-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Why do you think he is such a slimeball, Bilbo? I have been watching interviews with him and I think he carries himself very well. He is articulate and explains himself reasonably enough. He also explains Wikileaks and why they operate and also tells of their vetting process. I don't really understand why you hate him so much, but if that's how you feel then fair enough.
So he's finally being let out on bail? About time. I think all of this has only enhanced the support for Wikileaks and I think they should continue to play a valid role in the future. We need a site like this as the elites with their secrecy have only gone and brought us to war through deception and lies and the media simply lapped up government press releases instead of finding out the truth.
Wikileaks is valid and the response of some of these so called US elites has been borderline insane. Have him shot? Well, in that case let's have Bush brought in for his war crimes? The later is infinitely more reasonable.
I hate him because he is anti democratic. His site is unnacountable to anyone, they don't handle the information they given responsibiliy. He is a complete hypocritye refusing to explain his own site's finances whilst indiscriminately shining a spotlight on everyone else.
He has betrayed his informant Bradley Manning in failing to hand over any of the promised money for his defence, even Mannin's legal team have now turned on Assange.
You cannot have diplomacy without the ability to say things in confidence, and just taking away people's ability to speak in confidence and betraying the private trust of many individuals from many countries he serves only to damage diplomatic relations between countries and risks the lives of both civilians and military personel.
He himself is unelected, unaccountable and has set himself as an almost God like,dicatatorial figure, who is not answerable to anyone. He once famously wrote 'I am the heart and soul of this organisation, its founder, its philosopher, original coder, organiser, financier and all the rest. If you have a problem with me, piss off'.
Hardly the words of a man with a commitment to democratic process.
What he is doing has nothing to do with freedom of speech. With freedom of speech comes responsibility, and accountability. You need to balance the freedom to publish and all information you like against considerations of privacy and the public interest. Assange doesn't do that. What he does is the equivilent of rifling through people's dustbins. Investigative journalists are subject to certain rules and regulations. They are responsible and accountable for the information they uncover and select to reveal. Assange is not.
He is answerable to no one, he's not elected and he does not conduct himself in a responible way.
I can't stand the man.
In his defence, a close look at the sexual allegations against him highlights the fact that he is clearly on trial for his website rather than being a rapist. Those charges are utterly ridiculous and absurd. I agree with you there is no evidence of any sexual offences being carried out by him at all. The two women both consented to have sex with him, and only cried foul when each found out he had slept with the other. I think one is suing him because he did not use a condom, and the other because he broke the condom he used with her. The two women just sound like opportunists so it was right he got bail.
But it doesn't change the fact that he is a cunt.
Bilbo, are newpapers democratic in the way that they are subservient to the large corporate backers that they have? Are newpapers democratic in the way that they will spoonfeed you government press releases as news and drum up the case for illegal and immoral wars? Are governments democratic in how they will ignore the viewpoints of the majority of the population to go to war regardless?
In this sense Wikileaks is profoundly democratic in that they are supplying us with the truth regarding what our undemocratic governments are doing. If there was a Wikileaks when the drums of war were banging for Iraq then maybe there would have been no war. The mass secrecy and lack of democracy was what led us to these wars. The idea that Wikileaks is undemocratic is the opposite. They are telling us things that our governments will not reveal. That is democratic. It is allowing people access to the political system that the political system would otherwise deny.
He is the owner of a website, but the recent releases have been along with the Guardian and The New York Times, again...quite democratic considering it is following a media model in this instance. The information is what it is. If he was playing god then he would be altering and fabricating, but as it is these are simply documents being released as they are. And they have a vetting process to avoid harm. So far only a 1000 or so documents have been released as they continue to monitor prior to release.
He is what he is, a man on a mission to reveal the actions of dishonest government elites. There is nothing wrong with that and a great deal of good as far as I can see. The sex crimes charges are merely an attempt to divert attention. If America ever attempts to charge this man with espionage then you can say goodbye to any pretence at America even pretending to be an open democratic nation.
Fascist state 101 here we are. Try to tell the truth on the basis of someone elses leaked papers then we will have you put away, try to get on a bus and we will search your arse, corporate interests...fancy a lot of money funnelled away from the taxpayers?...here you go. Scary times!
All totally true and right here right now. Even Lyle has run scared of debating this stuff. ;D
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Why do you think he is such a slimeball, Bilbo? I have been watching interviews with him and I think he carries himself very well. He is articulate and explains himself reasonably enough. He also explains Wikileaks and why they operate and also tells of their vetting process. I don't really understand why you hate him so much, but if that's how you feel then fair enough.
So he's finally being let out on bail? About time. I think all of this has only enhanced the support for Wikileaks and I think they should continue to play a valid role in the future. We need a site like this as the elites with their secrecy have only gone and brought us to war through deception and lies and the media simply lapped up government press releases instead of finding out the truth.
Wikileaks is valid and the response of some of these so called US elites has been borderline insane. Have him shot? Well, in that case let's have Bush brought in for his war crimes? The later is infinitely more reasonable.
I hate him because he is anti democratic. His site is unnacountable to anyone, they don't handle the information they given responsibiliy. He is a complete hypocritye refusing to explain his own site's finances whilst indiscriminately shining a spotlight on everyone else.
He has betrayed his informant Bradley Manning in failing to hand over any of the promised money for his defence, even Mannin's legal team have now turned on Assange.
You cannot have diplomacy without the ability to say things in confidence, and just taking away people's ability to speak in confidence and betraying the private trust of many individuals from many countries he serves only to damage diplomatic relations between countries and risks the lives of both civilians and military personel.
He himself is unelected, unaccountable and has set himself as an almost God like,dicatatorial figure, who is not answerable to anyone. He once famously wrote 'I am the heart and soul of this organisation, its founder, its philosopher, original coder, organiser, financier and all the rest. If you have a problem with me, piss off'.
Hardly the words of a man with a commitment to democratic process.
What he is doing has nothing to do with freedom of speech. With freedom of speech comes responsibility, and accountability. You need to balance the freedom to publish and all information you like against considerations of privacy and the public interest. Assange doesn't do that. What he does is the equivilent of rifling through people's dustbins. Investigative journalists are subject to certain rules and regulations. They are responsible and accountable for the information they uncover and select to reveal. Assange is not.
He is answerable to no one, he's not elected and he does not conduct himself in a responible way.
I can't stand the man.
In his defence, a close look at the sexual allegations against him highlights the fact that he is clearly on trial for his website rather than being a rapist. Those charges are utterly ridiculous and absurd. I agree with you there is no evidence of any sexual offences being carried out by him at all. The two women both consented to have sex with him, and only cried foul when each found out he had slept with the other. I think one is suing him because he did not use a condom, and the other because he broke the condom he used with her. The two women just sound like opportunists so it was right he got bail.
But it doesn't change the fact that he is a cunt.
Bilbo, are newpapers democratic in the way that they are subservient to the large corporate backers that they have? Are newpapers democratic in the way that they will spoonfeed you government press releases as news and drum up the case for illegal and immoral wars? Are governments democratic in how they will ignore the viewpoints of the majority of the population to go to war regardless?
In this sense Wikileaks is profoundly democratic in that they are supplying us with the truth regarding what our undemocratic governments are doing. If there was a Wikileaks when the drums of war were banging for Iraq then maybe there would have been no war. The mass secrecy and lack of democracy was what led us to these wars. The idea that Wikileaks is undemocratic is the opposite. They are telling us things that our governments will not reveal. That is democratic. It is allowing people access to the political system that the political system would otherwise deny.
He is the owner of a website, but the recent releases have been along with the Guardian and The New York Times, again...quite democratic considering it is following a media model in this instance. The information is what it is. If he was playing god then he would be altering and fabricating, but as it is these are simply documents being released as they are. And they have a vetting process to avoid harm. So far only a 1000 or so documents have been released as they continue to monitor prior to release.
He is what he is, a man on a mission to reveal the actions of dishonest government elites. There is nothing wrong with that and a great deal of good as far as I can see. The sex crimes charges are merely an attempt to divert attention. If America ever attempts to charge this man with espionage then you can say goodbye to any pretence at America even pretending to be an open democratic nation.
Fascist state 101 here we are. Try to tell the truth on the basis of someone elses leaked papers then we will have you put away, try to get on a bus and we will search your arse, corporate interests...fancy a lot of money funnelled away from the taxpayers?...here you go. Scary times!
All totally true and right here right now. Even Lyle has run scared of debating this stuff. ;D
I do definitely agree we are heading in the direction of a facist state. I mean here in the UK schools now fingerprint our primary school kids, which even the EU has told Britain we must stop doing. The ONLY time I have agreed with a directive from the EU :D
But there has to be an accountability process and the responsible handling of information. Newspapers are subjects to load of regulations, restrictions and legal process, Assange is subject to nobody.
