Slashdot Mirror


WikiLeaks Will Unveil Major Bank Scandal

Atmanman writes "When WikiLeaks announced it was releasing 251,287 US diplomatic cables, we all thought we knew what was meant by its earlier ominous words that, 'The coming months will see a new world, where global history is redefined.' It now appears the organization is sitting on a treasure trove of information so big that it has stopped taking submissions. Among data to be released are tens of thousands of documents from a major US banking firm and material from pharmaceutical companies, finance firms and energy companies."

152 of 1,018 comments (clear)

  1. So... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...a lot of people recently said that Wikileaks has become an anti-US organization. We should probably wait and see what they actually release, but perhaps this news shows otherwise? Or is the fact that they are going to release data on US based corporations just going to be viewed as more evidence of an anti-US sentiment?

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      ...a lot of people recently said that Wikileaks has become an anti-US organization.

      Well, reality has a well established liberal bias.

      Or is the fact that they are going to release data on US based corporations just going to be viewed as more evidence of an anti-US sentiment?

      Well, or you could point out how the US's drive for globalization and (what they call) "free trade" is basically destroying everybody's economy because it's largely predicated on utterly meaningless economic theory. It's a race to the bottom, and apparently nobody has figured this out.

      It was the banking practices of US banks which directly caused the financial crisis, because they mixed up the imaginary, funny-money (bad US consumer debt) with the real money. And, when people discovered the funny-money had no value, the value of the real money tanked because it was now based on the funny money. The US essentially commoditized and exported bankruptcy.

      That's right America, it's your fucking fault.

    2. Re:So... by doconnor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Complaining that Wikileaks is anti-US is really an ad hominem argument. Just because they may be anti-US, doesn't mean what they have revealed it any less legitimate.

    3. Re:So... by jmorris42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > a lot of people recently said that Wikileaks has become
      > an anti-US organization.

      People say? W. T. F! Ever listened to the founder of Wikileaks? A more raving BDS aflicted loon you wouldn't find posting at Kos or DU and a more dedicated foe of civilization you won't likely find outside a cave in Pakistan.

      Listen up ya primitive screwheads. Wikileaks is BAD. You may think it is a good idea to throw all the world (of course you won't find Assange leaking secrets from an evil country that might actually KILL him... not that he disagrees with most of those countries enough to want to hurt them in the first place) and watch the powerful squirm but this won't end well. Not all information wants to be Free!

      You can't do foreign policy without secret cables flying around. You can't fight wars without intelligence. You just can't. Eventually a critical mass realizes it and this problem is going to get fixed. And none of the 'fixes' are going to be things we (we meaning the typical /. reader) is going to like.

      The least bad outcome longterm would be for the US govt (impossible with the current people in charge) to nip this thing in the bud now. Assange is for all intents and purposes on the other fucking side. He is acting as AQ's Intelligence arm and helping generally sow chaos and fear. Accept that and the logical consequence that follows from that. Kill Julian Assange and make it known any datacenter hosting, in ANY way including just a p2p tracker, Wikileaks content will be destroyed if they refuse the takedown notice. Of course that path won't be taken and the required fixes later will be much worse. Expect secure computing inititives to go on steroids in government and industry. People MUST be able to keep secrets and will end up paying the price in liberties if forced into it.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    4. Re:So... by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, they can only reveal information that they have been given. So far that much of that has been largely directed at the US Government could just be down to that being all they had at the time.


      Personally, I can't wait to see how major financial, energy and pharma companies have been shafting the general public, because apart from "Big Tobacco" and the media cartels I can't think of any more deceitful and greedy corporate scumbags out there. My only concern, and a seriously major one at that, is that the timing, the middle of a major financial upheaval, is less than ideal. Potentially having another major bank, energy or phara company collapse right now isn't going to do *anybody* any favours, no matter what the anti-capitalists might say.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    5. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      American Exceptionalism is the sadly more and more common belief that America, by its very nature, can do no wrong. It is Manifest Destiny written on a global scale. When we kill, torture, rape and rob, it is okay because what we do is for the Highest Good, therefore, if we torture, it must be the right thing to do. When we spy on other countries and interfere in their internal affairs, it is for their own good. If we do it, it is right, just, good, and in fact, both necessary and Fated to Happen. We are God's chosen, his favorites, just look at the evidence: would he have made us the best, richest, most powerful nation on Earth if we weren't his special favorites? God Bless America, and no one else!

      This is what a growing number of Americans seem to believe. Scream and yell all you want. We don't hear you because we don't have to listen. That is one of the perks of being powerful, you simply do not have to listen to or pay attention to most of your detractors because they are not living in the same world as you are.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    6. Re:So... by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can't do foreign policy without secret cables flying around. You can't fight wars without intelligence.

      You can't have government accountability with state secrets. I'd rather have the government accountability.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:So... by flyingsquid · · Score: 4, Insightful
      One of the revelations that emerged was that China is in favor of a unified Korea- under the control of Seoul. In other words, when push comes to shove they're hoping for the North Korean regime to fall. Given that the North Koreans have recently been torpedoing South Korean warships and shelling South Korean soil, this is an extremely provocative revelation. Maybe its the bitch-slap that North Korea needs to push them to the negotiating table... or maybe it's what finally sends their paranoid regime over the edge and provokes military action. It's damn risky, foolhardy, and irresponsible to release this kind of information.

      Furthermore, the majority of the communications are the legitimate, legal business of the U.S. governments pursuit of peaceful relations. Releasing these documents threatens alliances and negotiations, in the same way that blabbing all your friends' secrets hurts your relationships. People won't talk with our diplomats if they can't do so confidentially. How, exactly, does undermining the legitimate, peaceful diplomacy of the U.S. and other western powers make the world a better place?

      And consider that the release of these communications could ruin a lot of careers- not because of unethical activity, just because someone doing their job said something privately that shouldn't be said publicly.

      If Wikileaks wants to expose corruption and abuse of power, great. Why release everything else? There's a role for confidentiality. Would you want Wikileaks releasing your personal and business emails, financial information, and medical records just because someone, somewhere, might find evidence that you've been up to no good?

    8. Re:So... by Obfuscant · · Score: 2, Insightful
      American Exceptionalism is the sadly more and more common belief that America, by its very nature, can do no wrong.

      No. It is the belief that the US is better than other countries. Not perfect, just better.

      The rest of your rant is based on misinformation, so I will refrain from countering it point by point.

    9. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is not a discussion of China or Russia. Why bring them into this? Would it even help at all if I said all militant nationalism is disgusting? I doubt it. Like a child screaming, "But Charly did it!" when caught in wrongdoing, you seek to deflect blame by calling attention to the failings of others.

      How is America willing to honestly face its past? In what way, exactly, have we been honest, brave, forthright, and fair in facing our past of criminal genocide against entire native populations? Has anyone gotten forty acres and a mule? What have we redressed? I mean, you can come up with at least one example, right?

      Now, please don't get me wrong. I love this country and I love my fellow citizens, and I think we have been a great nation, and can be again. But I am not a sad enabler of my beloved's worst habits and traits. I am a true patriot, willing to go out on a limb and point out the cold, hard, and ugly facts, for the benefit of my country. A false friend will tell you only what you want to hear. Someone who really cares about you will tell you the truth, even if it hurts.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    10. Re:So... by Novotny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good lord. Look: Assange is publishing the information that is leaked to him by people horrified by what their employers are doing. He is acting in the people's best interests. One of the greatest evils in this world, to my mind, is modern banking. It's slavery, and I cannot wait until this is properly exposed. Btw, your advocacy of murder is truly appalling.

    11. Re:So... by greenbird · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you think America is overly nationalistic what do you think about China? Russia?

      Or those fanatical Canadians. The few Canadians at hockey games in the US sing that friggin national anthem louder than the 10 times as many Americans sing theirs.

      --
      Who is John Galt?
    12. Re:So... by chrb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The comments from Assange make it clear that WikiLeaks is not just acting as a repository, but rather clearly targeting organizations (governmental, commercial, etc.)

      This makes no sense. Assange is targeting "organizations"? Governments and commercial organizations? Of course he has leaked some information about organizations. So what?

      Or are you alleging that Assange is running some kind of targeted intelligence gathering operation? That he is actually out there, hacking the banks personally, or has recruited others to do so on his behalf? It seems a bit far-fetched; it's more likely that he is just leaking stuff that people send him, in which case the "targeting" is out of his hands.

      Or are or you alleging that Assange is just a front for some intelligence organization? Hmm: Pakistani General accuses Wikileaks of being part of CIA/Mossad psyops. Maybe. John Young of Cryptome also accused Wikileaks of being a CIA front. And some Chinese officials have apparently said the same. But if it is a CIA front, does that mean that opposing Wikileaks is unpatriotic?

      See how deep the rabbit hole goes....

    13. Re:So... by ArthurDA · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are they really targeted or is it just easier to get information from larger, more spread out organizations?

      I was torn on this whole Wikileaks issue but I must say that this post / essay (it's long, but read the first paragraph from Assange at least) really got me thinking...

    14. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Does the average individual in America today have more power to control his destiny than his counterparts in other first world nations? To me, it seems the average individual in America is struggling just to get by, has no health care, is poorly educated compared to the rest of the world, has fewer real functional rights, and less opportunity to succeed.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    15. Re:So... by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Interesting
      *ahem* I shall counter your left-wing screed with my right-wing screed!! Free trade has been characterized here as a "race to the bottom", a cute little assertion frequently made by decadent Westerners who want their own overpriced unionized manufacturing jobs protected so they can exploit the US population. Just look at places where you don't have meaningful free trade, like New York City trash collectors who get six-figure salaries and government-guaranteed pensions and free healthcare.

