey."
[insert witty comment related to US Thanksgiving and Turkey here]
When Scott McNeally of SUN told the public "You have no privacy, get over it!" our politicians didn't give a damn. When Google CEO Eric Schmidt told the public not to do anything they wouldn't like the world to know, politicians were similarly uninterested. Well now the shoe is on the other foot. The dirty deeds of the US and UK governments come to life, and all of a sudden they care about privacy... *their* privacy... not ours. Screw them. We're the public. We pay for the government. We're entitled to know what it's up to. More often than not 'National Security' is just a smokescreen for covering up incompetence and law breaking by government fat cats and politicians.
A FREE PRESS should be demanded by everybody worldwide. No exceptions. Ever. If they don't like it they shouldn't leak the info in the 1st place or they can punish those who leaked the info but they can not stop the PRESS. We must preserve the internet because its the last place for the free press ideals to exist even in nations who do not respect liberty - even if the internet is not the best place or as good as the press of long ago its better than nothing which is what everybody appears to be headed towards.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Don't let history disappear ... download now!
The file, "insurance.aes256," at 1.4G is ten times the size of the seven other Afghan War diaries files combined. Appears to be encrypted with AES Crypt from www.aescrypt.com
Here's the torrent page from The Pirate Bay.
https://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5723136/WikiLeaks_insurance
here's the magnet link
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:76a36f1d11c72eb5663eeb4cf31e351321efa3a3&dn=WikiLeaks_insurance&tr=http%3A%2F%2Fdenis.stalker.h3q.com%3A6969%2Fannounce
here's the torrent link
https://torrents.thepiratebay.org/5723136/WikiLeaks_insurance.5723136.TPB.torrent
I tried to post the checksums here but the slashdot filter didn't like them.
The AES256 encryption reminded me of this page from cryptome
http://cryptome.org/0002/state-aes.htm which says
State Department Warns Against AES Crypto
page 3 of http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/89272.pdf says
"The Bureau of Information Resource Management's Radio Programs Branch (IRM/OPS/ITI/LWS/RPB) provides all overseas missions two-way radios equipped with Digital Encryption Standard (DES) or Advance Encryption Standard (AES). These encryption algorithms provide limited protection from unauthorized interception of voice communications and are only approved for the transmission of Department of State Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) and Department of Defense For Official Use Only (FOUO) communications. Under no circumstances should DES- or AES-equipped radios be used for the transmission of classified information, as defined by Executive Order 12958."
What's up with that?
The "submissions" page says they are reworking their backend, no doubt to prevent from DDOS attacks.
Regardless of how people feel about the issue it all comes back to truth. People who lie for a living have alot to answer for, and no lie ever passes like people think it will. Wiki leaks are doing what no one has the balls to do....expose the liars of the highest order for the worthless cu*ts they really are. This is the main reason I no longer support any government...they lie and I end up having to deal with the backlash. They make laws yet never obey them, they create situations for war and expect us to die for them, they ruined any chance of peace in this world, they murder and steal call it patriotism.....I still call it murder but who am I. We allowed these worthless humans to have a say in our lives only to be betrayed, we can't live without these people even though we never needed them in the first place.
I feel humans could do better...we are alot smarter than we used to be, our children have abilities beyond ours, yet we have ensured they will never have a peaceful life. They will struggle and fail against our monster that we feed with our blood. Wiki leaks opened Pandora's Box.....and the world will suffer greatly once the truth is out. If you have a god....pray.
so is getting a speeding ticket, no? and there's plenty of lawful immoral acts.... on the scale of things this relates to, being a sly fox does not even register, at least not to me.
They wait for a signal. The signal could be anything that could be generally interpreted as the last straw that broke camel's back. After they get the signal, they call their friends and relatives, say something like "that does it" or "enough", grab nearest weapon and go out...
Voting is like a religion. As long as people believe in it they'll behave.
(1) The information to be published is tainted with bullshit to misinform, embarrassing to some but ultimately designed for the benefit of western government;
(2) The previous publication of relatively unimportant military leaks caused a very small proportion of people to actually care, and no damage to plans - wouldn't it be interesting to find out how people react to trivial diplomatic leaks containing information anyone relevant already knows?
(3) The publication will be used as an excuse to implement global legislation and unofficial procedure for more of what you guys call censorship. The UK is planning legislation to demand that Nominet remove domains from its registry (see also: fitwatch) and considering how the IWF can improve its child-protecting powers.