If you have wikileaks then you cannot have diplomacy, it's as simple as that. It is essential for the running of every kind of life, public and private life, that things can be said in confidence.
I don't want to live in a facist state. But neither do I want to live in a world where nobody can speak their private thoughts because of men like Assange who are snooping and spying on you.
Thing of it on a personal level. Imagine if someone here hacked into your personal email address or your school emails and posted all of your private stuff up on here for us all to see. Imagine someobody posting up your medical records, criminal records, private photo's etc.
It's simply wrong and I cannot endorse it in any way.
I'm not against revelations being made that are in the public interest. Maybe some of what wikileaks has revealed is. But by releasing 250,000 cables most of which serve no public interest other than tittilation only undermines true democracy, trust and freedom of speech.
Confidentiallity is an incredibly important requirement for all forms of human life. For sure, sometimes it can be breached when the public interest level is acute, as was the case with Daniel Elsberg blowing the whistle on the Vietnam war. But jjust the revealing of documents for revealing's sake is fundamnetally wrong.
He deserves considerable jail time in my opinion.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
I heard Assange and Wikileaks were going to start going after the Catholic Church....if that's the case then it won't be long Julian :deadnew:
Say what you will about the Catholic Church, but they still carry weight and they can and will still have people killed and I would think Assange is really playing with fire on this one. The CIA may get him locked up, but the Church will have him 6 feet under and not bat an eye.
This may be bad of me, but I do hope Michael Moore gets caught in some crossfire....they would have to be armor piercing rounds though to penetrate that mass of blubber that encases him.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
I heard Assange and Wikileaks were going to start going after the Catholic Church....if that's the case then it won't be long Julian :deadnew:
Say what you will about the Catholic Church, but they still carry weight and they can and will still have people killed and I would think Assange is really playing with fire on this one. The CIA may get him locked up, but the Church will have him 6 feet under and not bat an eye.
This may be bad of me, but I do hope Michael Moore gets caught in some crossfire....they would have to be armor piercing rounds though to penetrate that mass of blubber that encases him.
Moore would be an ambitious kill for sure. They would need to take advice from the Chinese Whaling industry for that hit.
I just really hate Assange. Furthermore his actions won't improve transparancy but will only serve to make nations and corporations more secretive. He is just doing damage.
The recklessness of it is criminal too. It's like if the police when called to carry out a search warrent just listed every finding on the internet, every item, every bill, letter, record, files on the pc, phone calls, web sites visited etc whether it was relevent or not and whether any evidence was found.
Privacy and confidentiallity HAS to be protected. They are FUNDAMENTAL human rights, at both a personal and organisational, even national level.
I don't object to whistle blowing when it in the public interest, and the documents and details uncovered and published are strictly to do with the corruption at hand, but just hacking into a private server and stealing every cable and putting them all on the net is not moral. It is theft, a betrayal of trust, espionage, criminal and I would say terrorism.
He should get at least 25 years imo.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
I heard Assange and Wikileaks were going to start going after the Catholic Church....if that's the case then it won't be long Julian :deadnew:
Say what you will about the Catholic Church, but they still carry weight and they can and will still have people killed and I would think Assange is really playing with fire on this one. The CIA may get him locked up, but the Church will have him 6 feet under and not bat an eye.
This may be bad of me, but I do hope Michael Moore gets caught in some crossfire....they would have to be armor piercing rounds though to penetrate that mass of blubber that encases him.
Moore would be an ambitious kill for sure. They would need to take advice from the Chinese Whaling industry for that hit.
I just really hate Assange. Furthermore his actions won't improve transparancy but will only serve to make nations and corporations more secretive. He is just doing damage.
The recklessness of it is criminal too. It's like if the police when called to carry out a search warrent just listed every finding on the internet, every item, every bill, letter, record, files on the pc, phone calls, web sites visited etc whether it was relevent or not and whether any evidence was found.
Privacy and confidentiallity HAS to be protected. They are FUNDAMENTAL human rights, at both a personal and organisational, even national level.
I don't object to whistle blowing when it in the public interest, and the documents and details uncovered and published are strictly to do with the corruption at hand, but just hacking into a private server and stealing every cable and putting them all on the net is not moral. It is theft, a betrayal of trust, espionage, criminal and I would say terrorism.
He should get at least 25 years imo.
Simply put Assange is a 21st Century Robespierre...he sees an evil in the government, but he has an evil inside of him that would just love to wield the power of the government. His movement will eat him alive....soon people will find out the truth about him and that he's not in this for the betterment of society, but he's in it because he wants to be a Cult of Personality, he's a narcissistic anarchist, and people (miles included) will eventually become disenchanted with this liberal darling....it happens very often, hell look at what has become of American politics and in only 2 years. Once people thought the Republican party dead, and now who's getting kicked out of office this January? I do love it when the naive idealistic liberals get a stiff dose of reality and they come crashing down in a heap clutching their coffee, smoking their cigarettes, and thinking to themselves "What went wrong? Why did this happen?"...it went wrong because it's not a perfect world, it happened because liberals don't govern in reality they are off in some far off philosophical dream world where people live together in peace and love each other and are supportive of one another and they never compete or have flaws like greed or corruption and the people receiving welfare are just hardworking folks down on their luck and they will take the opportunity the government (and the tax payers) have given them to pay it forward and actually contribute to society......oh it's going to be a doozy of a hangover when you libs wake up from this one and I'll be laughing my ass off at you.
:fighting0043gi5:
I forsee very few positive outcomes for Assange....I do think assasination is a distinct possibility, he's pissing off too many people to get out of this unscathed. I for one am looking forward to his downfall with great anticipation...if I saw him, I might even join in.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
I heard Assange and Wikileaks were going to start going after the Catholic Church....if that's the case then it won't be long Julian :deadnew:
Say what you will about the Catholic Church, but they still carry weight and they can and will still have people killed and I would think Assange is really playing with fire on this one. The CIA may get him locked up, but the Church will have him 6 feet under and not bat an eye.
This may be bad of me, but I do hope Michael Moore gets caught in some crossfire....they would have to be armor piercing rounds though to penetrate that mass of blubber that encases him.
Moore would be an ambitious kill for sure. They would need to take advice from the Chinese Whaling industry for that hit.
I just really hate Assange. Furthermore his actions won't improve transparancy but will only serve to make nations and corporations more secretive. He is just doing damage.
The recklessness of it is criminal too. It's like if the police when called to carry out a search warrent just listed every finding on the internet, every item, every bill, letter, record, files on the pc, phone calls, web sites visited etc whether it was relevent or not and whether any evidence was found.
Privacy and confidentiallity HAS to be protected. They are FUNDAMENTAL human rights, at both a personal and organisational, even national level.
I don't object to whistle blowing when it in the public interest, and the documents and details uncovered and published are strictly to do with the corruption at hand, but just hacking into a private server and stealing every cable and putting them all on the net is not moral. It is theft, a betrayal of trust, espionage, criminal and I would say terrorism.
He should get at least 25 years imo.
Simply put Assange is a 21st Century Robespierre...he sees an evil in the government, but he has an evil inside of him that would just love to wield the power of the government. His movement will eat him alive....soon people will find out the truth about him and that he's not in this for the betterment of society, but he's in it because he wants to be a Cult of Personality, he's a narcissistic anarchist, and people (miles included) will eventually become disenchanted with this liberal darling....it happens very often, hell look at what has become of American politics and in only 2 years. Once people thought the Republican party dead, and now who's getting kicked out of office this January?
:fighting0043gi5:
I forsee very few positive outcomes for Assange....I do think assasination is a distinct possibility, he's pissing off too many people to get out of this unscathed. I for one am looking forward to his downfall with great anticipation...if I saw him, I might even join in.
Yeah he's definitely a narcissist, people who have worked with him have said as much. I was reading about one such supporter only yesterday in the Telegraph who has quit Wikileaks because of his unethical behaviour and unnacountability.
The thing with Miles is, he has these ideals in his head, and he's committed to those ideals, and anybody who in any way seeks to further those ideals is ok by him, no matter how nefarious their methods or how violent or unnacceptable their behaviour.
When it comes to Israel, he hates them and hates everything they do. The good is ignored, the bad is everything and what is absent is imagined. The same with America, the same with Amir Khan.
So Assange is the good guy and always will be, no matter what skeletons he has in his closet or how unscrupulous his methods.
Palestine and opposers of Isreal will equally always be the good guys, victims of an out of control terror state, in every and all situations. Even when evidence brought to light via his hero Assange shows that those in the Arab world actually worry more about Iran than Israel his commitment to his ideals causes him to dismiss Egypt, the UAE, Bahrain, Syria and Saudi Arabia as tinpot dictatorships whose opinions can be ignored and that Israel is remains the only true menace in the region,
Likewise Khan's opponent's will be treated unfairly by referees, blighted by bad luck, or if Khan destroys them, then soft opposition, handpicked to make him look good.
