Former MI6 Chief Credits WikiLeaks With Helping Spark Revolutions
EnergyScholar writes "Sir Richard Dearlove, former Intelligence Chief of MI6, credits WikiLeaks with helping spark revolutions in the Middle East, in (what was supposed to be) an off-the-record speech. 'I would definitely draw parallels at the moment between the wave of political unrest which is sweeping through the Middle East in a very exciting and rather extraordinary fashion and also the WikiLeaks phenomenon. Really, what ties these two events together, and of course a number of other events, is the diffusion of power, away from the states and the empowerment of individuals, and small groups of individuals, by technology,' he said."
I think the fault is of the original reporter at the Register who either did not understand what is said (text comprehension) or decided to use a bit of journalistic 'slight of hand' to pazzazz his rather dull story. In any case it's clear the article contains no content supporting its title. And slashdot? I've been reading it on/off for 14 years and there's clearly an exponential decay (with us being just at the beginning of the drop; who know where this site will be in 10 years).
The technology he's talking about has been wide spread since 2001 at least, and here we are a few years into their last major release and we've got revolutions the like of which we haven't seen in 40 years. If nothing else, wikileaks made our rulers look like idiots, and their army's stopped supporting them. Any revolution ends when the military starts shooting, and in a few cases the army said no. This despite they've done it before. So there.
And besides, this is the former HEAD of British intelligence. He wouldn't bother making parallels for the sheer fun of it. He's trying to make a point.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Correct me if I'm wrong but I do recall that the protests in Tunesia were sparked by leaks (on WikiLeaks) about misbehaviour, corruption and self enrichment by their then-government. This sparked serious anger, and caused an uprising that quickly grew in strength when people realised that by standing together they were far stronger than their government.
People in nearby countries saw the news - Internet helps to spread it quickly - and organised themselves to rise against their respective governments. Egypt started, they also found their government to be weak and overthrown quickly, and again the news spread.
Many more countries see serious unrest, and I expect it's far from over. Especially Lybia where the government is stronger than expected and which is now descending into total chaos and civil war.
It's not just coinciding, it's a direct relation. Easy spread of information, in part facilitated by WikiLeaks, and easy and fast communication between people.
That's why you don't "announce" leaks. You either release or don't release documents.
This is one of the reasons why Daniel Domscheit-Berg (and several others) left Wikileaks. He thought it was wrong of Julian Assange to make threats about releasing specific leaks.
Also: Since last year, Wikileaks doesn't have a working submission system. There's still no way to send wikileaks anything right now. Assange stated in several interviews that Wikileaks wasn't accepting documents anymore because they were overwhelmed with the Iraq war/Afghanistan/State cable leaks and that they didn't have the staff to process new submissions. That was only half of the story. The other half is that one of the Wikileaks members that left last year at the same time as Daniel Domscheit-Berg was the guy who coded the submission system. When the coder left, Wikileaks wasn't able to keep the submission system running because there was no one else capable of maintaining it and making sure it stayed secure (given that the submission system is probably the most sensitive part of the site).
Check out this interview with Domscheit-Berg for more about why he left Wikileaks.
In a speech last night Gaddafi, an ally of the ousted president, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, said he was "pained" by the fall of the Tunisian government. He claimed protesters had been led astray by WikiLeaks disclosures detailing the corruption in Ben Ali's family and his repressive regime. The leaked cables were written by "ambassadors in order to create chaos", Deutsche Press-Agentur reported Gaddafi as saying.
The Iranian government have claimed that Wikileaks is a U.S. plot to destabilise anti-colonislist governments.
the release was an organized coordinated move, adding that such a huge volume of documents could not have been released without the cooperation of intelligence services of Western governments, in particular the US.
A former Pakistanti General has also claimed Wikileaks is a CIA/Mossad plot:
The US has a hand in this plot, and these reports (posted by the WikiLeaks website) are part of the US psychological warfare
Disclaimer: Tunisia: Don't Call It a WikiLeaks Revolution
Of course, just because they have running water and phones doesn't make it "okay" for this division to exist. In the long run, this inequality breeds crime and corruption, makes innovative businesses and ideas less likely, and is overall bad for the economy.
In other words, wealth inequality with or without context is a fine measure of the quality of a civilization.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201102/how-economic-inequality-is-damaging-our-social-structure
Income Inequality: Too Big to Ignore: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/business/17view.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1287314086-lFlE4a4AP+wkJ4dprPfTaw I keep saying it. The far right is working hard to make life miserable for their own grandchildren. There are only so many chairs at the big table and your name isn't on one of them.
Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
No what is sad is that to be labeled evil now you simply don't support the status quo which is what our current corporatist state loves with all its little black heart. I mean if they hadn't fallen even though their regimes were truly evil I'm sure the US Gov would be happily sending billions of our dollars to monsters like the Shah and Mubarak just to "ensure stability" no matter how much blood and suffering that stability caused.
So it is actually really simple: anyone who doesn't support the status quo and the top 1% no matter what is an evil socialist pinko terrorist scum. And as long as things tomorrow stay the same as today, so the top 1%ers can leach more money from the system and pad their already 60%+ take of the economy, no matter how much misery they bring? Well then it is all good because it brings "stability" to the system don't ya know?
That is why as much as I hate to say this I agree with Glen Beck 110%. For the good of the US and the world it is time for the US to "Be Switzerland" and stay the hell out of everyone's business and tend to our own. Bring home the troops, shut down the piles of overseas bases, stop trying to be the world's policeman and let them take care of themselves. The past 80 years have seen the USA prop up one truly mad dog scumbag after another with the taxes of the American people all so some company can get bananas 10c cheaper and it is time to end. Take the billions we are blowing on the military and invest it in our own people and renewable energy and let the mid east sort itself out.
Like the misery that has been the drug war the current path has been shown to be nothing but bloodshed and suffering for the masses for the enrichment of the few, and it is time for it to end. Any Tea partier or other third candidate that wants to be pres? Run on the "Be Switzerland" platform, as the American people are tired of being taxed to pay for monsters. It is time to stay home, it is time to "Be Switzerland".
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.