Even right now the leak is being stage-managed. You do not even have to lack of trust in Assange, merely question who manufactured his source.
Please consider these things when you review the documents. Who among us does not like to see a corrupt government exposed, and get a pound of private joy (sweet, cuddly Joy) when it is embarrassed? So we assume that what we hope for is what we are getting, the Pied Piper continuing his work.
<quote><p>Their leader is currently under investigation for breaking the law.</p></quote>
<p>How on Earth is that relevant?</p></quote>
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Also, his interview with CNN destroyed any credibility he had for me. He refused to talk about the investigation (as it was a private matter) and yet at the same time is trying to air the dirty laundry of other countries.
If he really is for open access and information, he should start with his own organization.
Diplomats often have to protect the sources of their information, something he might understand.
W.r.t. the whole wikileaks affair, there is one crucial thing I fail to understand. How? How did this these guys (Assange and company) become possessors of that information? What is the mechanism of the leaks? The only explanation I have is that many people at key positions at the Pentagon, CIA, etc. are traitors and leak deliberately info to the so called whistle blowers. Under that premise, it seems to me the most natural course of action for the American authorities is hunt down the traitors, not to whine to Assange not to publish. It should not be too difficult! After all, the info is sent to Assange and company over some physical medium, not by telepathy! How come that after more than an year high profile leaks there are no convictions and trials for treason? I am not an American and from my perspective the actions of wikileaks are obviously onesided. Even if such leaks were performed against every government in the world it would still be not a fair game since many governments don't give **** about exposure and cannot be embarassed (North Korea, Sudan, etc.). And the current situation is that these leaks are targeted exclusively against the US. I doubt that Assange would have the guts to publish something very damaging against Russia or Iran, in both cases ha can get murdered (think Litvinenko w.r.t. Russia or S. Rushdie w.r.t. Iran; Rushdie did not get murdered but it was close).
Can't we invoke this golden rule on the Governments, which is so dear to them?
MMMMMhhhhmmmmmm*smack* that steak DOES taste good
is it just me, or is wikileaks, witch used to have huge caches of documents, now just links to its iraqi war stuff? it seems to have steped away from...well...alot of its work, and towards some super narrow focus it seems, witch is a shame. certenly, i want to know where the other documents it used to keep are...
Quoth http://www.vancouversun.com/news/WikiLeaks+could+alter+diplomats+relay+info+Expert/3890617/story.html
> If it's like WikiLeaks' previous document releases, a select few newspapers are given weeks to troll the material and write stories, with the rest of the world's media poring through the Internet afterward.
The butthurt is strong with this one.
I can see how an organization like Wikileaks wants to
1) make sure there is some sort of protection
2) make sure that said protection, most likely partially unedited, does not leak in its original form
Contrary to what people are trying to tell you, Wikileaks _does_ retract information, like names, that may hurt people.
So yah, it does suck for the others, but it's painfully obvious that Wikileaks has to work with people they trust.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Really? You're using a witty bon mot as an argument? Wow. Listen, you're not required to like the guy, whether you think he is open enough about his own (sex) life, has good morals or a nice face simply doesn't matter. Even his credibility is only relevant in so far as you think he is making shit up -- which, by all accounts, he (or rather, Wikileaks, which is far more than just JA) isn't. Think he's on a crusade and hates the West? Doesn't matter!
This isn't even really a matter of opinion, it's simply a logical fallacy. Attacking the guy because of the rape allegations is a simple ad hominem: "This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions."
Attacking him because of Wikileak's own secrecy is an ad hominem tu quoque, apparently: "A tu quoque argument attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting his failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's viewpoint on an issue on the argument that the person is inconsistent in that very thing."
If he really is for open access and information, he should start with his own organization.
Now, unlike the stuff so far, this is personal opinion: Maybe Wikileaks should open up. But (personal and primarily organisational) privacy should be inversely proportional to power. I'd prefer it if powerful entities had few or no secrets, simply because due to their power they have the ability to do much harm. Compared to regional or national governments and corporations, Wikileaks isn't a particularly powerful entity, although I agree that they are at a point where certain stuff won't fly anymore. It'd probably be easier for them to open up if they weren't already the object of state sanctions.