That's why these threads are always such good entertainment for me, to see how far he will go to sustain his views even if it means giving up on more important ideals like the right to privacy and confidentiallity in the case of Assange, the condemnation of violence in the case of Palestinian attacks on Israel or the ideals of fair play and proper sporting conduct within boxing. All of these can ideals be tossed aside to ensure that blame is levelled at the appropriate party in Miles' eyes. :p
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
I've not SUGGESTED he should be assasinated, I'm saying it's a possibility that he will be....I don't know if you realize this miles, but most politicians (and governments are made up of politicians) do not like their dirty laundry aired out in public. Assange is playing a dangerous game and he's too confident in himself and his sources to know that someone will pull his card if he continues.
Assasination is 1 thing that COULD happen, as could an "accident", a long stretch in jail, an "accident" in jail, a fight in jail, etc.
You libs put your faith in this cat thinking he'll lead you to a new world of politics based on truth and transparency (like another someone that promised those exact things) and you just get the wool pulled over your eyes. WHEN ANYONE IN POLITICS TELLS YOU THEY ARE THERE TO SPREAD TRUTH THEY ARE LYING AND BUYING INTO IT IS STUPID ON AN ASTRONOMICAL LEVEL...Assange has his reasons for doing what he does #1 Power #2 Money....but those things are relative: power to 1 person isn't the power a government has, wealth to one person isn't the wealth of a nation. Assange is over playing his hand and he'll be lucky....DAMN LUCKY to see the other side of this situation...even if he was putting out information the CIA (or another super secret part of the government) told him to put out.
Robespierre....fucking Robespierre miles....I'm telling you
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media. These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
...is there a party anywhere that is based on "looking out for ordinary people"? If there is I can bet you it isn't successful because #1 ordinary people don't carry enough weight to get make deals and get things done politically and #2 ordinary people don't stay ordinary when they have power over other people (be they richer or poorer)....it's just a fact of life and you not noticing that is shocking, surely you're smart enought o see that.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media.
These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
Assange does NO investigation though! All he does is go into a house, catalogue all the contents and then put it up on the internet for all to see, irrespective of what the public interest is or whether any crime has been committed.
It's completely unethical.
Actually, I don't disapprove of all the Wikileaks revelations. I thought the video showing the US helicopter crew gunning down a crowd of innocent civilians was in the public interest. It's not that I disaprove of certain crimes or potential coverups being exposed.
But Assange is not doing that. He's just putting everything up on the internet wheter relevant or criminal or not.
How does it serve the public interest in any way (or improve diplomatic relations between countries) for him to reveal that one diplomat thinks one nation's president is a joke?
One particular cable that really annoyed me was the disclosure of certain 'critical sites', designated by America as being crucial to their national security. Many of these sites were not in the US, and were civilian infrastructures.
How is revealing that in any way helpful to peace? How does it serve the public interest? How can you not see the recklessness of such actions in an age of global terrorism. Would you, for example now want to be a worker at the snake anti venom laboratory in Australia, now it's been identified as a critical US infrastructure? Would you not be pretty pissed off at Assange for identifying your place of work as an ideal location for a terror attack?
There is no moral basis for releasing such information, and Assange is just endangering the lives of ordinary people around the world with such reckless disclosures.
He absolutely needs to be stopped imo.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
...is there a party anywhere that is based on "looking out for ordinary people"? If there is I can bet you it isn't successful because #1 ordinary people don't carry enough weight to get make deals and get things done politically and #2 ordinary people don't stay ordinary when they have power over other people (be they richer or poorer)....it's just a fact of life and you not noticing that is shocking, surely you're smart enought o see that.
I think there have historically been parties that have looked out for the interests of ordinary people. For instance, The Labour Party that came to power after WW2 introduced the welfare state meaning protection for ordinary citizens from "the cradle to the grave". University education for many years was free, healthcare was and is free at the point of use, utilities were nationalised etc etc. These were all done in the greater interests of society at large. Of course, much of this has been eradicated as Thatcher attempted to bring US style Friedman economics to the UK, but we do still have the health service.
Governments should exist to protect the interests of their citizens, not to protect themselves and their corporate buddies. In most countries we have found a balance between these two ideals, but in America you have two parties who have fallen way too far to one side. There is no party representing the 'people' whence socialism for the elite. The poor huddled masses have nothing and it amazes me that we haven't seen widespread social unrest.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media.
These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
Assange does NO investigation though! All he does is go into a house, catalogue all the contents and then put it up on the internet for all to see, irrespective of what the public interest is or whether any crime has been committed.
It's completely unethical.
Actually, I don't disapprove of all the Wikileaks revelations. I thought the video showing the US helicopter crew gunning down a crowd of innocent civilians was in the public interest. It's not that I disaprove of certain crimes or potential coverups being exposed.
But Assange is not doing that. He's just putting everything up on the internet wheter relevant or criminal or not.
How does it serve the public interest in any way (or improve diplomatic relations between countries) for him to reveal that one diplomat thinks one nation's president is a joke?
One particular cable that really annoyed me was the disclosure of certain 'critical sites', designated by America as being crucial to their national security. Many of these sites were not in the US, and were civilian infrastructures.
How is revealing that in any way helpful to peace? How does it serve the public interest? How can you not see the recklessness of such actions in an age of global terrorism. Would you, for example now want to be a worker at the snake anti venom laboratory in Australia, now it's been identified as a critical US infrastructure? Would you not be pretty pissed off at Assange for identifying your place of work as an ideal location for a terror attack?
There is no moral basis for releasing such information, and Assange is just endangering the lives of ordinary people around the world with such reckless disclosures.
He absolutely needs to be stopped imo.
Investigative journalism means to find out the facts about an event. To reveal something that was hitherto unknown. To move beyond merely parroting what the Pentagon is telling you. Sure, Assange is not doing traditional investigative journalism, but his organisation is gaining access to the facts. Wikileaks has sources who provide the information and the information is then vetted and revealed to the public. The recent releases were vetted along with generally respected newspaper publications. There is nothing unethical about this behaviour.
There is absolutely no reason for him to be stopped. Without Wikileaks we will simply have power continuing to act unchecked and have further threats to global peace commited by the leading proponents of state sponsored terrorism.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
I think there have historically been parties that have looked out for the interests of ordinary people. For instance, The Labour Party that came to power after WW2 introduced the welfare state meaning protection for ordinary citizens from "the cradle to the grave". University education for many years was free, healthcare was and is free at the point of use, utilities were nationalised etc etc. These were all done in the greater interests of society at large. Of course, much of this has been eradicated as Thatcher attempted to bring US style Friedman economics to the UK, but we do still have the health service.
Governments should exist to protect the interests of their citizens, not to protect themselves and their corporate buddies. In most countries we have found a balance between these two ideals, but in America you have two parties who have fallen way too far to one side. There is no party representing the 'people' whence socialism for the elite. The poor huddled masses have nothing and it amazes me that we haven't seen widespread social unrest.
The Labour Party is shit....they put too much on their plate and this generation can't pay for it and your college age kids were so entitled they riot at the thought of paying for their education....who are you guys trying to be Italian train workers? French people in general?
Rules for miles to learn
#1 You NEVER get something for nothing
#2 Entitlement programs (welfare, healthcare, etc) never stop growing therefore you can never have enough taxes so the end game is you break your nation and you break your people and when all is said and done everybody has a bunch of nothing.....Socialist Nirvana acheived
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media.
These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
Assange does NO investigation though! All he does is go into a house, catalogue all the contents and then put it up on the internet for all to see, irrespective of what the public interest is or whether any crime has been committed.
It's completely unethical.
Actually, I don't disapprove of all the Wikileaks revelations. I thought the video showing the US helicopter crew gunning down a crowd of innocent civilians was in the public interest. It's not that I disaprove of certain crimes or potential coverups being exposed.
But Assange is not doing that. He's just putting everything up on the internet wheter relevant or criminal or not.
How does it serve the public interest in any way (or improve diplomatic relations between countries) for him to reveal that one diplomat thinks one nation's president is a joke?
One particular cable that really annoyed me was the disclosure of certain 'critical sites', designated by America as being crucial to their national security. Many of these sites were not in the US, and were civilian infrastructures.
How is revealing that in any way helpful to peace? How does it serve the public interest? How can you not see the recklessness of such actions in an age of global terrorism. Would you, for example now want to be a worker at the snake anti venom laboratory in Australia, now it's been identified as a critical US infrastructure? Would you not be pretty pissed off at Assange for identifying your place of work as an ideal location for a terror attack?
There is no moral basis for releasing such information, and Assange is just endangering the lives of ordinary people around the world with such reckless disclosures.