      Honestly, I realize there are a variety of issues raised by global free trade related to the exploitation of the willingness of the desperate third-world workers to actually survive and the willingness of developing nations like China to pollute the crap out of the environment (both the local environment, in terms of "crazy bad" air quality, and in terms of carbon emissions). But I also really don't think protectionism doesn't solve these problems or help make the world a meaningfully better place. Free trade with the US has, however, improved the lot of millions of Chinese, and their society is approaching the cusp of a transformation which should ultimately leave their economy able to be driven by local consumers who can actually afford to care about things like the Environment, and who are actually able to effectively agitate for better local conditions. Because the alternative isn't Starvation anymore.

      In short, the "free trade sucks" argument is ultimately short-sighted and not a very effective way to improve the world.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    16. Re:So... by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yet America is still one of the few countries willing to honestly face its past and try to redress things it's done wrong.

      Really? Have reparations for violations of treaties with the Native nations gone through while I wasn't looking? Have we removed the official monuments to the pro-slavery terrorist organization, the "Confederacy", which once enjoyed support in the South -- and which a shocking number of contemporary Americans still support? Have we compensated the Americans of Japanese heritage who were rounded up into concentration camps during WWII?

      Yes, you'll find America museum exhibits that tell you how bad those things were and expressing sorrow. You'll also find Japanese museum exhibits that tell you how bad Japanese imperialism was, and I'm sure you'll find similar exhibits in other nations. So on what basis do you make your claim? It sounds like more American "exceptionalism".

      If you think America is overly nationalistic what do you think about China? Russia?

      Americans nationalism sucks. Chinese nationalism sucks. Russian nationalism sucks.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    17. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Flamebait? This is a great example of what I mean. Even suggesting that we are less than the best nation that is now, was, and ever could be is met with outright hostility and suppression.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    18. Re:So... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thanks, I've traveled outside the US, which helps to get some perspective.

      Hell, just paying attention in high school civics class ought to be enough to come to the same conclusions -- unless you've got that new texan curriculum, then you probably do need to travel...

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    19. Re:So... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      American Exceptionalism is the sadly more and more common belief that America, by its very nature, can do no wrong.

      No. It is the belief that the US is better than other countries. Not perfect, just better.

      I fail to see a meaningful distinction between your definition and the OPs.
      Mainly because such a belief inevitably leads to exactly the same consequences - ruthless arrogance.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    20. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 5, Funny

      Stimpy: Remeber the royal anthem of the kilted yaksmen!

      Our country reeks of trees
      Our yaks are really large
      And they smell like rotting beef
      carcasses...
      And we have to clean-up
      after them
      And our saddle sores are
      the best.
      We proudly wear women's
      clothing.
      And searing sand blows up
      our skirts.
      Ren & Stimpy: And buzzards,
      they soar overhead.
      And poisonous snakes will devour
      us whole.
      And our bones will bleach in
      the sun.
      Stimpy: That's it
      Ren & Stimpy: And we will
      probably go to ****.
      And that is our great reward
      For being the - uh - roy-yal
      Canadian kilted yaksmen
      Stimpy: Come on everybody
      Our country reeks of trees
      Our yaks are really large
      And they smell like rotting
      beef carcasses
      And we have to clean-up
      after them
      And our saddle sores are
      the best
      We proudly wear women's
      clothing
      And searing sand blows up
      our skirts
      And buzzards, they soar
      overhead
      And poisonous snakes will devour
      us whole
      And our bones will bleach in the sun
      And we will probably go to ****
      And that is our great reward
      For being the - uh - roy-yal
      Canadian kilted yaksmen

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    21. Re:So... by lennier · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No. It is the belief that the US is better than other countries. Not perfect, just better.

      The problem is that 'better' is a function of behaviour.

      'We can do bad things because we're good people' is not a coherent argument, because you're only good people to the extent that you don't do bad things.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    22. Re:So... by lennier · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Are we better than other countries? Does this then give us a moral mandate to make the world a better place?

      I would argue that sure, the USA probably is better than other countries, and yes, that probably does give you a moral mandate the make the world a better place. Power leading to responsibility, etc, etc.

      It's only the means - coercive violence - by which the USA attempts to make the world a better place that I have problems with. Basically I think coercion is counterproductive and a waste of everyone's time. It doesn't change anyone's minds except the user - it makes them nastier people. So a country is good to the extent that they don't do evil stuff, and by evil I mean coercive.

      But sure, as long as the USA's not doing evil stuff, go USA. You've done some good things which you should be proud of. Building the Internet for one.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    23. Re:So... by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The definition I have always heard of American Exceptionalism has more to do with a country that is still an infant compared to most others becoming a world leader/dominant power in just a few centuries using the same humans and not having any unique power due to natural resources, but just by giving individuals the power to control their own destinies more than had been possible on a large scale in any other country.

      What a distorted view of American history.

      The U.S. rose to power because people of European decent used superior military technology to commit genocide against the natives of land that was both highly fertile and well-forested. (Wood was the oil of the time.) After forming their own nation, those people continued to use slavery and theft to power their economy's expansion up until they were well industrialized. (Via, it ought to be noted, numerous patent violations.)

      While the powers of Europe tore each other up in the Napoleonic Wars, the Crimean War, WWI, and WWII, Americans kept stealing land from Indians (and later, from Hawaiians, Filipinos, and other people with fewer guns) and exploiting people of African ancestry and building a strong industrial base. American experienced booms after WWI and WWII by exporting goods to war-ravaged Europe; as the British Empire declined, the U.S. was set to step into the vacuum for a few decades. (I suspect, though, that in the histories a thousand years from now, the U.S. will be a footnote to the British Empire the way Constantinople is a footnote to Rome.) The U.S. then dissipated itself on the "Cold War", running up enormous debt in a dick-size competition with the U.S.S.R.

      Don't get me wrong: I'm a fan of the all-American idea of constitutional representative democracy, and proud that the bootprints on Luna are American. And we are the country that taught the world to rock-and-roll, thank you very much. But this "American exceptionalism" nonsense is an ahistorical, anti-intelelctual embarrassment.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    24. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most Americans are slightly worse off than they were, better off than most of the world, but not nearly as (self reportedly) happy and fulfilled as the rest of the first world.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    25. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 2, Insightful
      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    26. Re:So... by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You present a false dichotomy, terror kills very few people, it is you who spreads fear.

    27. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who said we can do no right? That is ludicrous, no one said it. Perhaps you missed the part where I said I am an American, and that I love our country, that I am a patriot, and that we as a nation can be truly great once more?

      God damn all knee jerk defensive excuses. America, please, fucking sit down, shut up, and take a little constructive criticism without being a whining baby about it. Face up to your imperfections like an adult. Learn to say "I'm sorry" and "I'll do better next time."

      You know who latches on to the idea that America is the greatest nation? Tiny little frightened people with no self esteem. People who do things, people who are secure, people who know what and who they are DO NOT NEED to feel that their country is the bestest everest.

      I mean, seriously, who gives a fuck if it is or isn't the best country ever? How does that impact you? If it is a suck-ass country, does that make you a suck-ass person? If it is an awesome country, does that mean you are awesome? How immature, who bases their self esteem on what they think of their country?

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    28. Re:So... by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A) No one was promised 40 acres and a mule by anyone in the government, so you got that most basic point wrong

      B) The US has redress a great many wrongs. From womens rights, freeing people, to the Japanese American internment camps.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    29. Re:So... by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You've really stopped thinking.

      He is simply saying the the US should lead other countries to make them better, but don't do it with violent actions.

      His logic is fine. Your reaction is overblown and stupid. You're not stupid please stop acting that way.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    30. Re:So... by Obfuscant · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I fail to see a meaningful distinction between your definition and the OPs.

      Then it is useless to continue this discussion. If you can't see a difference between "can do no wrong" and "not perfect", then we have no common ground upon which communications could profit.

      Mainly because such a belief inevitably leads to exactly the same consequences - ruthless arrogance.

      Yes, it is clear that there is no common ground, nay, not even a common language, with which we can converse.

    31. Re:So... by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And it must cease because modern civilization can't exist in the climate of fear he is trying to create.

      Wait wait wait.

      The U.S. is pursuing two wars of aggression. Al Qaeda and its sympathizers are commiting violent acts of terrorism. North Korea has fired on a South Korean village. But it's WikiLeaks that's trying to create a climate of fear, buy...publishing information that governments and their sociopathic offspring, large corporations, don't want you to have.

      Dude. Take your meds.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    32. Re:So... by spun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you count reservations as a reparation, you and I have nothing to discuss. Good day sir.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    33. Re:So... by mrchaotica · · Score: 2

      the pro-slavery terrorist organization, the "Confederacy", which once enjoyed support in the South

      The Confederates were not terrorists; they raised a regular army and fought on established battle lines. Terrorists, in contrast, both hide amongst the civilian population and intentionally target civilians.

      If you call the Confederates "terrorists," then you must also call all other revolutionaries so -- even the ones who succeeded, such as the Founding Fathers.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    34. Re:So... by h3 · · Score: 2

      >Have we compensated the Americans of Japanese heritage who were rounded up into concentration camps during WWII?

      Actually yes, to the tune of $1.6 billion to >82,000 interees and their heirs, back in 1999:

      http://www.democracynow.org/1999/2/18/wwii_reparations_japanese_american_internees

    35. Re:So... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then it is useless to continue this discussion. If you can't see a difference between "can do no wrong" and "not perfect", then we have no common ground upon which communications could profit.