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
The whole Wikileaks "controversy" is a huge case of killing the messenger. People should revisit New York Times Co. v. United States if they've forgotten. Any possible wrongdoing, regardless of their motives, lies at the people who leaked the information, not Wikileaks.
That being said, the people who leaked the information to Wikileaks is risking everything by leaking it. And they have nothing to gain from it, in fact Wikileaks has to take extraordinary measures to keep their anonymity. Why would they do this if they didn't sincerely believe that the information is something people need to know?
My UID is prime. Hah!
To the frields and family of the human being killed (and of course that human being himself), collateral damage IS murder. A soldier doesn't aim and shoot accidentally. He aims and shoots quite consciously, and at that point, it hardly matters whether he was "100% sure" he was aiming at the right person.
Consider the case where a gang member points and shoots deliberately during a turf war, kills an innocent, and then later claims "I was sure he was the enemy, so you can't really blame me". Bullshit -- that's first degree murder.
Even his credibility is only relevant in so far as you think he is making shit up -- which, by all accounts, he (or rather, Wikileaks, which is far more than just JA) isn't. Think he's on a crusade and hates the West? Doesn't matter!
The editing of sources to support one's own views (as in the helocopter video of which already many have commented) destroys any credibility as a reputable source. Though he may be using material from others, it is doctored and edited according to his own measures. It is no longer a 'leak' but rather an instrument of propaganda.
As for the 'ad hominem' argument, the whole question of wikileaks is whether one can trust the organization or not. The allegations of wrong doing naturally cast doubt on the trustworthiness of his character, and the motivations behind his actions. In these things we are not able to make scientific judgements (as we ourselves have not seen the original documents but only what is presented), but only have a moral certainty. For this reason his personal integrity is important to the authority of the organization as a whole.
Since he is holding government entities up to a higher standard, and thereby implying a criticism of their actions, there is nothing preventing us from applying the same criticizm to wikileaks itself.
The fact that the common interests of millions of people are directly influenced by the publications on wikileaks (not to mention involving ongoing conflicts), one could argue that as an organization they represent a body as important as a state or any other policy influencing body.
Ironic that they themselves are more secret than many governments.
If the traditional news media refuses to inform people about things of huge significance, they will probably be replaced by someone who is willing to do it. In some ways it's already happening. What will happen if they comply is that they grave that is already being dug for the traditional news media, will be dug out even faster. RIP.
Clever signature text goes here.
When the stakes are high, as in foreign diplomatic relations, those involved will do what is needed to "handle" the matter. For starters I fully expect ALL american diplomats are using or considering off-line crypto right now. Secondly the practice of giving some no-name private access to such materials will end. Third a law will be passed allowing for "criminal" web sites to be shut down without trial. A point of interest- wikileaks has denied receiving diplomatic letters/cables. It's possible that this whole issue was manufactured by the NSA/CIA/TLA whatever for the express purpose of forcing these three actions to be taken.
Like I said, his integrity (and all that shit) is relevant in so far as it affects the perception of validity of the documents. From what I can see, all of the major leaks have been universally regarded to be truthful. As long as the leaked documents are the real thing, Wikileaks' motivation for leaking them is irrelevant. Are you saying e.g. the war diaries were forgeries? I'll grant you that heavily editorialized releases like collateral murder are a different beast. Anyway, basing your judgement of the documents they release on the sexual conduct of Assange (as opposed to his political positions, etc.) seems particularly arbitrary and misguided.
I'd say Wikileaks is influential, as in able to reach a lot of people with information. But the influence is almost exclusively a result of the quality of the leaks. I'm sure Wikileaks in and out of itself has gained some influence, too, mostly in the form of mindshare and media contacts. But it isn't really able to do a whole lot with that influence besides publishing information. Wikileaks can only be influential as long as other people create secrets worth publishing. This is in no way comparable to the power of nations (and their governments) or even the influence of lobbyists and many big NGOs. Claiming that Wikileaks is "as important as a state" seems almost comical -- it'd certainly require an odd definition of "important" to be true.
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
There are five standing DA-Notices, all of which are advisory and none of which carry any legal authority. None of the five has been updated since 2008.
http://www.dnotice.org.uk/
"... I just want to make one thing absolutely clear. There has to be no question of the BBC bowing to government pressure!" - BBC Executive, "Yes, Minister"
Maybe they're not as corrupt as the USA? Or is that unpossible?