He absolutely needs to be stopped imo.
Investigative journalism means to find out the facts about an event. To reveal something that was hitherto unknown. To move beyond merely parroting what the Pentagon is telling you. Sure, Assange is not doing traditional investigative journalism, but his organisation is gaining access to the facts. Wikileaks has sources who provide the information and the information is then vetted and revealed to the public. The recent releases were vetted along with generally respected newspaper publications. There is nothing unethical about this behaviour.
There is absolutely no reason for him to be stopped. Without Wikileaks we will simply have power continuing to act unchecked and have further threats to global peace commited by the leading proponents of state sponsored terrorism.
So of the 250,000 cables that have been released which ones reveal corruption that was in the public interest for us to know? How has America been exposed by these leaks? You keep talking about this corrupt government but what corruption specifically has been revealed thanks these 250,000 cables?
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media.
These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
Assange does NO investigation though! All he does is go into a house, catalogue all the contents and then put it up on the internet for all to see, irrespective of what the public interest is or whether any crime has been committed.
It's completely unethical.
Actually, I don't disapprove of all the Wikileaks revelations. I thought the video showing the US helicopter crew gunning down a crowd of innocent civilians was in the public interest. It's not that I disaprove of certain crimes or potential coverups being exposed.
But Assange is not doing that. He's just putting everything up on the internet wheter relevant or criminal or not.
How does it serve the public interest in any way (or improve diplomatic relations between countries) for him to reveal that one diplomat thinks one nation's president is a joke?
One particular cable that really annoyed me was the disclosure of certain 'critical sites', designated by America as being crucial to their national security. Many of these sites were not in the US, and were civilian infrastructures.
How is revealing that in any way helpful to peace? How does it serve the public interest? How can you not see the recklessness of such actions in an age of global terrorism. Would you, for example now want to be a worker at the snake anti venom laboratory in Australia, now it's been identified as a critical US infrastructure? Would you not be pretty pissed off at Assange for identifying your place of work as an ideal location for a terror attack?
There is no moral basis for releasing such information, and Assange is just endangering the lives of ordinary people around the world with such reckless disclosures.
He absolutely needs to be stopped imo.
Investigative journalism means to find out the facts about an event. To reveal something that was hitherto unknown. To move beyond merely parroting what the Pentagon is telling you. Sure, Assange is not doing traditional investigative journalism, but his organisation is gaining access to the facts. Wikileaks has sources who provide the information and the information is then vetted and revealed to the public. The recent releases were vetted along with generally respected newspaper publications. There is nothing unethical about this behaviour.
There is absolutely no reason for him to be stopped. Without Wikileaks we will simply have power continuing to act unchecked and have further threats to global peace commited by the leading proponents of state sponsored terrorism.
Here's a few reasons why he should be stopped
1. These leaks are a threat to National security
2. These leaks were state secrets obtained illegally and are therefore to be considered espionage
3. These leaks were released to cause malicious effects and therefore doing so would be considered a form of terrorism and anyone who helped him gain access to such information that is a US citizen should be held for treason
...shall I continue?
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media.
These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
Assange does NO investigation though! All he does is go into a house, catalogue all the contents and then put it up on the internet for all to see, irrespective of what the public interest is or whether any crime has been committed.
It's completely unethical.
Actually, I don't disapprove of all the Wikileaks revelations. I thought the video showing the US helicopter crew gunning down a crowd of innocent civilians was in the public interest. It's not that I disaprove of certain crimes or potential coverups being exposed.
But Assange is not doing that. He's just putting everything up on the internet wheter relevant or criminal or not.
How does it serve the public interest in any way (or improve diplomatic relations between countries) for him to reveal that one diplomat thinks one nation's president is a joke?
One particular cable that really annoyed me was the disclosure of certain 'critical sites', designated by America as being crucial to their national security. Many of these sites were not in the US, and were civilian infrastructures.
How is revealing that in any way helpful to peace? How does it serve the public interest? How can you not see the recklessness of such actions in an age of global terrorism. Would you, for example now want to be a worker at the snake anti venom laboratory in Australia, now it's been identified as a critical US infrastructure? Would you not be pretty pissed off at Assange for identifying your place of work as an ideal location for a terror attack?
There is no moral basis for releasing such information, and Assange is just endangering the lives of ordinary people around the world with such reckless disclosures.
He absolutely needs to be stopped imo.
Investigative journalism means to find out the facts about an event. To reveal something that was hitherto unknown. To move beyond merely parroting what the Pentagon is telling you. Sure, Assange is not doing traditional investigative journalism, but his organisation is gaining access to the facts. Wikileaks has sources who provide the information and the information is then vetted and revealed to the public. The recent releases were vetted along with generally respected newspaper publications. There is nothing unethical about this behaviour.
There is absolutely no reason for him to be stopped. Without Wikileaks we will simply have power continuing to act unchecked and have further threats to global peace commited by the leading proponents of state sponsored terrorism.
So of the 250,000 cables that have been released which ones reveal corruption that was in the public interest for us to know? How has America been exposed by these leaks? You keep talking about this corrupt government but what corruption specifically has been revealed thanks these 250,000 cables?
Well, that's the thing. As someone who already followed the wars in some detail I don't think the leaks have actually been as damaging as some seem to think. The truth is already out there so to speak. They have simply added further unsavoury shades to what we already knew were wars built on lies and deception. But they do reveal particular war crimes, but not only those commited by America. So America hasn't really been exposed by these leaks as it has already largely been exposed. However, I would argue that the response of the US in possibly trying to legislate new laws to arrest Assange and of some leading political figures calling for his assasination. Well, this far beyond anything the leaks have revealed, have shown America in a far more unsavoury light. This is quite shocking actually. They will kill millions around the world and even publically call for the assasination of a public figure who has revealed how war crimes have been commited. These people are outrageous when you look at it in this light.
These latest documents don't actually say all that much to an informed observer of the wars. But they do tell us a lot about diplomacy and the cattiness and pointless things that they like to comment upon. For instance, I couldn't care less what diplomats think about the character of David Cameron. It is revealing, but largely uninteresting to me. The previous releases were more significant IMO and I am surprised it has taken the latest ones to spring up the calls for assasination and trial. I would have expected the loonies to have emerged then rather than now.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media.
These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
Assange does NO investigation though! All he does is go into a house, catalogue all the contents and then put it up on the internet for all to see, irrespective of what the public interest is or whether any crime has been committed.
It's completely unethical.
Actually, I don't disapprove of all the Wikileaks revelations. I thought the video showing the US helicopter crew gunning down a crowd of innocent civilians was in the public interest. It's not that I disaprove of certain crimes or potential coverups being exposed.
But Assange is not doing that. He's just putting everything up on the internet wheter relevant or criminal or not.
How does it serve the public interest in any way (or improve diplomatic relations between countries) for him to reveal that one diplomat thinks one nation's president is a joke?
One particular cable that really annoyed me was the disclosure of certain 'critical sites', designated by America as being crucial to their national security. Many of these sites were not in the US, and were civilian infrastructures.
How is revealing that in any way helpful to peace? How does it serve the public interest? How can you not see the recklessness of such actions in an age of global terrorism. Would you, for example now want to be a worker at the snake anti venom laboratory in Australia, now it's been identified as a critical US infrastructure? Would you not be pretty pissed off at Assange for identifying your place of work as an ideal location for a terror attack?
There is no moral basis for releasing such information, and Assange is just endangering the lives of ordinary people around the world with such reckless disclosures.
He absolutely needs to be stopped imo.
Investigative journalism means to find out the facts about an event. To reveal something that was hitherto unknown. To move beyond merely parroting what the Pentagon is telling you. Sure, Assange is not doing traditional investigative journalism, but his organisation is gaining access to the facts. Wikileaks has sources who provide the information and the information is then vetted and revealed to the public. The recent releases were vetted along with generally respected newspaper publications. There is nothing unethical about this behaviour.
There is absolutely no reason for him to be stopped. Without Wikileaks we will simply have power continuing to act unchecked and have further threats to global peace commited by the leading proponents of state sponsored terrorism.
Here's a few reasons why he should be stopped
1. These leaks are a threat to National security
2. These leaks were state secrets obtained illegally and are therefore to be considered espionage
3. These leaks were released to cause malicious effects and therefore doing so would be considered a form of terrorism and anyone who helped him gain access to such information that is a US citizen should be held for treason
...shall I continue?
1. Which ones?
2. Assange is simply the messenger here. You don't shoot the messenger, he didn't steal anything.
3. Going to war on the pretext of lies was extremely malicious and has has been descibed by some as illegal and against international law. Perhaps we should try Bush for war crimes.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media.
These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
Assange does NO investigation though! All he does is go into a house, catalogue all the contents and then put it up on the internet for all to see, irrespective of what the public interest is or whether any crime has been committed.
