WikiLeaks Publishes Cable Archive In Full

We recently discussed news that WikiLeaks had complained of a password leak which threatened the encryption of unredacted documents contained in the Cablegate archive. Now, reader solanum writes with this update: "According to the Guardian, 'WikiLeaks has published its full archive of 251,000 secret US diplomatic cables, without redactions, potentially exposing thousands of individuals named in the documents to detention, harm or putting their lives in danger. The move has been strongly condemned by the five previous media partners – the Guardian, New York Times, El Pais, Der Spiegel and Le Monde – who have worked with WikiLeaks publishing carefully selected and redacted documents.' In the same article The Guardian gives further explanation of the controversy reported earlier, suggesting that Assange went against standard protocol in providing the master password to the newspaper."

Comments

Re:Fantastic, stunning deceit by The Guardian

[ScentCone]

but a picture that Wikileaks now places someone at risk that wasn't placed at risk earlier through joint efforts is monumentally deceitful

Nonsense. Before Assange and crew offered to help the original criminal move copies of all of that stolen data, the people named in those documents were less at risk. Assange acted to handle that data and make a big show of picking and choosing how and to whom he would dribble it out (to maximize his ego-boosting press coverage), but it was his group's actions that took one bumbling, screwed-up idiot's lame data-dump-theft and turned it into widely reachable collection that, of course, inevitably would be clear text for everyone at some point.

Monumentally deceitful? That would be Assange pretending this wasn't what he wanted all along. He's got a political agenda and a personal need for the spotlight, and this allows him to grind both axes. And of course his sycophantic apologist fanboi club will simply say that no information should ever be discreet, and so this is all good, blah blah blah.

You can argue about blame

Not at all. The guy who stole the documents is primarily to blame, and the guy who set up the infrastructure to hold it for him, and to spread it around is the other party. Period.

Re:Wikileaks - we don't care who we injure or kill

[rubycodez]

I totally reject your flippant attitude toward evil doing by the USA, or notion that we should excuse it because that's historically normal. We claim to stand for justice, freedom and human rights, and that is what should guide our actions. If our interests, and we ourselves, get harmed *because* we do evil, then GOOD. we deserve it, and should take that harm which we reap from sowing evil as warning to change our ways to what we know is right.

You have the attitude of every tyrant's lackey and every large corporation which profits on human misery's minion. It is wrong