      Oh I see a semantic difference, I just don't see one in practice. When one believes that their actions and the outcomes thereof are always "better" than what anyone else could have done then one would have to actually be perfect in order to avoid the trap of abusing that authority for self interest or even just laziness.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    36. Re:So... by moortak · · Score: 2, Informative

      1.2 billion was paid out to survivors of the internment camps. Why would they pay out to everyone of Japanese heritage?

      --
      Xavier Rabourdin for president 2012
    37. Re:So... by Coolhand2120 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The fact you cannot discuss my very valid problems with your arguments for reparations is typical, and I might point out that your attitude in general leads to violence. I would really like to know why I should be made to pay for wrongs that I had nothing to do with. Just ignoring me is the hallmark of someone who does not have an argument.

      I live in southern California where gambling is illegal, unless you live on an Indian reservation. This is a gigantic boon to Indians and they make tens of millions of dollars thru their special treatment though the law. Can you explain to me how this fits with "All men are created equal". Why is it that the government has said in so many situations that "All men are created equal unless you are in this group then we need to prop you up by stealing money from other people.". Why the hell do you think you or anyone else gets to decide how much of my hard earned money goes to repay someone who has never been wronged in their life? Explain why if I was born with certain color skin in one part of California I can open a Casino, while with another color skin I cannot. I just don't think they inherently deserve money I have earned because of the color of their skin. If you can show me how the government has harmed an individual you may have an argument, but people who have never suffered deserve no reparation.

    38. Re:So... by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Really? Have reparations for violations of treaties with the Native nations gone through while I wasn't looking?

      The act dealing with natives died the moment the US went it's own way from Britain. The 'United States' were under no obligation or requirement to uphold any treaties. Really if the natives have a bone to pick, they should be going after Britain.

      See in Canada, when we became our own country the act was still in effect as such; it's Canada problems in dealing with them, within our own sovereign borders.

      I suppose it doesn't need to be said or does it? Welcome to how the world works. Treaties and documents die when new nations are formed, or split from their parent.

      Also, you should learn some history on the confederacy. You'd be less ignorant then.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    39. Re:So... by a_nonamiss · · Score: 2

      Travelling has nothing to do with it. It's intelligence, pure and simple. I've never been outside the US (excepting Toronto, which doesn't really count) and I share your views 100%.

      Just sayin'. Idiots can travel too.

      --
      -Arthur
      Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
    40. Re:So... by sp3d2orbit · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, America was successful because it was the first to adopt a constitutional representative democracy and stick with it.

    41. Re:So... by NetNed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah maybe we should make every nation that has done wrong to any sect of people pay reparations to those they wronged? Heck lets go back to the start of A.D. and work our way right through till now. People who were wronged by the Greeks, the Roman empire, the British empire, the Mongrels, the Huns, etc. etc. etc...... Lets bring that all in to a discussion about document that were leaked that some asshats what to say all Americans will see as "anti-American".

      News flash for the uninformed people of other countries, the only people calling this anti-American are either politically affiliated or are such a small minority that it doesn't even represent 1% of the US population.

      Most concerned American citizens want to know more about what their government is doing and saying because we are sick of politicians subverting our rights for corporate gains and their own gains.

    42. Re:So... by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you want examples of other countries that meddled with others' affairs on the same scale and with the same disregard for everyone else, it would be the Soviet Union and the British Empire.

      Don't forget the Romans. I mean, what have they ever done for us?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. Go, Julian, go! by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Expose the corruption and tyranny of our ruling classes for all to see, and let the bastards be damned!

    1. Re:Go, Julian, go! by oldspewey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here's the question: if corruption and tyranny of the ruling class is exposed for all to see, how many people will put down the xbox controller or stop shopping for some idiotic black friday deal long enough to do something about it?

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    2. Re:Go, Julian, go! by Xibby · · Score: 4, Funny

      Many Bothans died to bring us this information.

      --
      I'm going to go back in my box and will think within the limits of my box: MS Sucks Linux Good I read too much Slashdot.
    3. Re:Go, Julian, go! by AndyAndyAndyAndy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They should wait until things are worse-off to release such damning and anger-inducing materials. We ain't going to spark the revolution this way!

      --
      It's always confirmation bias!
    4. Re:Go, Julian, go! by beakerMeep · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's a TARP?

      --
      meep
    5. Re:Go, Julian, go! by DrSkwid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      More than would if it wasn't exposed at all.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    6. Re:Go, Julian, go! by shadowrat · · Score: 5, Funny

      people will shift from bitterly complaining about the ruling class to smugly complaining about the ruling class. it will be totally different.

    7. Re:Go, Julian, go! by NFN_NLN · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is a quote from the article which sums it up nicely:

      Q: What do you think WikiLeaks mean for business? How do businesses need to adjust to a world where WikiLeaks exists?

      A: WikiLeaks means it’s easier to run a good business and harder to run a bad business, and all CEOs should be encouraged by this. I think about the case in China where milk powder companies started cutting the protein in milk powder with plastics. That happened at a number of separate manufacturers.

      Let’s say you want to run a good company. It’s nice to have an ethical workplace. Your employees are much less likely to screw you over if they’re not screwing other people over.

      Then one company starts cutting their milk powder with melamine, and becomes more profitable. You can follow suit, or slowly go bankrupt and the one that’s cutting its milk powder will take you over. That’s the worst of all possible outcomes.

      The other possibility is that the first one to cut its milk powder is exposed. Then you don’t have to cut your milk powder. There’s a threat of regulation that produces self-regulation.

      It just means that it’s easier for honest CEOs to run an honest business, if the dishonest businesses are more effected negatively by leaks than honest businesses. That’s the whole idea. In the struggle between open and honest companies and dishonest and closed companies, we’re creating a tremendous reputational tax on the unethical companies.

    8. Re:Go, Julian, go! by suso · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe its like the whole fry a frog theory. By releasing so much information all at once, we're likely to get more enraged and do something, but the steady release of information is likely to just warm us up to it and likely to get Wikileaks closed for good before it gets ot the more juicy stuff.

    9. Re:Go, Julian, go! by cool_arrow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In order to "get more enraged and do something" people would likely need to give up their idiotic TV shows and care about something real. Sure pal.

    10. Re:Go, Julian, go! by Dalambertian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Had the present leaks occurred when we were still considering war with Iraq, do you think we'd be in the mess we are today? As I recall, the media published only what the government wanted us to hear, that the rest of the world supported us. Because the public bought it, the congressmen bought it, and the debate was over before it began. Would you rather us wait until the next war starts?

  3. There we go wikileaks... by orphiuchus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now this is the kind of stuff I want to see. I already know basically what the government is doing and how things are going in the wars on the ground, what I don't know is what the pharmaceutical companies and banks have been hiding.

    1. Re:There we go wikileaks... by Nidi62 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now I want to see them publish stuff from other countries. The US isn't the only country with dirty laundry. But this is certainly a good start.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:There we go wikileaks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wikileaks publishes what it can get, as long as it is original.

      It has no agenda. If your government comes off badly, that only says that they have been bad, and that someone found it necessary to tell them about it.

    3. Re:There we go wikileaks... by DarthVain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. I didn't find the leaks all the surprising.

      I want to know the dirt on the banks and to a lesser extent big pharma.

      I know they are ripping me off 6 ways from Sunday, but the details should sure be interesting. I have a feeling there is going to be some really angry people soon, and they won't be directed at Wikileaks... (which might be the whole point really now...)

  4. So in short by durrr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wikileaks is embarassing everyone who deserves it. I approve.

    1. Re:So in short by NFN_NLN · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Wikileaks is embarassing [sic] everyone who deserves it (in the U.S.)

      From the article it doesn't appear they are after the US in particular, that's just where a lot of their information is coming from.

      Q: Continuing then: The tech industry?

      A: We have some material on spying by a major government on the tech industry. Industrial espionage.

      Q: U.S.? China?

      A: The U.S. is one of the victims.

    2. Re:So in short by countSudoku() · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Then let all who stand accused offer up their own info to refute? I'll not hold my breath. Falsified info is easier to spot than you think, and truth is much stranger than fiction. Forced transparency is better than nothing, when you're living in the dark, like most of us suckers. Let the leaking continue!

      --
      This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
  5. Will this silence all those people saying... by Nadaka · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That wikileaks is exclusively an an ant-US govornment organization and that they no longer do "real whistle-blowing"?

    1. Re:Will this silence all those people saying... by rotide · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, now they will spin this as an attack against our economy too.

  6. It will, "stimulate investigations" by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "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"

    While one may not like all the steps taken by Assange, one should give credit for the understatement that the new documents will "stimulate investigations".

  7. Read all about it! by cablepokerface · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Document will say that bankers are crooks.

    Life will go on unchanged. They will still get their buy-out.

    Carry on.

    1. Re:Read all about it! by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Life will go on unchanged. They will still get their buy-out.

      Exactly. After the obscenity that was the mortgage scandal, did anything change? Nope, and the greedy bastards responsible even got a shitload of free money from The Taxpayers...

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  8. Seriously by zero.kalvin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are we still going to ask them to stop doing what they are doing ? However with big banks and big pharm involved, I am more concerned about the well being of the individuals who run wikileaks, then if only governments were involved.

    1. Re:Seriously by spun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are we still going to ask them to stop doing what they are doing ?
      However with big banks and big pharm involved, I am more concerned about the well being of the individuals who run wikileaks, then if only governments were involved.