It's completely unethical.
Actually, I don't disapprove of all the Wikileaks revelations. I thought the video showing the US helicopter crew gunning down a crowd of innocent civilians was in the public interest. It's not that I disaprove of certain crimes or potential coverups being exposed.
But Assange is not doing that. He's just putting everything up on the internet wheter relevant or criminal or not.
How does it serve the public interest in any way (or improve diplomatic relations between countries) for him to reveal that one diplomat thinks one nation's president is a joke?
One particular cable that really annoyed me was the disclosure of certain 'critical sites', designated by America as being crucial to their national security. Many of these sites were not in the US, and were civilian infrastructures.
How is revealing that in any way helpful to peace? How does it serve the public interest? How can you not see the recklessness of such actions in an age of global terrorism. Would you, for example now want to be a worker at the snake anti venom laboratory in Australia, now it's been identified as a critical US infrastructure? Would you not be pretty pissed off at Assange for identifying your place of work as an ideal location for a terror attack?
There is no moral basis for releasing such information, and Assange is just endangering the lives of ordinary people around the world with such reckless disclosures.
He absolutely needs to be stopped imo.
Investigative journalism means to find out the facts about an event. To reveal something that was hitherto unknown. To move beyond merely parroting what the Pentagon is telling you. Sure, Assange is not doing traditional investigative journalism, but his organisation is gaining access to the facts. Wikileaks has sources who provide the information and the information is then vetted and revealed to the public. The recent releases were vetted along with generally respected newspaper publications. There is nothing unethical about this behaviour.
There is absolutely no reason for him to be stopped. Without Wikileaks we will simply have power continuing to act unchecked and have further threats to global peace commited by the leading proponents of state sponsored terrorism.
So of the 250,000 cables that have been released which ones reveal corruption that was in the public interest for us to know? How has America been exposed by these leaks? You keep talking about this corrupt government but what corruption specifically has been revealed thanks these 250,000 cables?
Well, that's the thing. As someone who already followed the wars in some detail I don't think the leaks have actually been as damaging as some seem to think. The truth is already out there so to speak. They have simply added further unsavoury shades to what we already knew were wars built on lies and deception. But they do reveal particular war crimes, but not only those commited by America. So
America hasn't really been exposed by these leaks as it has already largely been exposed. However, I would argue that the response of the US in possibly trying to legislate new laws to arrest Assange and of some leading political figures calling for his assasination. Well, this far beyond anything the leaks have revealed, have shown America in a far more unsavoury light. This is quite shocking actually. They will kill millions around the world and even publically call for the assasination of a public figure who has revealed how war crimes have been commited. These people are outrageous when you look at it in this light.
These latest documents don't actually say all that much to an informed observer of the wars. But they do tell us a lot about diplomacy and the cattiness and pointless things that they like to comment upon. For instance,
I couldn't care less what diplomats think about the character of David Cameron. It is revealing, but largely uninteresting to me. The previous releases were more significant IMO and I am surprised it has taken the latest ones to spring up the calls for assasination and trial. I would have expected the loonies to have emerged then rather than now.
This is amazing! So even you admit these leaks don't reveal any corruption or sordid goings on in the backrooms of American government yet you STILL condone the theft and publication of them!
That's shocking and you should be ashamed of yourself ;D
So you think it's acceptable to just steal classified information from the world's biggest superpower that isn't even incriminating and show it to the world in order to achieve what exactly?
How would you like it someobody ransacked your home, published your private diaries, all of your medical, criminal and career records along with any recent correspondences you had had online via email and just made it all available for the public to see?
That you could even attempt to justify this when you even ADMIT that America has been shown to have done nothing wrong is remarkable.
So what your actually saying that you do not care whether corruption has been revealed or not, in your opinion the American government has no right to confidentiallity of privacy regarding sensitive materials and it is the right of persons, or are not even American citizens to obtain illegally such private materials and upload them for titillation?
In hindsight do you think Assange was wrong to breach the trust of the American government in releaseing such trivial material? Do you think this damages his cause at all?
I mean I'm not against whistle blowing when serious corruption or lies have been practiced in secret but by your own admission Assange doesn't even have a whistle to blow. He has just stolen classified documents and revealed them to the world.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Some of you people are out of your minds. You are seriously suggesting that Michael Moore and Julian Assange should be assasinated? Assasinated for what? For providing us with evidence that the US elite is as corrupt and immoral as I have been arguing for years. You don't like the truth, it's too much for you to handle? So it is perfectly acceptable to start a war based on deceit, but not okay to reveal a few home truths about the dishonest nature of that war? Bush gets a pass, but we want Assange to be put out by a sniper? One man is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and Assange is likely responsible for the death of noone.
So in calling for the assasination of Assange then you are obviously advocating the assasination of anyone at the New York Times and The Guardian who were also involved in the vetting process of these documents. How about then assasinating anyone who then goes on to read these said documents. Get a grip. We need checks on unlimited power. Our governments do not listen. We need alternative means of reigning them and the corporate elite in and Wikileaks has been doing that. We should be proud of the work Assange has been doing and should be highly critical of our governments. And rightly so.
And Lyle US party politics is irrelevant to this debate. The only reason that the Republicans have come back is because Obama is a fraud. He has always been a corporate shill whence no public option for health care, huge bail outs for the financial sector, expansion of the war and a watered down financial reform bill. People are dissapointed and their jobs haven't come back, but the only alternative are the Republicans. It will get much worse if they get into power. There is no voting alternative for the American people. You either vote for this party of big business or that one. There is no party looking out for ordinary people.
To be clear, I have not suggested he should be assassinated. I agree with you that would be a gross abuse of power, and would likely make a martyr of him anyway.
But he's no hero. His last 250,000 cables don't reveal any corruption, just 250,000 breaches of trust and theft of personal and confiential documents.
He is a menace to world peace with his irresponsible meddling.
Nonsense, the people who bang the drums for phoney wars are the threats to world peace. The release of data showing corruption and abuses of power in those illegal and immoral wars is a healthy thing. We need more Wikileaks and maybe we won't even be going to war in the first place.
And I certainly do not regard Assange as a hero. I don't know the man, but I do think is articulate and presents his views well. I appreciate the role that he has played in recent years and I would like him to continue doing what he is doing. He is simply doing what the gutted out media has failed to do and in particular I blame the US media.
These places have been gutted and good investigative journalism just doesn't seem to exist anymore whence the apathy of the general public concerning what are really significant global events.
Assange does NO investigation though! All he does is go into a house, catalogue all the contents and then put it up on the internet for all to see, irrespective of what the public interest is or whether any crime has been committed.
It's completely unethical.
Actually, I don't disapprove of all the Wikileaks revelations. I thought the video showing the US helicopter crew gunning down a crowd of innocent civilians was in the public interest. It's not that I disaprove of certain crimes or potential coverups being exposed.
But Assange is not doing that. He's just putting everything up on the internet wheter relevant or criminal or not.
How does it serve the public interest in any way (or improve diplomatic relations between countries) for him to reveal that one diplomat thinks one nation's president is a joke?
One particular cable that really annoyed me was the disclosure of certain 'critical sites', designated by America as being crucial to their national security. Many of these sites were not in the US, and were civilian infrastructures.
How is revealing that in any way helpful to peace? How does it serve the public interest? How can you not see the recklessness of such actions in an age of global terrorism. Would you, for example now want to be a worker at the snake anti venom laboratory in Australia, now it's been identified as a critical US infrastructure? Would you not be pretty pissed off at Assange for identifying your place of work as an ideal location for a terror attack?
There is no moral basis for releasing such information, and Assange is just endangering the lives of ordinary people around the world with such reckless disclosures.
He absolutely needs to be stopped imo.
Investigative journalism means to find out the facts about an event. To reveal something that was hitherto unknown. To move beyond merely parroting what the Pentagon is telling you. Sure, Assange is not doing traditional investigative journalism, but his organisation is gaining access to the facts. Wikileaks has sources who provide the information and the information is then vetted and revealed to the public. The recent releases were vetted along with generally respected newspaper publications. There is nothing unethical about this behaviour.
There is absolutely no reason for him to be stopped. Without Wikileaks we will simply have power continuing to act unchecked and have further threats to global peace commited by the leading proponents of state sponsored terrorism.
Here's a few reasons why he should be stopped
1. These leaks are a threat to National security
2. These leaks were state secrets obtained illegally and are therefore to be considered espionage
3. These leaks were released to cause malicious effects and therefore doing so would be considered a form of terrorism and anyone who helped him gain access to such information that is a US citizen should be held for treason
...shall I continue?
1. Which ones?
2. Assange is simply the messenger here. You don't shoot the messenger, he didn't steal anything.
3. Going to war on the pretext of lies was extremely malicious and has has been descibed by some as illegal and against international law. Perhaps we should try Bush for war crimes.
He paid Bradley Manning for the documents. Well more accurately he promised to support him financially to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars for the best legal representation and to provide him with the best defence.
But he failed to deliver on his promise. Despite appealing for and receiving donations for Bradley Manning, he didn't hand them over.
Also he has refused to provide finanical details of his funding. It seems everybody's secrets are fair game but Assange's own.
That's your man of principle right there.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
No, I admit openly that some of the documents have no interest to me. For instance, I am not particularly interested in how the diplomatic service works. The previous releases on Afghanistan and Iraq were more significant in highlighting a number of important things in those wars and I think that was useful, but overall I have learned a lot more from alternative media and magazines like Z-magazine. Independant journalists and writers have been doing their jobs, it's just that those people are not writing for mainstream American newspapers.
In terms of the latest releases, I keep repeating that if you have a problem with it then you must also have a problem with the newspapers that worked with Wikileaks too. A lot of so called news is trivial and I think some of these diplomatic releases, though juicy, are trivial. But others would likely disagree with me. I am actually far more interested in seeing the future releases concerning the Bank of America as the economic crisis is something that I am VERY interested in and think that the banks have been trying to cover up a lot. I am hopeful that we will see some light being shined there.
And let's not forget that these leaks are not only about America, these diplomatic releases make a number of countries look a bit bitchy. It is revealing though and has value, but is just not not neccessarily the kind of information that I myself am looking for.
To be fair to me, I am quite an open person so any diplomatic releases about me would already be known. You all know my views and who I am and there is no secrecy in that regard. But to reveal my bank data or passport number is crossing the line, but I don't think we have been told about the bank details of any diplomats. That is clearly not neccessary. But if I had a diary and my wife in one of her rages decided to release it online, then what could I do? I would just have to live with it, but I would have every confidence that it would be an interesting diary, so I wouldn't mind too much in the end. :p
Assange is what he is and Wikileaks is what it is. I don't think it is the most important outlet in the world, but in a world where the mainstream media continues to dilute itself, I do think that along with credible media outlets that Wikileaks can be very useful. Whistleblowers can turn to Wikileaks who will protect their anonymity and in turn documents can then be vetted along with other journalists and released to the public. They aren't just turning over everything, it is being vetted and that is a crucial point.
Does the fact that I don't find all the information interesting hurt his cause? I don't think so. Like I say, anything that can enlighten us on what the elite are thinking is a good thing, just because I don't have a particular interest in what US diplomats think about Cameron doesn't automatically invalidate its relevance to someone else.
And for sure Assange is not even a whistleblower himself. He is simply someone that provides cover for others with whistles to blow. And other newspapers have been doing the same here, so unless we want to shut down some papers and put away their editors too then we should give Assange a break. The reaction from the US elite and governments around the world has been far over the top. I think their reactions have simply made more people more interested in and aware of Wikileaks. It has been very counterproductive IMO.
Right no more posting! I've been at it for 2 hours. I need lunch and some cricket.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
No, I admit openly that some of the documents have no interest to me. For instance, I am not particularly interested in how the diplomatic service works. The previous releases on Afghanistan and Iraq were more significant in highlighting a number of important things in those wars and I think that was useful, but overall I have learned a lot more from alternative media and magazines like Z-magazine. Independant journalists and writers have been doing their jobs, it's just that those people are not writing for mainstream American newspapers.
In terms of the latest releases, I keep repeating that if you have a problem with it then you must also have a problem with the newspapers that worked with Wikileaks too. A lot of so called news is trivial and I think some of these diplomatic releases, though juicy, are trivial. But others would likely disagree with me. I am actually far more interested in seeing the future releases concerning the Bank of America as the economic crisis is something that I am VERY interested in and think that the banks have been trying to cover up a lot. I am hopeful that we will see some light being shined there.
And let's not forget that these leaks are not only about America, these diplomatic releases make a number of countries look a bit bitchy. It is revealing though and has value, but is just not not neccessarily the kind of information that I myself am looking for.
To be fair to me, I am quite an open person so any diplomatic releases about me would already be known. You all know my views and who I am and there is no secrecy in that regard. But to reveal my bank data or passport number is crossing the line, but I don't think we have been told about the bank details of any diplomats. That is clearly not neccessary. But if I had a diary and my wife in one of her rages decided to release it online, then what could I do? I would just have to live with it, but I would have every confidence that it would be an interesting diary, so I wouldn't mind too much in the end. :p
Assange is what he is and Wikileaks is what it is. I don't think it is the most important outlet in the world, but in a world where the mainstream media continues to dilute itself, I do think that along with credible media outlets that Wikileaks can be very useful. Whistleblowers can turn to Wikileaks who will protect their anonymity and in turn documents can then be vetted along with other journalists and released to the public. They aren't just turning over everything, it is being vetted and that is a crucial point.
Does the fact that I don't find all the information interesting hurt his cause? I don't think so. Like I say, anything that can enlighten us on what the elite are thinking is a good thing, just because I don't have a particular interest in what US diplomats think about Cameron doesn't automatically invalidate its relevance to someone else.
And for sure Assange is not even a whistleblower himself. He is simply someone that provides cover for others with whistles to blow. And other newspapers have been doing the same here, so unless we want to shut down some papers and put away their editors too then we should give Assange a break. The reaction from the US elite and governments around the world has been far over the top. I think their reactions have simply made more people more interested in and aware of Wikileaks. It has been very counterproductive IMO.
Right no more posting! I've been at it for 2 hours. I need lunch and some cricket.
I think you are missing the point completely Miles. You say that we, the people have a right to know when our governments are behaving corruptly. I agree with you.
But you also acknowledge, that in this instance America has not behaved corruptly.
Yet you see no problem to obtain illegally 250,000 cables and publish them online for the world to read, not to reveal corruption, or for the purposes of whistle blowing, but for titillation.
You are in effect arguing that it is fine for any individual to break into any organisation, obtain any documents of any level of sensitivity and publish them online for the world to gawk at. You see no problem with this??? :confused:
It's really rather extraordinary this viewpoint you hold.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
No, I admit openly that some of the documents have no interest to me. For instance, I am not particularly interested in how the diplomatic service works. The previous releases on Afghanistan and Iraq were more significant in highlighting a number of important things in those wars and I think that was useful, but overall I have learned a lot more from alternative media and magazines like Z-magazine. Independant journalists and writers have been doing their jobs, it's just that those people are not writing for mainstream American newspapers.
In terms of the latest releases, I keep repeating that if you have a problem with it then you must also have a problem with the newspapers that worked with Wikileaks too. A lot of so called news is trivial and I think some of these diplomatic releases, though juicy, are trivial. But others would likely disagree with me. I am actually far more interested in seeing the future releases concerning the Bank of America as the economic crisis is something that I am VERY interested in and think that the banks have been trying to cover up a lot. I am hopeful that we will see some light being shined there.
And let's not forget that these leaks are not only about America, these diplomatic releases make a number of countries look a bit bitchy. It is revealing though and has value, but is just not not neccessarily the kind of information that I myself am looking for.
To be fair to me, I am quite an open person so any diplomatic releases about me would already be known. You all know my views and who I am and there is no secrecy in that regard. But to reveal my bank data or passport number is crossing the line, but I don't think we have been told about the bank details of any diplomats. That is clearly not neccessary. But if I had a diary and my wife in one of her rages decided to release it online, then what could I do? I would just have to live with it, but I would have every confidence that it would be an interesting diary, so I wouldn't mind too much in the end. :p
Assange is what he is and Wikileaks is what it is. I don't think it is the most important outlet in the world, but in a world where the mainstream media continues to dilute itself, I do think that along with credible media outlets that Wikileaks can be very useful. Whistleblowers can turn to Wikileaks who will protect their anonymity and in turn documents can then be vetted along with other journalists and released to the public. They aren't just turning over everything, it is being vetted and that is a crucial point.
Does the fact that I don't find all the information interesting hurt his cause? I don't think so. Like I say, anything that can enlighten us on what the elite are thinking is a good thing, just because I don't have a particular interest in what US diplomats think about Cameron doesn't automatically invalidate its relevance to someone else.
And for sure Assange is not even a whistleblower himself. He is simply someone that provides cover for others with whistles to blow. And other newspapers have been doing the same here, so unless we want to shut down some papers and put away their editors too then we should give Assange a break. The reaction from the US elite and governments around the world has been far over the top. I think their reactions have simply made more people more interested in and aware of Wikileaks. It has been very counterproductive IMO.
Right no more posting! I've been at it for 2 hours. I need lunch and some cricket.
I think you are missing the point completely Miles. You say that we, the people have a right to know when our governments are behaving corruptly. I agree with you.