      Absolutely. Governments world wide are just pawns for these sociopaths, they really don't care if governments take the blame. But when you start going after them directly, expect to wind up dead or in prison.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  9. Anti-US Government, Maybe by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...a lot of people recently said that Wikileaks has become an anti-US organization. We should probably wait and see what they actually release, but perhaps this news shows otherwise? Or is the fact that they are going to release data on US based corporations just going to be viewed as more evidence of an anti-US sentiment?

    You should probably clarify that you meant anti-US government as they might actually be providing the citizens a lot more transparency than previously thought possible. When a US company is targeted, both the government and the people might be happy -- especially if it's tax evasion or violation of laws. Here's a good snippet when they run down which industries they might have dirt on:

    Continuing then: The tech industry?

    We have some material on spying by a major government on the tech industry. Industrial espionage.

    U.S.? China?

    The U.S. is one of the victims.

    I'm going to go out on a limb and say that everyone would like the offenders of industrial espionage to be dragged out in the open. Especially the United States government.

    Anti-US, pro-US, who cares? This is going to get interesting and the knife is going to cut everybody.

    I'm really going to break down laughing if Wikileaks hosts dirt on Amazon, their knew hosting provider with EC2!

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by AndyAndyAndyAndy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      US Gov and others are pissed because they're getting their pants pulled down. Beyond that, it's not the fault of Wikileaks that these targets have skidmarks on their undies. Embarrassment where it's due.

      --
      It's always confirmation bias!
    2. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by spun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The US government has always worked closely with US corporations to perform espionage. The government gives the corporations data on their foreign competition, the corporations give the government spies cover.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    3. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by lennier · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not just the US government with Cablegate. It's the Arab governments with their venomous anti-Iran private statements which come out looking the most like two-faced hypocrites.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    4. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by ladoga · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm somewhat amused of these anti-american accusations that pretty much everyone who criticizes the US government in form or another is subjected to on internet forums. Wasn't it recent US president who was so eager to make it clear for everyone that "You are either with us or against us"? Seems like many people in US have taken that advice to their hearts.

      In recent news from the same front the incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee says WikiLeaks should be officially designated as a terrorist organization.
      http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20023941-38.html

      If this goes through, whatever you do, please don't preach to the rest of the world about freedom.

    5. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by Reece400 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yup, interesting that their reaction to this leak is greater security/secrecey. Really shouldn't they just avoid doing a lot of these things first place?

    6. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by peragrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Chinese government has always worked closely with CHinese corporations to perform espionage. The government gives the corporations data on their foreign competition, the corporations give the government spies cover.

      The Russian government has always worked closely with Russian corporations to perform espionage. The government gives the corporations data on their foreign competition, the corporations give the government spies cover.

      The German government has always worked closely with German corporations to perform espionage. The government gives the corporations data on their foreign competition, the corporations give the government spies cover.

      shall i continue, or is the point made? Every country behaves like a schizophrenic child to each other. why are you so shocked by that?

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    7. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by spun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah, so the fact that the other children are doing it makes it okay? I see. Yes, please stop. You have made your point crystal clear.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    8. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by tsm_sf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Saudi Arabia and Iran were never exactly asshole buddies. A better headline for that leak would have been "Wikileaks exposes nuance in middle east to western readers."

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    9. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How many people already got hurt ?

      I'll flip it around for you. Is there *any* evidence that the data wikileaks has released has caused folks to be hurt? And no, embarrassing governments doesn't count.

      For all intents and purposes, wikileaks is filling the role of a news organization. People give them data, and they publish it. The folks that do the actual leaking might break laws doing so, but so far I have yet to see Wikileaks do anything actually illegal. Hugely embarrassing? Absolutely. Against the law? Which one would that be?

      There's a reason Interpol has a warrant out of Assange on charges of sexual assault...

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    10. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by peragrin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Go read all the comments on this. There are very few reasonable people trying to have a discussion. you everyone else either falls into the three camps. the guberment is evil, USA is ebil, or julain was wrong.

      The government is made of people if the people are being schizophrenic on the topic why would the governments be any different?

      I have never once said it was okay, not once in any of my comments. however just trying to point out that every government does this and has done this for as long as governments have existed seems to go over all the heads here. The USA is actually one of the most stable countries in the world(I would put Canada, Australia and one or two others ahead). Why is that? Because we don't kill each other because our government does something stupid. we simply use lawyers to push them out. We know presidents won't be around for more than 8 years. that represents slow change. If you want change in other governments you have to kill people, or live with a government that is non functional.

      Where is that any better?

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    11. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by similar_name · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're claiming that releasing data on currently in-progress military operations does not cost lives ? Are you daft ?

      I see data on currently in-progress military operations daily on the news and internet. Are you claiming that all data on currently in-progress military operations costs lives or just this data? Why?

      Laws that wikileaks definitely breaks : * espionage * privacy laws * breaking and entering * trading in illegal goods * violating trust placed in them

      Just a couple of things I want to say. What 'breaking and entering' did wikileaks do? The information may have been given to them by someone who did that, but wikileaks didn't do it. If they are trading in illegal goods doesn't that make every news organization that repeated the info liable as well? What law is 'violating trust placed in them' and what trust was placed with them to begin with?

      I'm not arguing one way or another that what they are doing is right or wrong, I'm just saying if they are definitely breaking these laws as you say why aren't they being charged with that?

    12. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by Nursie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ummmm....

      Do you really think that in the name of 'friendship' with the US, european nations ought to just let US firms create and then abuse monopoly status in european markets?

      That the EU ought to say "Oh, they're American, let's no subject them to the same laws as we subject EU companies"?

      1. Learn better grammar, your post was painful to read
      2. Grow up

    13. Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe by slick7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the real solution is to impose term limits and do away with appointed bureaucrats.

      When the asshats refuse, then what?

      There is no inherent loss of freedom because we don’t know what H. Clinton said to the Ambassador from Ecuador

      Lets start with a short history of American foreign policy. America's allies during and since WWII: Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos, José Napoleon Duarte Fuentes, Anastasio Somoza, Manuel Antonio Noriega Moreno, Salvador Isabelino del Sagrado Corazon de Jesus Allende Gossens and Augusto Pinochet, Ngo Dình Diem, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi. If you are willing, cut and paste these American allies into Google and see just how unsavory they are. You talk about the loss of freedom, I talk about the loss of life. But lets not forget Iraq and Afghanistan.

      That however is not the subject of this debate.

      Then I guess Stalin, Hitler, and Mao are not up for debate either. There are few countries on this planet that have not met with a violent overthrow of its government, America is one of them. I would like it to stay that way, however, when a coup d'état does occur, it's not by the populace, it's by a hidden till the last minute cabal. Usually the rich, the banks, disgruntled military or police, organized religion and/or organized crime; and who gets hurt?
      How much of what's happening in this country now, is by design? By who's authority? To what end?
      There are people saying that this planet is overpopulated. Who lives? Who dies? By what criteria?

      A generation which ignores history has no past — and no future. - RAH

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
  10. That ought to be good by bartok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope this is about Goldman Sachs!

    1. Re:That ought to be good by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Informative

      List of top US banks. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0763206.html

      The following list shows the largest banks in the U.S., as of March 31, 2010. The assets are listed in millions of dollars.

      1. Bank of America Corporation (Charlotte, NC) $2,340,667,014
      2. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (New York, NY) $2,135,796,000
      3. Citigroup Inc.(New York, NY) $2,002,213,000
      4. Wells Fargo & Company (San Francisco, CA) $1,223,630,000
      5. Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., The (New York, NY) $880,677,000
      6. Morgan Stanley (New York, NY) $819,719,000
      7. Metlife, Inc. (New York, NY) $565,566,452
      8. Barclays Group US Inc. (Wilmington, DE) $427,837,000
      9. Taunus Corporation (New York, NY) $364,079,000
      10. HSBC North America Holdings Inc. (New York, NY) $345,382,871
      11. U.S. Bancorp (Minneapolis, MN) $282,428,000
      12. PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., The (Pittsburgh, PA) $265,432,977
      13. Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, The (New York, NY) $220,966,000
      14. Capital One Financial Corporation (Mclean, VA) $200,707,587
      15. Ally Financial Inc. (Detroit, MI) $179,428,000
      16. Suntrust Banks, Inc. (Atlanta, GA) $171,796,255
      17. BB&T Corporation (Winston-Salem, NC) $163,700,076
      18. TD Bank US Holding Company (Portland, ME) $154,722,170
      19. State Street Corporation (Boston, MA) $152,881,394
      20. Citizens Financial Group, Inc. (Providence, RI) $143,962,035
      21. American Express Company (New York, NY) $142,295,548
      22. Regions Financial Corporation (Birmingham, AL) $137,287,286
      23. Fifth Third Bancorp (Cincinnati, OH) $112,651,313
      24. Keycorp Cleveland, OH $95,260,404
      25. Unionbancal Corporation San Francisco, CA $85,471,728
      26. Northern Trust Corporation Chicago, IL $76,318,597
      27. Bancwest Corporation Honolulu, HI $75,215,088
      28. M&T Bank Corporation Buffalo, NY $68,439,222
      29. Harris Financial Corp. Wilmington, DE $65,531,083
      30. BBVA USA Bancshares, Inc. Houston, TX $65,169,102

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:That ought to be good by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Those figures are wrong, Bank of America only has $2.77 trillion in assets (according to WP), not $2.3 quadrillion. It should say the figures are in thousands of dollars, or drop the figures by three decimal places.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  11. Messing with Government of USA is one thing by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Messing with multinational mega corporations are an entirely different thing. They might not care or even look at you indulgently when you take pot shots at the government. But come after them, they don't play nice. To put it mildly.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Messing with Government of USA is one thing by Amorymeltzer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe. I mean, yes, they're probably rougher, but corporations are minuscule when it comes to the two things that matter: Money and Bureaucracy. If the top 10 officials at a bank just up and resign, well shit. It's going to tank and, while the company may not fail completely it will hemorrhage capital. If the top 10 government officials resign, there'd be some crazy press but we'd essentially be back to the status quo in a month (with a much less orange Congress). The US government may be under a huge deficit, but it still has an enormous revenue stream, in a way corporations simply can't match. Governments may do a lot of pandering, but as far as entities go, they can certainly outlast any other for-profit enterprises out there.