But you also acknowledge, that in this instance America has not behaved corruptly.
Yet you see no problem to obtain illegally 250,000 cables and publish them online for the world to read, not to reveal corruption, or for the purposes of whistle blowing, but for titillation.
You are in effect arguing that it is fine for any individual to break into any organisation, obtain any documents of any level of sensitivity and publish them online for the world to gawk at. You see no problem with this??? :confused:
It's really rather extraordinary this viewpoint you hold.
The person who stole them took them illegally. If I am working for the government then I am obliged to keep to a confidentiality agreement that I signed up to. Assange has never agreed to keep anything confidential, so I struggle to see why he is at fault. He has never worked for the US government, so has no reason to keep things hushed. That distinction is sigifiicant.
Are we to force journalists to sign a contract with the government and be forced to say only good things about their country? No they SHOULD be (though usually aren't) independant and be seeking the truth. If that means governments are forced to look foolish at times, then so be it.
I honestly have no issues with these releases whatsoever and encourage them to continue. As I say, I am VERY interested in seeing what the Bank of America has to say about what has gone on over the past 3 years or so. We have a right to know what those within corporations who have bankrupted the worlds economy and have been given free money really think. The diplomacy thing is not so much my bag, but the economy is and I want to know what has been going on behind the closed doors.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
The person who stole them took them illegally. If I am working for the government then I am obliged to keep to a confidentiality agreement that I signed up to. Assange has never agreed to keep anything confidential, so I struggle to see why he is at fault. He has never worked for the US government, so has no reason to keep things hushed. That distinction is sigifiicant.
Are we to force journalists to sign a contract with the government and be forced to say only good things about their country? No they SHOULD be (though usually aren't) independant and be seeking the truth. If that means governments are forced to look foolish at times, then so be it.
I honestly have no issues with these releases whatsoever and encourage them to continue. As I say, I am VERY interested in seeing what the Bank of America has to say about what has gone on over the past 3 years or so. We have a right to know what those within corporations who have bankrupted the worlds economy and have been given free money really think. The diplomacy thing is not so much my bag, but the economy is and I want to know what has been going on behind the closed doors.
:vd:
No one is saying that investigative reporting (if that even still exists, thank you left wing news media) is bad. However revealing state secrets at a time where we're already at war and certain nations (Iran and North Korea) are amping up their military and in North Korea's case going so far as to deliberately attack South Korea (miles) I don't think that airing dirty laundry that may exacerbate things is a good idea in this political climate. Assange says he wants to end all government....the only way I see that happening is via the mass use of nuclear weapons. Will we be a happy world after that?
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
The person who stole them took them illegally. If I am working for the government then I am obliged to keep to a confidentiality agreement that I signed up to. Assange has never agreed to keep anything confidential, so I struggle to see why he is at fault. He has never worked for the US government, so has no reason to keep things hushed. That distinction is sigifiicant.
Are we to force journalists to sign a contract with the government and be forced to say only good things about their country? No they SHOULD be (though usually aren't) independant and be seeking the truth. If that means governments are forced to look foolish at times, then so be it.
I honestly have no issues with these releases whatsoever and encourage them to continue. As I say, I am VERY interested in seeing what the Bank of America has to say about what has gone on over the past 3 years or so. We have a right to know what those within corporations who have bankrupted the worlds economy and have been given free money really think. The diplomacy thing is not so much my bag, but the economy is and I want to know what has been going on behind the closed doors.
:vd:
No one is saying that investigative reporting (if that even still exists, thank you left wing news media) is bad. However revealing state secrets at a time where we're already at war and certain nations (Iran and North Korea) are amping up their military and in North Korea's case going so far as to deliberately attack South Korea (
miles) I don't think that airing dirty laundry that may exacerbate things is a good idea in this political climate. Assange says he wants to end all government....the only way I see that happening is via the mass use of nuclear weapons. Will we be a happy world after that?
I would argue the complete opposite. Revealing state secrets whilst immoral wars are taking place is extremely neccessary as it continues to reinforce the realisation that terrible acts are being commited and being subsidised by taxpayer money. In fact I want to see more leaks and I want these government acts to be shown for what they are and be known by more people. The US government is currently trying to spin that the war in Afghanistan is going according to plan when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. The number of attacks has increased and the number of US troops killed this year has risen significantly. If we were to only listen to government press releases we would be thinking that economic good times are coming back and that the Afghan war is going swimmingly. All utter tosh. In that regard I think the prior releases about the wars were significant and useful.
Iran is amping up its military because of Wikileaks? Iran has been put on the defensive for a number of years now, Wikileaks simply told them that other nations have a vested interest in seeing them destroyed. I don't think it is a bad thing for people to realise the two faced nature of some of these regimes. They will say in private something far different than what they will tell their own populations or what their own populations actually believe to be true. North Korea is nuts, but they didn't shoot those rockets because of Wikileaks.
Like I say, it would be better for all parties if there was no dirty laundry and if there was more transparency in politics. The very fact that the Iraq war was even allowed to happen and the way the US media blindly drummed up support for it shows that there are huge problems with the existing model. Power centres have pretty much been free to do what they want with no checks or balances. Anything that can influence it the other way is acceptable IMO.
These leaks aren't causing the damage, the damage is already being caused by unnacountable elites with unchecked power.
-
Your ravings about elites and unchecked power just leads me to believe that no matter the cost you consider America a great evil and you want it brought down to size.
I merely state that before you put all your eggs in that basket you consider the alternative to what we have today. Consider Nazi or Soviet rule, Communism and Socialism may be terms you agree to on paper but once again in the real world those forms of government bring nothing good to the table and the elites of those societies are hypocrites of the highest order and corrupt to boot.
These leaks can cause trouble, what happens if he leaks something that draws a military response from a nation like Iran or North Korea. And don't give me that "Iran has had to build its army to make sure its safe" bullcrap, they want Israel off the map, they've said as much and with no leaks needed
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Your ravings about elites and unchecked power just leads me to believe that no matter the cost you consider America a great evil and you want it brought down to size.
I merely state that before you put all your eggs in that basket you consider the alternative to what we have today. Consider Nazi or Soviet rule, Communism and Socialism may be terms you agree to on paper but once again in the real world those forms of government bring nothing good to the table and the elites of those societies are hypocrites of the highest order and corrupt to boot.
These leaks can cause trouble, what happens if he leaks something that draws a military response from a nation like Iran or North Korea. And don't give me that "Iran has had to build its army to make sure its safe" bullcrap, they want Israel off the map, they've said as much and with no leaks needed
The way Miles talks about Iran you would think they are the utopian model for peaceful democratic government.
Every other nation in the Arab world is a tinpot dictatorship, Israel are Satan's own spawn. America is the biggest threat to world peace, Britain is it's lapdog.
It seems that Iran leads the world on human rights issues and is the only peaceful and family friendly nation in the world today.
Let's just have another quick look at their avuncular, almost saintly leader.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckLO8HcNyo
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Your ravings about elites and unchecked power just leads me to believe that no matter the cost you consider America a great evil and you want it brought down to size.
I merely state that before you put all your eggs in that basket you consider the alternative to what we have today. Consider Nazi or Soviet rule, Communism and Socialism may be terms you agree to on paper but once again in the real world those forms of government bring nothing good to the table and the elites of those societies are hypocrites of the highest order and corrupt to boot.
These leaks can cause trouble, what happens if he leaks something that draws a military response from a nation like Iran or North Korea. And don't give me that "Iran has had to build its army to make sure its safe" bullcrap, they want Israel off the map, they've said as much and with no leaks needed
I am suspicious of any form of concentrated power. I become extremely suspicious when nations attack other nations without consideration of the legal and moral ramifications. I become even more suspicious when that nation decides to go after an individual who has done nothing more than show some of the dirty linen. So on that basis I think it would do the world a great deal of good to see America cut down to size, to at least force it to become a more reflective and responsible superpower.
I do consider the alternatives. I look at China and am appalled by how they treat dissidents. I am appalled by the lack of basic rights and freedoms, but at the same time I look at the West and am appalled at all the corporations that have gone to China to take advantage of cheap labour. The west has made China what it is and so ultimately we are responsible for that political system. How can we judge them when we were so quick to buy their cheaply made products? In fact I look at America as a state that is rapidly beginning to take on the qualities of a fascist state. Not quite what the Nazi's had, but the way the media colluded to build up the need for war in Iraq was blatant propaganda, the way the government works for the interests of large corporations rather than the general population, the ridiculous homeland security expansion. Freedoms are being stripped away and freedom of thought is being clamped down upon. Anyone who disagrees is either a terrorist or dare I say it a socialist!
Communism and socialism are very nice words on paper, but in practice communism doesn't work. Socialism on the other hand can be and is very successful. Of course Friedman style economists would disagree, but I don't see how you can argue against the benefits of nationalised utilities and public transportation, universal healthcare and a sufficient welfare state. These are not only good things on paper, but the types of things that responsible and reflective states provide to their citizens and they do the world over. Most countries that have been forced to accept Friedman style economic policies have ultimately rejected them. Freemarket capitalism is what has failed and you are seeing it right now in America.
Iran and North Korea are extremely small fish at the end of the day. The biggest threat to world peace is America, so just maybe America should clean itself up and stop being such a bully. Your nation is responsible for the murder of how many people on this planet and you are concerned about what a number of released files might do to provoke a response from Iran and North Korea? Has Iran gone and invaded Israel? Has North Korea gone and invaded the south? And how many people have these released documents killed? A whole lot of shoulda/woulda's, but no actual substance.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Your ravings about elites and unchecked power just leads me to believe that no matter the cost you consider America a great evil and you want it brought down to size.
I merely state that before you put all your eggs in that basket you consider the alternative to what we have today. Consider Nazi or Soviet rule, Communism and Socialism may be terms you agree to on paper but once again in the real world those forms of government bring nothing good to the table and the elites of those societies are hypocrites of the highest order and corrupt to boot.
These leaks can cause trouble, what happens if he leaks something that draws a military response from a nation like Iran or North Korea. And don't give me that "Iran has had to build its army to make sure its safe" bullcrap, they want Israel off the map, they've said as much and with no leaks needed
The way Miles talks about Iran you would think they are the utopian model for peaceful democratic government.
Every other nation in the Arab world is a tinpot dictatorship, Israel are Satan's own spawn. America is the biggest threat to world peace, Britain is it's lapdog.
It seems that Iran leads the world on human rights issues and is the only peaceful and family friendly nation in the world today.
Let's just have another quick look at their avuncular, almost saintly leader.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckLO8HcNyo
Not at all, Bilbo. Iran is another example of unhealthy concentration of power in the hands of an elite that is not responsive to the will of the general population. Sound familiar? I will not defend the regime.
And only Israel has moved beyond the rhetoric in recent years, Bilbo....not Iran.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Your ravings about elites and unchecked power just leads me to believe that no matter the cost you consider America a great evil and you want it brought down to size.
I merely state that before you put all your eggs in that basket you consider the alternative to what we have today. Consider Nazi or Soviet rule, Communism and Socialism may be terms you agree to on paper but once again in the real world those forms of government bring nothing good to the table and the elites of those societies are hypocrites of the highest order and corrupt to boot.
These leaks can cause trouble, what happens if he leaks something that draws a military response from a nation like Iran or North Korea. And don't give me that "Iran has had to build its army to make sure its safe" bullcrap, they want Israel off the map, they've said as much and with no leaks needed
The way Miles talks about Iran you would think they are the utopian model for peaceful democratic government.
Every other nation in the Arab world is a tinpot dictatorship, Israel are Satan's own spawn. America is the biggest threat to world peace, Britain is it's lapdog.
It seems that Iran leads the world on human rights issues and is the only peaceful and family friendly nation in the world today.
Let's just have another quick look at their avuncular, almost saintly leader.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckLO8HcNyo
Not at all, Bilbo. Iran is another example of unhealthy concentration of power in the hands of an elite that is not responsive to the will of the general population. Sound familiar? I will not defend the regime.
And only Israel has moved beyond the rhetoric in recent years, Bilbo....not Iran.
What nations has Israel attacked in recent years?
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2008 most readily spring to mind. Yeah, yeah, Palestine is not recognised as a country, but it is hardly Israel.
-
Miles you keep saying that governments are run by elites for elites and that no one is tending to the needs of the average ordinary citizen....well please, pretty please with a cherry on top show me a successful government that accommodated the average ordinary citizen and no corporations or elite group had little to no pull.
You won't be able to show me one because its like a unicorn, its a fantasy and that my friend is what liberalism is based on....fantasy
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
An interesting read.
Freed on bail – but US steps up efforts to charge Assange with conspiracy - Americas, World - The Independent
How low will America go to get their man? Manning is the man who stole the files and did so on his own, but the US government is going to go relatively easy on him if he says Assange was behind it too? That is low.
I'm glad to see John Conyers has a bit of sense and I was also pleased to read the comments at the end of the article. Seems that most of the people posting are of a similar mindset to me.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Your ravings about elites and unchecked power just leads me to believe that no matter the cost you consider America a great evil and you want it brought down to size.
I merely state that before you put all your eggs in that basket you consider the alternative to what we have today. Consider Nazi or Soviet rule, Communism and Socialism may be terms you agree to on paper but once again in the real world those forms of government bring nothing good to the table and the elites of those societies are hypocrites of the highest order and corrupt to boot.
These leaks can cause trouble, what happens if he leaks something that draws a military response from a nation like Iran or North Korea. And don't give me that "Iran has had to build its army to make sure its safe" bullcrap, they want Israel off the map, they've said as much and with no leaks needed
The way Miles talks about Iran you would think they are the utopian model for peaceful democratic government.
Every other nation in the Arab world is a tinpot dictatorship, Israel are Satan's own spawn. America is the biggest threat to world peace, Britain is it's lapdog.
It seems that Iran leads the world on human rights issues and is the only peaceful and family friendly nation in the world today.
Let's just have another quick look at their avuncular, almost saintly leader.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckLO8HcNyo
Not at all, Bilbo. Iran is another example of unhealthy concentration of power in the hands of an elite that is not responsive to the will of the general population. Sound familiar? I will not defend the regime.
And only Israel has moved beyond the rhetoric in recent years, Bilbo....not Iran.
What nations has Israel attacked in recent years?
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/c...here-we-go.jpg
For what it's worth, Assange annoys me and he seems to be a little spotlight happy for my liking, revelling in the power that he finds himself wielding... but I'm happy to know what is going on and how things work behind the doors of the manipulative masters the world over.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Isn't it Sweden that looks after their poor and elderly the best?
Or is someone else taking the piss?:)
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Miles you keep saying that governments are run by elites for elites and that no one is tending to the needs of the average ordinary citizen....well please, pretty please with a cherry on top show me a successful government that accommodated the average ordinary citizen and no corporations or elite group had little to no pull.
You won't be able to show me one because its like a unicorn, its a fantasy and that my friend is what liberalism is based on....fantasy
I said it before, I think the most obvious example to me was what The Labour Party introduced to the UK after WW2. A nationalised healthcare system, nationalised utilities and transportation systems, support for those unable to work and subsidised education through the tertiary sector, support for trade unions etc. These were measures that were enacted even though the major British corporations would likely have been against it. In fact it was so successful that it largely stayed in place until Thatcher under the influence of Friedman dismantled it in the 1980's.
Now the average UK citizen has to pay through the roof for utilities, public transportation, university education etc. But we do still have the NHS. It was a system that did work and was successful, but of course it could never come back as large corporations in collusion with the government would never relinquish what they now have.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miles
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Miles you keep saying that governments are run by elites for elites and that no one is tending to the needs of the average ordinary citizen....well please, pretty please with a cherry on top show me a successful government that accommodated the average ordinary citizen and no corporations or elite group had little to no pull.
You won't be able to show me one because its like a unicorn, its a fantasy and that my friend is what liberalism is based on....fantasy
I said it before, I think the most obvious example to me was what The Labour Party introduced to the UK after WW2. A nationalised healthcare system, nationalised utilities and transportation systems, support for those unable to work and subsidised education through the tertiary sector, support for trade unions etc. These were measures that were enacted even though the major British corporations would likely have been against it. In fact it was so successful that it largely stayed in place until Thatcher under the influence of Friedman dismantled it in the 1980's.
Now the average UK citizen has to pay through the
roof for utilities, public transportation, university education etc. But we do still have the NHS. It was a system that did work and was successful, but of course it could never come back as large corporations in collusion with the government would never relinquish what they now have.
You cad Sir!
You've made me look up roof in context...
you ment to say ass.
Sore through the roof
Pay through the ass
the other way is gay.
-
Miles if you are under the illusion that Unions are neither political nor have elite members then that's fine....I tend to disagree. Unions have done great harm in the US and I think now that we have a Department of Labor that Unions in general are worthless other than being a group that uses strong arm tactics to ensure the Democrats keep some power. I know you're speaking specifically of England and you (like most other Brits) want to place 100% of the blame on Maggie Thatcher, but do tell me there was 0 corruption in those Unions and 0 intent from elite Union leaders to gain greater power in the government for THEMSELVES and not the average joe's out there, becasue I don't buy it for a second.
-
Re: Wikileaks? Are you for or against what they are doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Andre
Isn't it Sweden that looks after their poor and elderly the best?
Or is someone else taking the piss?:)
No, that's quite true. Scandinavian countries generally speaking have very good welfare state models.