      --
      I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
    2. Re:Messing with Government of USA is one thing by berashith · · Score: 2

      corporations have ready access to the US government...

    3. Re:Messing with Government of USA is one thing by blair1q · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Anyone with the phone number of Xe and a slush fund has ready access to those things.

  12. Wow. by Facegarden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope Assange is as well-protected as he seems to be. He may already have the US Gov't after him, but if it's banks and pharmaceutical companies too, things are only going to get worse.

    I really hope some of this stuff makes people stop saying "We hate wikileaks" and start saying "hey thanks for letting us know we were all getting fucked."

    The general public needs to be reminded that censorship isn't the answer. It seems to be the only thing they want nowadays.
    -Taylor

    --
    Worldwide Military budgets: $2100 billion. Worldwide Space Exploration budgets: $38 billion. Really, world? Really?
    1. Re:Wow. by mr_matthew · · Score: 2, Informative

      I had read that even Australia has launched a criminal investigation of him - they might be able to invalidate his passport as well if things go south on that front. Interpol has an arrest warrant for him, as does (IIRC Sweden), where they want to talk to him about the alleged sexual assault he committed. I think Ecuador offered him political asylum or something like that though.

    2. Re:Wow. by RingDev · · Score: 4, Informative

      Interpol doesn't create "arrest warrants". They handle international police cooperation in the enforcement of law. Sweeden or Australia may have a warrant out for him, and they are working with Interpol to have a "Red Notice" filed. The notice may be recognized as merit for arrest in some countries, but it's a bit of a crap shoot.

      There was a lot of misinformation spread about Interpol a few months ago. They don't have judges, they don't have cops, they don't detain people. They just facilitate communication and interaction between police forces from different countries.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  13. Next year by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Informative

    The blurb makes it sound like this is an imminent release. According to the interview this information won't be released until "early next year".

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Next year by KillaGouge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Early next year is within 60 days

      --
      GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
  14. I am engaging in flamebait, mod accordingly... by Xaedalus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And what exactly, pray tell, would you do once the corruption and tyranny gets exposed? What are you hoping for? The revolution to begin? Bringing down the 'fat cats' and bringing 'justice' to the 'oppressed'? Okay, fine, heard that all before.

    What happens afterwards? Who does the clean-up? Who puts everything back in order? Or, would there be a New World Order? One based on your personal definitions of what is 'Just' and 'Un-Just'? One in which the Wrongs are Righted, the Righteous finally ascend to Their Proper Station, and we all live in a land of Kumbayah under a new benevolent rule?

    I'll cut to the chase. Spare me your indignant moral outrage and nihilistic desire to watch the world burn. You're just as bad, corrupt, and potentially tyrannous as those you espouse to hate. The only difference between 'Them' and people like you is that you haven't gotten your turn to be in charge.

    --
    Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    1. Re:I am engaging in flamebait, mod accordingly... by Gizzmonic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hey Xadelus! We're on the way to fight a revolution to get the oppressive British government off our backs!

      Spare me your indignant moral outrage and nihilistic desire to watch the world burn.

      Well, all right, how about if we pass a law requiring inspections of meat processing plants so that we can assure that workers are in humane conditions and-

      Spare me your indignant moral outrage and nihilistic desire to watch the world burn.

      Oh. Okay. Well, some guys and I are getting together to help Europe and Asia out from the threat posed by fascist governments, and we were wondering if-

      Spare me your indignant moral outrage and nihilistic desire to watch the world burn.

      --
      (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    2. Re:I am engaging in flamebait, mod accordingly... by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      Conservatives realize man isn't perfect and more that he isn't even perfectable. Thus we design our social norms accordingly, with checks and balances and limits to minimize the damage.

      So please explain the removal of all those banking regulations.

  15. Interview with Assange about banks... by GPLDAN · · Score: 3, Informative

    So do you have very high impact corporate stuff to release then?

    Yes, but maybe not as high impactI mean, it could take down a bank or two.



    ... Will we?

    Yes. We have one related to a bank coming up, that’s a megaleak. It’s not as big a scale as the Iraq material, but it’s either tens or hundreds of thousands of documents depending on how you define it.

    Is it a U.S. bank?

    Yes, it’s a U.S. bank.

    One that still exists?

    Yes, a big U.S. bank.

    The biggest U.S. bank?

    No comment.

    When will it happen?

    Early next year. I won’t say more.

    What do you want to be the result of this release?

    [Pauses] I’m not sure.

    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. Usually when you get leaks at this level, it’s about one particular case or one particular violation.

    For this, there’s only one similar example. It’s like the Enron emails. Why were these so valuable? When Enron collapsed, through court processes, thousands and thousands of emails came out that were internal, and it provided a window into how the whole company was managed. It was all the little decisions that supported the flagrant violations.

    This will be like that. Yes, there will be some flagrant violations, unethical practices that will be revealed, but it will also be all the supporting decision-making structures and the internal executive ethos that cames out, and that’s tremendously valuable. Like the Iraq War Logs, yes there were mass casualty incidents that were very newsworthy, but the great value is seeing the full spectrum of the war.

    You could call it the ecosystem of corruption. But it’s also all the regular decision making that turns a blind eye to and supports unethical practices: the oversight that’s not done, the priorities of executives, how they think they’re fulfilling their own self-interest. The way they talk about it.

  16. Haha by copponex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, that's why senior administration officials are calling for Assange's head. Because he made it all up.

    It's really pathetic when people consider the truth to be political. I think it's far more likely that you're upset that your worldview has turned out to be a lie.

  17. good, mess with the corporations by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Interesting

    messing with governments gets mixed up in equivalency and nationalism and generates more heat than anything actually useful. iran is already saying wikileaks is an american plot

    http://www.presstv.ir/details/153259.html

    something that hurts the usa should be a subject of celebration in the iranian government, right? no. because people are so mixed up in their prejudices, any reveal of what a government did or said can always be conveniently reexplained with some creative thinking such that your prejudices are never really examined. whether pro-usa, or anti-usa, your opinion of the usa is completely unaffected by wikileaks, as iranian spin shows

    wikileaks clearly shows that the great satan is not the one who hates them and wants their destruction: all their neighboring countries secretly push the usa to topple iran, while those countries say nothing publicly. that's what wikileaks shows. this challenges the narrative of the great satan plotting your downfall, and so proof that the great satan is not a great satan. therefore, wikileaks must be explained away with plots and conspiracies, where julian assange is actually an agent of the CIA. it would be hilarious, if maintaining the prejudicial narrative weren't such a deadly serious effort by those who love, or hate, the usa, for prejudicial reasons. so it's a complete wash: wikileaks has zero effect on the usa's standing in the world, or in the minds of committed pro-usa or anti-usa partisans.

    however, the corporations, they need unmasking. a lot of people in the usa have this phony narrative of their poor neighbors and their government being the enemy of their prosperity. the real enemy of their prosperity: corporations. there is nothing wrong with capitalism, but corporatism is not capitalism. corporatism is buying off the government to permanently warp the markplace against the smaller players and to entrench your dominant position in it. the government is not the enemy, corporations are. the greatest enemy capitalism has ever known, in fact, is not communism, but corporatism, in all of economic history, the big players have always warped the markplace in their direction. yet so many fools believe this phony narrative of the government and poor people being the enemy of capitalism, and large corporations heroes, or at worst, harmless victims on the sidelines, of evil government regulations (that are written by those same corporations)

    so hopefully, a reveal of how corporations are your real enemy, not your government, might open some foolish eyes, for once, i hope

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:good, mess with the corporations by Spad · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's similar to what the US Republicans did with Obama. They hate the guy so much that even when he was offering them exactly what they wanted in terms of legislation, they were compelled to reject it simply because he had suggested it and he was the enemy, to be opposed at all costs.

      When you oppose someone or something that strongly the human mind is capable of amazing cognitive dissonance; no matter how illogical the reasoning or how hypocritical your position, you can find a way to explain how all of your problems are somehow their fault and that nothing you've done could have in any way contributed to it.

    2. Re:good, mess with the corporations by sdguero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the government is not the enemy, corporations are. the greatest enemy capitalism has ever known, in fact, is not communism, but corporatism, in all of economic history, the big players have always warped the markplace in their direction. yet so many fools believe this phony narrative of the government and poor people being the enemy of capitalism, and large corporations heroes, or at worst, harmless victims on the sidelines, of evil government regulations (that are written by those same corporations)

      so hopefully, a reveal of how corporations are your real enemy, not your government, might open some foolish eyes, for once, i hope

      So you admit that perhaps the biggest tool these corporations have in controlling the markets, is government. The bigger and more complex the government, the more likely large corporations can do nasty things to the market via Washington. Big government is not the answer to big corps.

  18. Doing their job. by Beer_Smurf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the media had been doing their job WikiLeaks would not be needed.
    But since the media is in bed with government and industry, this is what it takes.

    1. Re:Doing their job. by tekrat · · Score: 5, Informative

      Amen brother!

      Furthermore, this is what Obama PROMISED : "a more transparent government".
      Instead what we got was a more secretive government. So someone has to do the job if they are not going to.

      But yeah, "the media" are a bunch of spineless corporate mouthpieces. Every "anchor" is a former MTV V-Jay, with only entertainment experience and no journalism credentials. And no one is left to do actual, hard-hitting reporting. Walter Cronkite must be so ashamed of what has happened to "the news".

      --
      If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  19. Well kinda depends by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Informative

    If it ends up that the new leaks target all kinds of banks and companies, then no. If they are all conveniently US banks and companies, then I'd say that lends some credence to the anti-US idea. I mean after all in terms of corporate leaks you have one of three situations:

    1) Only the US companies are so incompetent as to allow any information to leak. Any non-US company is an expert at information security, as good or better than a national intelligence agency, and thus has no leaks at all. Ok well that is hard to the point of impossible believe.

    2) Only US companies do anything bad. All other companies in the world are perfectly moral and righteous, they don't do anything they would be worried about the public seeing. We know that isn't the case, as a great very public example look at the French banker who got nailed for billions in unauthorized trading.

    3) Wikileaks only care about or chooses to publish secrets for US entities, not foreign. This is likely.

    So like I said, it'll all come down to what is released. If it is from all over the place, then that is a good sign they probably aren't motivated by anti-US feelings, the US leak was just because they happened to get that information. If everything released just happens to be about US entities, well then I'd say that is a reasonable indication that yes, they DO have an anti-US agenda.

    We'll just have to see.

    1. Re:Well kinda depends by Nadaka · · Score: 3, Insightful

      4) the US is the 800lb economic gorilla holding a major portion of the large banks of the world.

      5) this is a huge leak from a few or single source in the banking industry and just happened to be in the US... much like the recent US intelligence leaks are most likely from a single source.

    2. Re:Well kinda depends by Volante3192 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      FWIW, the most recent leaks, the State cables, were pretty embarassing to other nations and, surprisingly, flattering to US diplomats.

      Yemeni President joking about whisky, in a Muslim nation? Boned.
      Saudi King saying the West should bomb Iran? Uh-oh.

    3. Re:Well kinda depends by chill · · Score: 4, Informative
      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    4. Re:Well kinda depends by chrb · · Score: 2, Informative

      If it ends up that the new leaks target all kinds of banks and companies, then no. If they are all conveniently US banks and companies, then I'd say that lends some credence to the anti-US idea.

      Wikileaks already released information about foreign banks that was politically explosive: the Julius Baer tax evasion and money laundering docs, and the Northern Rock memo. The Julius Baer documents led to wikileaks.org being censored by the U.S. judicial system. Details of the Northern Rock memo were completely censored in the British press by the British judicial system.

      So, if Wikieaks really is just an anti-U.S. operation, then why would they release documents on Swiss and British banks? And why do people who complain that Wikileaks is only releasing U.S. info ignore the cases where they released information from non-U.S. entities?

    5. Re:Well kinda depends by diegocg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The cables have revealed that the spanish National High Court was influenced by US diplomatics to drop some cases that were embarassing for the US. I think it's far more embarassing for us than for USA.

    6. Re:Well kinda depends by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Informative

      3) Wikileaks only care about or chooses to publish secrets for US entities, not foreign. This is likely.

      That's based on the entirely absurd predicate that all leaked information ends up at wikileaks. Maybe the people with the info don't want to give it to wikileaks, maybe they would prefer to sell it on the black market to someone who can use it for direct financial benefit (blackmail, market manipulation, etc).

      All you need to do is look at a list of wikileaks highlights to see it's not true:

      Somalian assassination order
      Swiss Bank Julius Baer
      British National Party membership list
      British University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit
      Australian internet censorship list
      Peruvian Petrogate scandal
      Trafigura toxic dumping in the Ivory Coast
      Kaupthing Bank of Iceland
      British Joint Services Protocol
      Love Parade stampede in Duisburg, Germany

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    7. Re:Well kinda depends by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      well then I'd say that is a reasonable indication that yes, they DO have an anti-US agenda.

      Speaking first as a patriotic American, frankly, my first priority is to fix corruption here in the US. If WikiLeaks was publishing stuff from all nations, I would be primarily interested in the stuff about the US. Because I am a patriot. Because corruption reduces GDP. Because I want America to excel in GDP growth. (regarding the GDP-focus; my hobby-to-the-brink-of-religion is economic research)

      Speaking as a pragmatic globalist, consider the correlation to monopolies. Small monopolies that have little power are not very hazardous. Large monopolies with lots of power are more hazardous. Anti-trust law focuses on the large monopolies because they have the greatest negative impact. That is rational. Similarly, the US has the most power on the global stage. I think that's a fine thing, being an American -- politically incorrect though it may be, it's good to be the king. However, being in that position means that any corruption or foul play on our part is subject to greater scrutiny. Just like big monopolies, that is a rational thing. Corruption in the US has a much bigger effect on the world than, for example, corruption in France. It only makes sense to focus on the most potent hazard, which is a combination of amount of corruption and ability to influence events. Our ability to influence is so massively outsized that it takes less corruption to make us a greater hazard.

      Take your pick: Patriotic American me is happy with all the US-oriented WikiLeaks stuff because it is my house and I have a duty to help keep it clean. Pragmatic Globalist me understands that my country has a greater obligation to end corruption because we have more influence on world events.

      Is WikiLeaks biased against the US? I don't care, as long as they keep publishing the US stuff -- that is the stuff that is most important to me. Frankly, Americans who feel otherwise strike me as unpatriotic.

  20. Wikileaks seems to be playing the PR angle a lot by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Okay. Why Not Just Release It!?

    Wikileaks was a site that just published leaked documents. It still does this. It seems now though that it wants to be considered a major entity in its own right rather than just as an anonymous dumping ground for data. So now we have Julian Assange publicly engaged in self promotion, by revealing himself and Wikileaks pre-announcing its leaks.

    It concerns me a little. It does seem to change the nature of what Wikileaks is. Is it a news site that has an explicit agenda, or an anonymous service that releases everything without taking a moral stance?

  21. Revolution by Jorl17 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't really care if they're anti or pro American. This is a true Revolution to be remembered in future time. If all these documents are, indeed, real, then we may be watching the true Revolution of Freedom -- the discovery that our democracy has grown to be something riddled with shit and corruption. The question that I pose is: What's next?

    Democracy is still the best ideal that I believe we have. I am talking worldwide, not just in the US. What is the valid alternative? Alternatives that I often discuss with my friends are alternatives that establish different democratic hierarchies and especially voting restrictions. However, this ideal that I often propose to them is just not feasible for many reasons (mainly: Human non determination, Human misuse of resources, implicit discrimination and violation of human rights). What is our alternative? Where do we go from here? I'm sure many disagree, but it seems to many that most (notice not /all/, but *most*) democracy isn't working and will not work in the near future. What IS __THE NEXT STEP__?

    For starters, WikiLeaks seems to be going there. Freedom is a must have. Transparency is essential. Not everywhere, as some things must be made secret, but the fear of being discovered -- much like is happening now -- can force people to "behave". This is a true revolution if it gets spread and if it really gets worldwide. We must use this to our well being, we must show people that Freedom is essential and that a Democracy without proper freedom and ethically correct behavior isn't good. That IS the next step -- a Free, Ethically Correct Democracy. Unfortunately, that is the exact ideal that we can't reach, because even losers vote -- and losers can't vote decently. Plus, even if we didn't allow losers to vote, who is to say they didn't stop being losers? Plus, who isn't to say that "non losers" can't be bought or vote wrongly? Who isn't to say that the politicians that "ethically correct people" elect change their position and become "evil"?

    The World keeps going forward, but we're walking backwards -- and we don't seem to be willing to go forward...just check the possible comments and troll ratings I'll get instead of a logical and healthy debate.

    --
    Have you heard about SoylentNews?
  22. um... YES. by The+Hatchet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    YES YES YES. YES. OH GOD YES. OH YEA. FUCK YEA. Please, release this data soon. I want this so bad. Hell, considering how incredibly evil the bank and corporate system in America is on a public level, I am terrified and excited and horny to find out how evil they have actually been being this entire time.

    --
    Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
  23. Not to be morbid, but... by webdog314 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Attacking the U.S. government was dangerous enough, but with the amount of collective money behind the banks, pharma and energy, I sure wouldn't want to be anyone associated with WikiLeaks right now. A ten-million dollar per head contract for these people would be chump change for the companies involved.

  24. Re:Wikileaks seems to be playing the PR angle a lo by rakuen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, to take a third option, what if he's heavily broadcasting his actions for a reason? You know, the US government scrambled around doing damage control in preparation for the cable leak. Maybe this is his way of saying, "Hey, I have this information and I'm going to give you the chance to do something before it hits the fan."

    Devil's Advocate to be sure, but considering the goal of this is transparancy, it would mean a lot more if the bank would come clean itself, rather than wait for a third party who claims to have them already beaten.

  25. Re:Wikileaks knows no bounds by The+Hatchet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You are joking, right? Because if not, holy shit humanity sucks and all because of you.

    You see, they are releasing data that shows banks have been fucking people over in more ways than the ways they have been doing it publicly. It is like unveiling evidence that shows a serial killer also happens to rape children, eat puppies while they are still alive and kicks kittens for fun, along with baby seal clubbing.

    Banks own 60% of the property and wealth in the US. They have been publicly leveraging that massive wealth to drive up the prices of everything they own to sell off, like De'Beers does with diamonds except with shelter, and forcing people into homelessness. If that is their publicly known business model, aren't you curious to find out what they have been hiding?

    --
    Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
  26. We'll see... by MaWeiTao · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So far a lot of the stuff I've seen leaked hasn't been particularly shocking. A lot of it covers things people have already known or at least strongly suspected but for whatever reason hasn't gotten the attention it deserves. These leaks simply drag those details out into the light of day to be openly acknowledged and discussed. It seems to me like the media and government officials are making a bigger deal of this than the general public. On the other hand, I also believe that it's entirely possible to cross the line and start causing some real harm, even if it hasn't happened yet.

    I don't have a particular good impression of Assange; I get the impression he has too big an ego for his own good. I also have questions about about bias. I think Wikileaks can provide a valuable service, but only if it operates as an equal opportunity offender. There's a real problem if members of the organization can't see beyond personal biases, if they show reluctance in releasing information damaging to their particular worldview, for example. Or worse, they decide they have it in for a particular entity, in this case, the United States. Of it may be a problem that the US isn't nearly as good at securing it's sensitive information as, let's say, China.

    I'm placing bets on the bank in question being Bank of America. They're quite despicable, but then that's already well-known which again raises my point of Wikileaks releasing information that's generally common knowledge.

  27. The best part will be the GOP's response by copponex · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If the documents are sufficient, I wonder how they will continue to spin corrupt financial industry practices as the fault of Obama without actually doing anything useful to stop them. 9/11 spared them from Enron, and if lightning strikes twice...

  28. Who watches the watchmen? by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here's what concerns me. We have large numbers of anonymous individuals sending information off to some guy who they assume is some sort of hero or on a moral high ground. In actuality we don't know what Assange's intentions or internal agenda is. It would be trivial for Assange to filter information and only display leaks that would damage the country of his choice. Not just at a government level, but at a corporate / economic level. It is impossible to monitor Wikileak's integrity or transparency. Do you think if Mr. Whistleblower's documents regarding Country X are not posted that Mr. Whistleblower is going to go to the established media and complain about that?

    Somehow Wikileaks has assumed a level of authority and trust that it has not earned nor that is remotely justified via its internal policies and structure. I have read numerous articles about Assange, and how he wants to be in control of everything and basically tells his "volunteers" to f*** off if they question him or disagree with what he does. He holds all the keys to the kingdom.

    Quotes of Assange's like this, from the interview linked in this story, concern me further:

    All I can say is it’s clear there were unethical practices, but it’s too early to suggest there’s criminality. We have to be careful about applying criminal labels to people until we’re very sure.

    Who is Assange to judge and / or label corporations or individuals? Isn't his role in life to throw static files on a server so other people can download them? Shouldn't the information speak for itself and be analyzed be individuals that know far more than him and his organization? I don't think Assange is the unwilling, unwitting sacrificial lamb that has been thrust into this horrible role. There seems to be an ego to stoke, or at least that is my opinion.

    Finally, one last personal nitpick. What the hell does "wiki" have to do with anything? I think he threw that term in there to gain additional trust and ride the coattails of Wikipedia. There is nothing "wiki" about wikileaks in any way whatsoever.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Who watches the watchmen? by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Finally, one last personal nitpick. What the hell does "wiki" have to do with anything? I think he threw that term in there to gain additional trust and ride the coattails of Wikipedia. There is nothing "wiki" about wikileaks in any way whatsoever.

      I've always though "wiki" was from the word "wick". That is to say, a candle or lantern wick will absorb and consolidate a substance. Wikipedia absorbs and consolidates knowledge. Wikileaks absorbs and consolidates scandals for redistribution and consumption.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Who watches the watchmen? by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is impossible to monitor Wikileak's integrity or transparency. Do you think if Mr. Whistleblower's documents regarding Country X are not posted that Mr. Whistleblower is going to go to the established media and complain about that?

      If it's bad for Wikileaks to operate without transparency, it's also bad for the US government and corporations to operate without transparency. Wikileaks is a partial solution to the latter problem. The former problem is quite easily solved. If you have information that Wikileaks won't publish, there's no shortage of ways of getting data on the internet anonymously.

      Who is Assange to judge and / or label corporations or individuals?

      He's a man with a conscience. It's the responsibility of all men with consciences to use them. That means calling out those who do wrong.

      Now I'd agree that Assange is on an ego-trip, but who in international politics is not?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Who watches the watchmen? by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Obviously that bastard could care less about all the bankers who will lose their livelihoods as a result of this information being made public. He's nothing but a traitor to the free market--and probably a communist, socialist, fascist, muslim, Nazi, child molesting rapist too!

      I hear he wasn't even born in the U.S.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:Who watches the watchmen? by LordKronos · · Score: 2, Informative

      Finally, one last personal nitpick. What the hell does "wiki" have to do with anything? I think he threw that term in there to gain additional trust and ride the coattails of Wikipedia. There is nothing "wiki" about wikileaks in any way whatsoever.

      When I think of "wiki" I think of the idea of user contributed knowledge, and that's what wikileaks is all about. The users are everyday people from industries and governments all over the world. They contribute the special knowledge they have about their industry/government.

  29. I disagree by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wikileaks isn't anti-US at all.

    Sure, most of the stuff released there puts the US in a bad light. But you know what? Wikileaks didn't actually do any of those things. They just let the world know about it. You think we'd be a better nation if nobody knew about any of this stuff?

    Not me my friend.

    I'm glad the untouchable people who harm the country I love just might get called to task for the things they've done. The end result will be a stronger (and hopefully more accountable) America.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:I disagree by c0lo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you are mistaken. Wikileaks could easily filter information to further any agenda it sees fit. Assange has shown that he is NOT impartial and strongly opposes many of the Us governments policies. Which is part of the concern many people here have with them currently.

      By taking sides you introduce the oppurtunity for your opponents to label you as having an agenda. And frankly they might be right. Look up some of my old posts, I had concerns about this months ago. Long before the media started spouting off about W-L.

      I dont know if W-L is a problem, but Assange has hurt their credibility.

      I almost take it as an insult: do you think I'm so stupid that I cannot decide by myself what opinion should I have, based on the authentic documents? Point to me to another set of authentic documents and I'll be happy to read them (as happy as I'm reading those posted by the Wikileaks).
      (also, do you take me of so stupid to accept your "You are mistaken" sentence without any appeal to my own judgement?)

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  30. Re:Wikileaks knows no bounds by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dude, wake up. Our country (and most others) is run by mobsters, traitors, and diverse sociopaths. In attacking Wikileaks' release of documents showing this corruption and criminality you are defending people and organizations far more damaging to individuals, countries, and societies than Wikileaks can ever be.

    What people need to learn is that wikileaks is not the enemy of the United States, it is the enemy of humanity.

    That remark is so far over the top, so ludicrous, and so simple-minded that one can only wonder who could possibly make it and why.

  31. Re:No Russian or Chinese revelations by CyberTech · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I assume this is because documents written in english get more world press.

    --
    -- CyberTech
  32. Re:Shorting Op. by BlueStraggler · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm sorry, but having someone steal something and then give it to you doesn't make it "public domain" or "public information", it just makes you an accomplice to the theft.

    If it is information about massive fraud and criminal enterprise against the public (and let's face it, that's exactly what it is going to be), it makes you an accomplice to a fucking hero.

  33. Re:Bring it. by jank1887 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "comes out before wikileaks is no more"

    I think we can all safely assume that Mr. Assange has a dead man's switch of some sort and the mass of stuff he collected will be sent to the BBC and NYTimes if he somehow "disappears"

  34. so they have an anti-us agenda. by unity100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    so what ?

    i dont remember any divine communique, any natural law, any galactic decree that says being 'anti-us' is something bad ? apparently, noone but americans got the memo.

    its ok being anti-china, its ok being anti-iran, its ok being anti-whatever, but, somehow, 'anti american' is a no-no eh ?

    what amazing level of self-centeredness.

    world doesnt revolve around u.s., note that.

    in addition, it was the wall street which scammed ENTIRE planet, in a fraud that was unparalleled in history. so much that they sold water vapor to governments, banks, major global corporations, and poisoned the credit supply of the world SO bad that, there is no end to it in sight. because noone can tell poisoned assets from valid ones.

    of course its going to be about a u.s. bank. geez.

    AND,

    wikileaks puts out ALL kinds of shit. its you americans' fault that you ALWAYS check it when there is something involving u.s., and see the front page about u.s. then go about bullshitting how they are anti-us. here, for your convenience, the link to where wikileaks indexes the shit it spurts out. i dont see 'us, us, us' written all over it. it wouldnt be a problem even if it was.

    http://mirror.infoboj.eu/

  35. We dont need to know everything by voss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One of the key parts of diplomacy requires diplomats to be able to give uncensored advice to political leaders that may offend the public or other leaders.
    In the long run this may reduce the quality of advice our leaders get which could have tragic consequences. Its the reason why executive
    priveledge exists. The most honest president the US has ever had, Grover Cleveland, fought tooth and nail for leaders being able to receive honest
    and confidential advice.

    A leak is only good think if it serves a legitimate public interest, not merely curiousity. If your intention is merely to cause
    embarassment for embarassments sake then youre not a whistleblower.

    1. Re:We dont need to know everything by unity100 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      that key part of diplomacy is the very part that allows governments to pull shit behind the backs of the people.

      and, it doesnt matter what's the nature of a leak - transparency, is transparency.

  36. 'no privacy' goes both ways by tekrat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    All I can say it "It's about F'ing time." Go Wikileaks Go!

    For years, we have had to put up with our privacy and our rights being stolen. Now we even have to appear naked to fly. Our privacy is always under attack, and yet we are told "it's for our own good" either by the governments that assault us, or the corporations that rip us off and sell our personal data to each other.

    FINALLY the time has come that governments and corporations are under the same microscope as the average joe. The internet has become the great equalizer. And notice how governments and corporations bristle at the mere thought that *their* privacy is being invaded, while they continue to casually rape us.

    Yes, when it's the governments/corporations that have their privacy assailed, "ohhh the guy is a terrorist" "Assage must be imprisoned" "DDoS isn't good enough for him, hanging's too good for him!", etc..., meanwhile, few are DDoS'ing the RIAA, TransUnion, Equifax, et al.

    THIS IS OUR REVOLUTION. And it's about time. Grab your pitchforks. Heads must roll.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:'no privacy' goes both ways by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So you are saying that because our privacy has been violated so should theirs? How does that help us? Wouldn't it be better to restore our privacy instead of violating others privacy? What about the economic fallout from all of this, warranted or not? What about those retirees who stand to loose even more of their fixed income because of the additional scandals? What about those who might loose jobs? Wikileaks states they want to rewrite history. In any revolution (as you put it), a lot of innocent people are hurt, far more than those actually fighting the revolution itself.

  37. your post by unity100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    has been, for some reason, hope-inducing.

  38. your post. by unity100 · · Score: 2

    I am embarrassed to call myself an American just because of what the US Government is trying to do... :-(. Can't wait for the next round of leaks :-)

    has restored my perspective towards american people.

  39. Big disclosure: China fed up with N. Korea leaders by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative

    The most significant disclosure so far is that China's leadership is fed up with North Korea acting like a "spoiled child". Previously, China was considered to be a supporter of North Korea. Now, confirming the info from Wikileaks, Chinese officials are admitting that China's leadership is fed up with the drama. This leak was a win for both the US and China. It gets the word out that China isn't going to back any stupid actions by Kim Jong-il. without China's leadership having to say so publicly. This helps calm the situation down. That one item outweighs any harm Wikileaks may possibly have done.)

    (Here's the best analysis of the Korean situation I've seen in print.)

  40. Re:This is just getting shameless by JavaBasedOS · · Score: 3, Informative

    The thing is that someone has to put themselves out for Wikileaks. Someone has to stand and defend its credibility. By putting himself out there, it's arguable that
    he's doing it to ensure Wikileaks continues to be a presence.

    I could be wrong though, maybe he is doing this for publicity. What we deem of his actions and what his rationale turns out to be are two different things.

  41. Re:were the leaks planted? by gustgr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So, they idea is: if a leak makes the US government look bad then it must be the real deal, but if it may serve the US government in some way then we have to suspect that it has been planted?

    Nice judgement you have there.

    This reminds me of what is going on with the leaks which state that the Government of Israel had notified both the Egyptian Government and the Palestinian Fatah before attacking the Gaza Strip during operation Cast Lead in 2008, mainly against Hammas (and thus making the Fatah look bad to the Palestinians). The international press is giving much more voice to those denying the leak than it gives to leaks which bring discomfort the US government.

  42. Ought to be interesting by cdrguru · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This should pose as a wakeup call to everyone - you clearly cannot trust governments, banks, pharamceutical companies or really anyone else. Everyone must be assumed to be untrustworthy until proven otherwise.

    And the proof is often 50 years after they are dead. So the message is Trust Nobody.

    The second thing is that if the government, banks and other corporations are evil and corrupt maybe we should do something about it? Boycotts are pointless but bombs, arson and executions might get somewhere. The idea would be that if you cannot trust the people with the power and money then they need to be eliminated. Maybe we can find some trustworthy people - or maybe things just need to be restructured in such a fashion so that nobody is required to be trusted any longer.

    This is probably another under-30/over-30 sort of battle, but this time there might actually be enough motivation to cause a worldwide revolt against anyone with more than a couple of nickles to rub together. The current US President has presented one possible dividing line between good and evil - $250,000 - but there may a more realistic one that is much, much lower. Sadly for Mr. Obama, it would appear that he is clearly in the evil camp with earnings well above $250,000.

    So? Are you ready for the revolution? Are you prepared to dedicate your life (or what is left of it) to eliminating oppression in the world by untrustworthy government and corporations? It sounds like Mr. Assange is clearly going down that road.

  43. Re:So... they are honoring the treaties? by jelizondo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yet America is still one of the few countries willing to honestly face its past and try to redress things it's done wrong.

    So are they ready to abide by the Fort Laramie treaties or do you mean something else?

    --
    Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
  44. The question is what guides him? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

    Conscience or Ego? There is an old intelligence maxim (that Tom Clancy has put in his books) that the reasons people betray trust, commit treason, and so on are MICE: Money, Ideology, Conscience, and Ego. It is quite a true maxim (hence its endurance).

    So what's his motivating factor? Probably not money, it isn't like he's getting rich off this. Probably not ideology either. Possibly, but he doesn't act like an ideologue so he's either not or is real good at hiding it. That leaves just conscience and ego.

    Supports claim conscience, of course. He is a moral man doing what he believes is right and necessary, despite the risks. However it could be ego too, he does it because it stokes his ego and makes him feel powerful and important, and attack those who he feels has wronged him in some way.

    So what's it matter? Well it matters because that will determine the quality of information that gets leaked, what sort of decision making process goes on. The MICE maxim is not important only in terms of counterintelligence, making sure people don't give up information, but in terms of evaluating your intelligence assets. It is important to understand what motivates them because that will tell you the quality and kind of information you get. They won't tell you everything, and will outright make shit up. Understanding what motivates them can tell you when those things happen.

    Same deal applies here. If he is acting out of ego, then the quality and nature of what we get shown will be very different then if he acts out of conscience.

  45. I dont get what you are saying. by unity100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    they are exposing kidnappings, tortures, murders, warmongers, bank scammers, fraudsters,

    and youre saying 'assange is doing shameles self promotion'.

    what the fuck are you on ? and some witless fool modded it interesting ? why ? because some idiot thinks that world governments betraying their countries' founding ideals, kidnapping, torturing people and then threatening ALLIES about it, is not important?

    a major bank fraud, of the global scale, extinguishing so many homes and bankrupting families like the wall street scam, is not important ?

    just what is your angle ? are you just another right wing nutjob ? you cant handle that some guy does THIS much against your government ? or jealous ?

    or, are you a witless moron that cant understand that if he hadnt put himself in the spotlight, he would be already dead by a roadside and noone would know it ?

  46. Oh good. Let's shoot the messenger. by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the final analysis, Assange only reports what is. If the politicians of the world can't handle that, the problem is with the politicians , not Mr. Assange.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  47. Re:No Russian or Chinese revelations by Johnny5000 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Its interesting that there never seem to be any internal Russian or Chinese revelations.

    Actually, it seems there are some Russian secrets:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/11208_moscowsbidtoblowupwikileaksrussiansplaybydifferentrules

    --
    The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
  48. scanner by jDeepbeep · · Score: 2, Funny

    US Gov and others are pissed because they're getting their pants pulled down.

    It's a little more like they've been put in a porno scanner at the airport.

    --
    Reply to That ||
  49. Re:This is just getting shameless by AfroTrance · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is about shameless self promotion and nothing more.

    Absolute Bullshit. Self-promotion to what end? You even say yourself he will eventually be killed (or "stopped"). So you are saying he is self-promoting to eventually be the target of a murder?

  50. Now, this I want to see by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Bank of America has been downright criminal in some of its conduct. I recently refinanced my mortgage and closed all of my accounts just to get from under those clowns. I've suspected that a lot of their dishonest conduct has been common business practice, now I'm sure I'll have that confirmed. Things I've seen happen:

    * Deposits delayed to trigger overdraft charges.
    * Flat out lied to about my escrow account size. They forced me to pay about $600 to "settle" the balance, then realized they made a "mistake" that took about 8 months to correct, netting me $1100 including $500 I was owed in the first place.
    * Steering me into a trap credit card when I wanted a vehicle loan. First payment was a day late and my interest rate exploded.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  51. Good Question, allow me to answer by Xaedalus · · Score: 2

    Hey Spun, good question.

    To answer your question, in my view of the world there IS Justice, and there should be hope of it. The debate between you and BlueLucidFox, and between Rakuen and CheekyJohnson (and touched on by others in this thread - never thought I'd spawn an actual serious, good discussion here) touched on a couple of key elements that I personally believe in: Justice, and Balance.

    I believe that Justice must be tempered with Balance (or Mercy, if you will). Yes, there is corruption. Yes, there is evil. And yes, we should always be vigilant in monitoring for, exposing of, and protecting the instruments of our society from those elements. We have to be exact and thorough in our safeguarding, and spend the time and effort to verify if there is corruption/evil, how far has it spread, what must be done to fix the problem, and what preventions do we need to have in place. To do so is hard, and takes time and resources.

    However, it is also wrong of people to smear our entire social structure with the insinuation that all those in authority are corrupt (without proof) and then insist on tearing down everything -- and conveniently rebuilding with themselves in charge. At that point, all we've done is exchange the Devil we know for the Devil we don't, and all too often the new Devil is exactly the same as the old-all he did was switch suits. Justice without Mercy leaves us wide open to such actions. It takes Mercy to realize that we don't have to destroy the whole system, just prune the parts that need pruning.

    Hope that answers your question?

    --
    Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    1. Re:Good Question, allow me to answer by spun · · Score: 2

      Absolutely, and now I'm glad I took out most of the snark in my post before posting it. The concept of Justice does not force you to look any further for a root cause than an immediate perpetrator. Mercy forces you to look at the perpetrator as a person, and a link in a chain of cause and effect. It forces you to look further for root causes, and unless one understands root causes of oppression, violence and hatred, simply punishing perpetrators will never remove them.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton