The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Not all leaks are created equal > Comments

Not all leaks are created equal : Comments

By Antony Loewenstein, published 11/2/2011

When it comes to unknown unknowns, Wikileaks is head and shoulders the best source.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
IS THERE ANY GOVERNMENT ON EARTH THAT'S COMPLETELY OPEN AND TRANSPARENT WITH ALL ITS CITIZENS?
Posted by SHRODE, Friday, 11 February 2011 6:15:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SHRODE not many governments, but that is the problem. The phenomenon of Wikileaks is a reaction to the status quo. Maybe somewhere along the way governments and organisations will have to adapt to a growing expectation of accountability and transparency. That can only be a good thing in a democracy.

Anthony's assessment is correct, it is often not the leak that is at issue but the nature and standing of the leaker.
Posted by pelican, Friday, 11 February 2011 8:15:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wikileaks...just leaked :) they have their own 'disgruntled' former employee... dishing out the dirt on 'dirty...smelly...raised by wolves' Assange. Oh the Irony.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Friday, 11 February 2011 8:29:41 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Al your hatred is transparent. :)

Assange will no doubt be a ripe target. Sometimes the claims will be fabricated sometimes they will be on the money. I doubt Assange is perfect, very few people are.

Why is it ironic? Wikileaks is for transparency not against it, I doubt WL is even blinking at those tensions being revealed. That is your mindset not the mindset of a Wikileaker. You are judging WL by your standards (seeing the irony), not by WL goals of transparency and accountability.
Posted by pelican, Friday, 11 February 2011 8:40:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
wikileaks .. it's UnAustralian to dob ..
Posted by rpg, Friday, 11 February 2011 9:21:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The selective nature of Wikileaks has always been questionable.
The derogatory emphasis always on the US and the lack of any documents from Israel, even though both are as one in the evil activities of the Middle East.
How many such cables have we seen? None.

Why Assange has on one occasion even had complimentary things to say about Netanyahu. That makes him somewhat unique in the world other than our own sycophantic PM, the compromised Ms Gillard, on record when Deputy PM and leader of the parliamentary Labor Left caucus, vowing her total support for Israel in the midst of the phosphorous bombing and deliberate murder of Gazan women and children. No votes for her in Palestine, obviously, but Melbourne, the breeding ground for Zionism is a different matter.

No Wikileaks on that subject or cables arranging the Israeli largesse for our seventeen politicians and public servants and their Gillard-sponsored and approved trip to Israel for a “Leadership Conference” (see brainwashing). Has that also been subject to media censorship as Assange has stated, the reason given for nothing other than US cables?
Assange, when confronted with the clear evidence of this fact stated that such leaks on the evil machinations of Israel, false flag episodes and on, had been sent to the media. However, it was the media that had withheld the release of those documents.

True or not? It would be valuable to have this confirmed, one way or another. We certainly won't receive such confirmation from Murdoch or his tame employees, all knowing clearly of his lifetime obligation to Zionist money.
Greg Sheridan on the subject of no Israeli Wikileaks material? Hardly.

So the credibility of Assange and his ‘released’ leaks is still very suspect. As well, it is hard to think of this now lauded “openness” resulting from Wikileaks without thinking of Pfc Manning, the source. His solitary confinement means enjoying nothing of Assange’s fame and fortune, Assange clearly not in Wikileaks for philanthropic reasons.

Spare a thought for Pfc Manning, unlikely to survive US torture.

Remember Abu Ghraib?
Posted by rexw, Friday, 11 February 2011 10:27:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I also stand by the fact that Wikileaks is hands down the best thing to happen to democracy since the US Declaration of Rights and since Switzerland was formed.

It is hands down the ONLY way a democratic society could ever expect to function properly, and ensure we, the voting public have as much wisdom and insight as to who we vote for and therefore allow to act on our behalf with our societies.

Imagine voting for Tony Abbot to keep the boats away after learning of his little backstabbing deal to let them in secretly to bribe Wilkie into crossing the floor to them?

All the people who fear freedom of information in a democracy would, in my opinion, be much more at home in a dictatorship, where they can whip up a hyseria that the sky will fall down if their current leader might have less than a perfect mandate.

Also
You know Rexw, it isn't nice to LIE.

For example, typing "wikileaks, Israel" into Google would immediately prove you wrong, with plenty of stories of Israeli scandals, including the Israeli government/Mossad trying to secretly and artificially sabotage the Palestinian economy to weaken the state.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/wikileaks-israel-aimed-to-keep-gaza-economy-on-brink-of-collapse-1.335354

But never mind that, keep sticking to your definitely-non-partisan conspiracy sites about evil Hebrew secret societies plotting world domination from the most inhospitable regions of the world.
They wouldn't possibly lie to you, right?

Anyway, let me explain to you how Wikileaks works.
People who are affiliated with government offices, leak documents- because Wikileaks exists, they leak it to Wikileaks. The governments with the most members willing to leak- or have the most things to leak about, end up being the countries most represented.

On the site itself, they have a counter as to how many documents they get per-country, clear for anyone to see.
Posted by King Hazza, Friday, 11 February 2011 12:32:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I tend to agree with rexw.His leaks are very selective and the US State Dept approves what's printed anyway.Why has not Assange tackled really big issues like the missing $2.3 trillion that Rumsfeld announced the day before 911?

I think Assange will be used to demonise Iran and thus justify its invasion.
Posted by Arjay, Friday, 11 February 2011 5:22:19 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The commenter who calls himself 'King Hazza' suggests that readers take a trip to ‘Wikileaks, Israel' on the web, but failed to mention that on this site one can find four or five selected leaks apparently putting my argument into the bin.
Seems that way but nothing that was disclosed in those 'selected' leaks, out of over 1100 that had hit the streets, was unknown to anyone who is familiar with the activities and philosophies of Israel. All were 'old news' among the analysts and interested parties.

At the risk of being called a liar once again, may I respectfully suggest that he read just one article from the Veterans Today website...... (that is US Veterans from all the military dalliances that the US has engaged in for the past 40 years, thousands in numbers.)..... They were once heroes, still are to most thinking people and somewhat tired of being used as the fodder for Israeli objectives.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2010/11/gordon-duff-wikileaks-a-touch-of-assange-and-the-stench-of-aipac/

Then if anyone would like to expand their horizons even further, hook on to 85% of all the real uncompromised journalists and professional authors around the world, all on the web somewhere if one wants to search them out, who echo these comments in varying degrees. Jeff Gates, Alan Hart, Gordon Duff, John Pilger......the list is endless, thousands representing the real truth. Because they do not appear on the pages of Murdoch publications, anywhere, which the comfortable and disinterested use as their printed word, this fact alone gives such writers all the credibility that the the world’s readers need.

Would have liked to have mentioned all this before but word limitations force one to be economical, not verbose, sometimes losing emphasis and unable to backup comments as one would like.

At least people in this country who are suspicious of Assange and his Wikileaks enterprise, soon to be aired in public, have not demanded that Assange be "diappeared" (sorry, that is the word they used)as have many of the notable elected persons and religious lights in the US Congress and Senate. Democracy is great.

That is where people should direct their arrows.
Posted by rexw, Friday, 11 February 2011 7:25:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arjay- why would they be leaked?
For intelligence and inside-infomation to the likes of top-level scandals and the highest level of domestic intelligence, the documents, orders, invoices would pass through offices of selected personnel who are less likely to leak.
Most of the leaked documents are the kinds of things that would pass through more people (or more ordinary employees)- especially those of foreign relations documents that travel through embassies)- and thus more likely to be leaked (the majority are eye-witness or embassy papers).
Governments are not some kind of monolithic organization- they are dozens upon dozens of separate offices to which the paperwork is divided among.
Of course, I guarantee that now they will be deliberately leaking false articles (such as the 'high security snake venom facility that terrorists must not know about' report to demonize Wikileaks as a security threat)

Strange Rex how you didn't want to address that story. Why would Mossad want to let everyone know (or think) that they are secretly strangling the Palestinian economy, or confirm they are actively pushing for an invasion against Iran? And why would they want to create a news source that demonizes its only allies in the Middle East?
Perhaps the person fooled by Murdoch is in fact you- after all, Murdoch was recently caught out in Wikileaks also- and it would do him, the US government, AND Israel a huge favor to convince everyone that Wikileaks is actually their own false-flag,and thus don't read it. And of course there is the possibility that the people putting forward the 'false flag' statement are in fact little Murdoch-patriot cheerleaders themselves.
Posted by King Hazza, Saturday, 12 February 2011 12:39:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Now that I have established how the nature of process of the leaks are both possible and logically feasible, could you both now explain how your 'true' sources would get THEIR information?

Is John Pilger an expert spy that sneaks into the Israeli Prime Minister's office and personally inspects his documents and observes his phone calls and party conferences?
Does Alan Huff have the quick-dial number of a Mossad 2nd in command to keep him up to date with their latest schemes?
Do tell.

And also explain what these governments would have to gain at the cost of international pariah status and confirming every accuser and conspiracy theorist RIGHT about their misconduct and true policy and depicting all of their political schemes (That they personally benefit from) as completely fraudulent and their alleged claims to justify them as outright fabrications?
Posted by King Hazza, Saturday, 12 February 2011 12:46:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Daniel Domscheit-Berg has broken away from Wikileaks and started Open Leaks.This perhaps explains the anomolies and the friction between Assange and some of his co-workers.Assange does not tackle really big issues.I think some people like Daniel have released material that Assange has not approved of ie information that damns Israel.
Posted by Arjay, Saturday, 12 February 2011 6:58:56 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Indeed, more leaks sites are a good thing.

But do, pray tell, what kind of information 'damns Israel' more than what has been expressed? Along with
-Israel was trying to coordinate Gaza war with Abbas
-Lobbying the US to attack Iran and negotiating with various countries for clearance (thought that was no mystery)
Seriously, what were you expecting?

And for that part, why the following are not 'big issues'.
-USA stealing personal data from, and spying on UN members
-USA getting lobbied to attack Iran BY Saudi Arabia
-USA secretly conspiring to punish Europe for its GM crops regulations
-A considerable coverage of the full network of torture collaborators in the War on Terror
-Damning internal reports on Afghanistan's prospects
-Revealing that the USA are secretly inside Pakistan
-Revealing that the attacks on terrorist bases in North Africa were in fact US Drone attacks which the local government gave clearance for, and took the blame for to retain good relations
-Approaching poor nations and bribing leaders to take in guantanamo inmates
Among other things.
I'd say each of those are FAR bigger than the Israel Palestine conflict.

By not even bothering to look at any Wikileaks material, and instead just believing what you are TOLD Wikileaks does and doe not have by your commentary source, you are not different from all the people that get their world information from Fox News.

And you have not answered my previous question- how do your sources know better?
Posted by King Hazza, Saturday, 12 February 2011 8:46:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arjay and Rexw

You are pushing it uphill trying to make a point with some of the writers on this subject, rational thinking not being part of their armoury as is patently obvious, daily.

However, it may create a slightly different climate with last night's developments in Egypt, providing no one sees any value in the "Vice" President, the expert in renditions, torture and so-called intelligence gathering at the behest of Israel and give him his marching orders. How many deaths can be attributed to him as well as Mubarak for the CIA/Mossad consortium. Sorry, Ms Condeleeza Rice said that doesn't happen and one can question the honesty of the US government and particularly the Secretary of State.

Now that should be listed as one of the most naive statements in 2011.

Out of it all comes a great need for an honest administration, free from US interference and Mossad false flags, opening access to Palestine, at last, and together with a general movement against US installed dictators or oil rich royalty, the peoples of that part of the world may now see the value in being independent, enjoying human rights for once and progressing to become worthwhile contributors to the aims of global peace.

At least they now a chance.
Posted by Rhys Stanley, Saturday, 12 February 2011 9:01:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Unknown unknowns also serve to maintain Leakywiki Loonies in a perpetual state of Soap Opera myopia.
Posted by Wakatak, Sunday, 13 February 2011 6:26:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
With Rex and RJ. Looking forward, if that's the word, to the 4 Corners episode on the hapless Manning and wikileaks.
Posted by paul walter, Sunday, 13 February 2011 11:14:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Have some of you actually read the Wikileaks site? It is a bit unwieldy to navigate but there is a lot already posted with much more to come. Judgements about how selective or not should come after the release is finalised otherwise it is impossible to judge.

Thus far, the material appears very broad and ranges across numerous Embassies. It would only be natural that the biggest 'scoops' would originate from those countries where standards of governance are low and where there is little in the way of democratic structures. No Embassy has been 'spared'. Even the plight of the Chassogians is mentioned - an event and situation that I had not been aware of until WL.

WL claim the material is censored only where there is a belief release may lead to loss of life.

For the conspiracy theorists WL is being controlled by the US and the releases are contrived for some greater purpose (right wing conspiracy). For others the releases are potentially damaging to international relations coupled with a belief that WL is part of some socialist anti-US conspiracy. You have to shake your head.

WL is the best thing to happen to accountability. Too often we place our future in the hands of others who may not always live up to those democratic principles we all espouse. The best tool against corruption and organised crime is transparency. Making it more difficult to deceive is the first step in an imperfect world. The next step has to be refusal to engage in relationships that are in essence corrupt regardless of self economic interests. Helping to line the pockets of dictators is not in anybody's interests particularly for citizens.
Posted by pelican, Sunday, 13 February 2011 12:05:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Of course Rhys it is pointless trying to get people lacking the faculties of abstract thought rather than cling to beliefs and parrot lines somebody else said to maintain cognitive equilibrium instead of being forced to relearn that the world works in a much different way than you were groomed to believe (be it from Fox news or the World Socialist Alliance newsletter that both focus-non-stop on Israel/Palestine because the authors of either are obsessed with it, creating the illusion that the whole world cares about this issue):

After all, if someone were to seriously believe that the USA or Israel would actually create a site that spreads some of the strongest anti-US and Israel propaganda in form of evidence of both nations' extensive crimes and dirty dealings) ever, at their outright own expense just to play a trick on lazy TV audiences in western countries whose world is so small that it only involves the USA and Israel, then I'm not sure asking any amount of logic would suffice.

Speaking of which, you haven't answered my question either- how would your information sources know better than government employees distributing the leaks?
Or, to put it another way, on what evidence- OR motive, would your sources and their claims be true and the leaks as being both false and an attempt by the same powers that are being slammed by them?

Also, have you actually SEEN the leaks? OR have you just watched a few paraprases on Channel 7 or the gossip magazines about General Qaddafi's nurse, and then a commentary by some political magazine by someone who only watched said Channel 7 segment themselves?

Some of you speak of 'media trickery' but are faring no better at being duped yourselves.
Posted by King Hazza, Sunday, 13 February 2011 1:57:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hazz,

Why do you think it isn't all the Swedes' doing ? Notice they are so far coming out of the Wikileaks all squeaky-clean, innocent. Yeah, right.

Is it possible they have been manipulating the CIA and Mossad through their historic and early domination of those dark forces, perhaps in collusion with the Chinese, (it's hard to say, they both cover their links so well) and that they have put Assange up to all this, they've used him without him being aware of it (then maybe not), and then cleverly - to throw everybody off the track - 'charged' him with some minor misdemeanour ? And notice how cleverly they cover their tracks ? Not the slightest hint of involvement ? Absolutely brilliant !

Everybody in the world is either deliberately working for the Swedes, or is unwittingly a puppet, and without remotely knowing it ! Except maybe me. Or maybe that's just what they want me to think......

This could be my last post. Or maybe they'll keep using me.....

Jxx
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 13 February 2011 3:31:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is no doubt that there is lot of deception and double speak out there.I remain very suspicious of Julian Assange.Webster Tarpley,Gordon Duff and ex-CIA who remain loyal to the US people, say Julian has a hidden agenda and when we look at all the circumstancial evidence,Julian looks like a false flag information source.

All the corporate media get the OK from the US State Dept before any info pertaining to national security is published.Why then does the US Govt cry foul on info they have approved? I smell a dirty big rat.

Donald Rumsfeld on the eve of 911 declared $ 2.3 trillion had gone missing from the Military budget.At that time the annual budget was only 1/3 this amount.So why was 3 yrs of spending hanging around in the Military budget waiting to be lost? Over to you Julian Assange,where did it go?
Posted by Arjay, Sunday, 13 February 2011 6:12:36 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More likely Loudmouth, is that this is actually an attempt by the aliens to make people revolt against their national governments so they can introduce a NWO because they want to rule the world so they can start eating people because they've been living off liquid-food in toothpaste tubes for so long, and they are deliberately reducing the leaks about Sweden in order to make it their scapegoat?
(jk for benefit of other posters).

Sadly, I think that a lot of people are in a state of mind where they will only regard news that validates their suspicions that the Illuminati, Communists, Freemasons are secretly controlling the world and sprinkling secret messages confirming their existence in plain public view even though they want to remain a secret, because they're evil and that's what evil people do all day.
Posted by King Hazza, Sunday, 13 February 2011 6:20:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
King Hazza,you seem to know a lot about nefarious,perhaps fictional groups like the illuminati,free masons etc not mentioned by Loudmouth.

How do they fit into the Assange picture?
Posted by Arjay, Sunday, 13 February 2011 9:36:10 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Simple Arjay, they don't.
It is arguable that people who are trying to protect their government's reputation and want wikileaks discredited would want you to think it is a false flag, because real or not, governments would only gain from that site being shut down, or being ignored by conspiracy buffs as a false flag instead of spreading the leaks.

As for the above groups- what many do not realize is that any form of alliance between them is obviously impossible as they are all outright incompatible: And save the Vatican, not a single one of them is an actual singular organized group.

In short I don't buy the notion that any body has the global influence that conspiracy sites insist on (US lobbyists, EU, UN, China and probably Saudi Arabia are each the closest we probably have).
The only reason the USA makes such a big deal about Israel and gives them so many weapons is because it means instead of having to send US soldiers to occupy that incredibly unstable region (and become the main target of hatred), they can just let the Israelis watch it for them instead.

The theories stating otherwise relies on too much emphasis on things that aren't as substantial as people are made to believe, ignoring the broader world, and skipping every event from the 1300s to the 20th century.

The motives of the sinister players do not add up either. Governments have only to lose by the leaks, other groups have no opening to strip control off them, and if people start demanding stronger democracy like what the Swiss have, those people would only have to lose even more.
Posted by King Hazza, Monday, 14 February 2011 10:32:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
King Hazza.Our Govts are controlled by the corportate elites.They control the media our money supply and hence our Govts.Mayer Rothechild,"Give me control of a nations currency and I care not who makes the laws." Our currency is created as debt by private and foreign banks.They own us King Hazza.This is why our whole nation is enslaved in debt.
Posted by Arjay, Monday, 14 February 2011 5:52:01 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Partly correct Arjay, though not as simple an issue.
It's not so much a system of control by private companies (as it is, their control is limited to the monopolies on some consumerables, and privatized assets)
-as much as it is a system where politics attracts dishonest, incompetent business-world rejects whose sole objective is to get into government and use it as a launching pad into the ranks of the top companies by doing favors while in government (refer to Bob Carr's relationship with Macquarie Bank as a good example).

For actual powers, it very much is distributed among government, even our money, debts, inflation rates are set by governments or bodies that answer directly to governments- it is merely that, again, the government is perfectly free to corrupt the process by altering it to suit people who can do them favors.

Media-wise, every boss of a commercial channel and newspaper press would have his preferred party (again, these too are businessmen who would have a lot of preferred policies in mind) who would of course make their programming favor their own preferred party:
Sadly, as Australia only has three commercial networks and two newsprint companies, this coverage is far more constrained.

All it takes of course is for more people to change their attitude as voting citizens- which is made most possible by leaking every act of misconduct they commit- thus ensuring that voters have the means to be more responsible and know more of which candidates are crooked.
Hence why I support all the leakers (and of course direct-democracy, where bribing half a nation into a bad policy is much harder)).
Posted by King Hazza, Monday, 14 February 2011 7:28:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hazza,

On your support for all leakers: I wonder if the leaking of all of China's (or Russia's) secret emails would have the people out in the streets demanding the overthrow of their governments.

No, perhaps not: that's the tragedy of socialism gone wrong. But live in hope :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 14 February 2011 8:54:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No chance of that Loudmouth- given that the Chinese people can't exactly vote, and are well-aware of how the Chinese government brutally deals with non-violent protesters, secessionists (or just people whose houses stand in the way of progress!), there is no way anyone would want to risk calling them out on bad policies.
Leaking over there would be a waste of time- and as the people are so used to having the same one government (and taught that if it were compromised they'd have anarchy), they'd fear the leaks as a destabilizing cause.

We, on the other hand are lucky in that we- voting citizens of a free country, actually CAN benefit from the leaks and can change our votes, lobby for different policy- anything at all.
Hell, if a bad policy gets leaked before it is implemented, the government might scuttle it altogether to avoid the backlash.
And because our governments are so easy to replace, there isn't even any risk of instability either- the party- or just crooked members- will simply be voted out in favor of someone who doesn't have a mile-long leak record.
(and the only great change that might occur is demand for more transparency and more direct-democracy- which are both improvements in my book)

To put it another way, a leak is absolutely useless to citizens of a dictatorship unless they feel like grabbing a gun, staring down the army and overthrowing the government:
For citizens of a democracy, leaks do us a HUGE favor that we can use however we like.
Posted by King Hazza, Tuesday, 15 February 2011 9:12:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well put Hazza. How an earth can a democracy function without access to information to make informed choices. And that is only one part of it, transparency reduces the opportunities for corruption and brings in accountability. It is clear to see why those in power might shudder at the thought but I am surprised by the comments on OLO especially Arjay, who has always pushed for more open government.

Why are people so scared of having access to what corporations or governments are doing often in the 'national interest'. Who decides the national interest and at what cost to others.

Did people see the interview with Assange on 4Corners and 60 Minutes this week? The fellow has been targeted for merely publishing documents as any other journalist has done since the free press.

No organisation is without problems and no organisation should be protected from criticism, but all there is a lot of distracting nonsense written about Assange and WL.

Comments by some extreme right wing commentators and some Conservative politicians calling for his assassination make you wonder who is the real enemy of State.
Posted by pelican, Tuesday, 15 February 2011 9:30:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican,

Yes but remember that Assange hasn't been charged at all yet with anything associated with Wikileaks, and surely any government has to go through the process - if somebody spills the beans on sensitive issues - of clarifying whether or not an offence has been committed or some damage been done or lives been threatened. So far, given that he remains uncharged, there does not appear to be any crime involved. So end of hysteria, from both Right and Left :)

Hazza,

You may be right, but what is sauce for the Tunisian and Egyptian ganders may be sauce for the Chinese goose:

"To put it another way, a leak is absolutely useless to citizens of a dictatorship unless they feel like grabbing a gun, staring down the army and overthrowing the government' - precisely as they did in Tunisia and Egypt, and will probably do elsewhere, including, I hope, Iran.

As well, the people across China have Hong Kong as some sort of model, not to mention Taiwan. We don't hear much about it but every year, there are something like 100,000 demonstrations or confrontations or upheavals across China. Yes, consequently, I'm sure, there are millions in their prison camps, but if anything this us surely an incitement to all their relatives never to give up ?

As well, China has a long, long history of repression and revolt, of seeming stability or stagnation, and sudden brutal and catastrophic fragmentation - the Wars around 0 BC/AD, at the end of each dynasty, the Taiping Revolution in the mid-nineteenth century, the period after the 1911 Revolution. Yes, China has a huge army to keep the people down, but frustration occasionally trumps brute force. It's a big country.

Live in hope :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 15 February 2011 10:12:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I hope so too Loudmouth- especially in Iran (though I can tell you, the Chinese public are, by large, overwhelmingly supportive of the system they have, so we'd have to make-do with willing submission for stability for now).

And I'm glad you've also noticed how much of both the 'Right' and 'Left' are reacting to this. The sooner this fails to be seen as a 'left' or 'right' issue, the better the world will be!

-
Indeed Pelican, it's a knee-jerk impulse by some supporters, of course.
In all societies, many people bristle at a threat to government as an immediate threat to stability:

Continuing my earlier point, if a government in a dictatorship is threatened and loses favor with the people (or attacked from outside), it creates instability and anarchy, as the system required that this government, with no replacement clauses, stay in place indefinitely for order to exist.

But in a democracy the whole point is that we are SUPPOSED to sack a government that fails to stay in our favor, with endless methods to help us cheaply and easily change the government around as we see fit. The transition is harmless, and we even have clauses that allow us to operate without a government (the hung parliament). All the consequences of a government getting into trouble over here is only good news for this country.
It is merely people that react before they think, and assume anybody rocking the boat = terrorist or anarchist.
But again, it would only result in anarchy if this were a dictatorship. In a democracy we can insist upon better with only things to gain.

Which is why I keep saying that those uncomfortable with leaks would be more at home living in a dictatorship- because being insecure when learning the truth because "we 'need' the individuals currently holding government to maintain order" would actually have some merit over there- over here, and in the USA, they're nothing but irrationally paranoid slobs who actually PREVENT democracy from happening.
Posted by King Hazza, Tuesday, 15 February 2011 10:25:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good points, Hazza.

As an old socialist, I've come to believe that genuine socialism will only ever be brought about as an IMPROVEMENT ON democracy, something building on, expanding and enriching democracy, rather than as an ALTERNATIVE TO it.

And a strong measure of transparency is vital to a strong and healthy democratic political life.

Ergo, transparency is necessary, in the extremely long run, for genuine socialism to ever succeed. - including transparency within its own organisations - at least, no secret plans to go back on the promises that get them into power - no 'land to the tillers' today and 'collectivise now' tomorrow, and butcher off whoever objects.

Like that Murdoch lickspittle, Greg Sheridan, I've been surprised at how little US nefariousness the Wikileaks have shown up so far. Surely they plot and plan the overthrow of defenceless and popular [i.e., anti-US] governments ? The invasion of weak countries for economic gain ? The spreading of lies and instability against governments they want to overthrow ? Collusion with vile dictatorships ?

So where is the evidence of it ?

Either Arjay is close to the mark, that Assange is a US double-agent, or the US does not demonstrate remarkable evil, at least not in its emails ?

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 15 February 2011 11:56:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Indeed Loudmouth- or to put it in another light, the more refined a democracy becomes (and the more we get into the use of referenda and less on reliance on party-politics), the better suited it is to adjust its own system to incorporate which elements and principles of a range of systems, and the balance of civil rights to a manner that more precisely suits the need of the public at large, instead of having to pick and choose which packaged-deal is most tolerable.

Of course, party stances towards different policy could be for anything, from vested interests to opposition for the sake of posturing- and of course, if either of these were leaked, it would save us a LOT of time on parties pushing for, or blocking policy on dodgy grounds.

For evidence damning the USA (and other countries) - there are plenty of dirty deals covered by the leaks- it's more a case that not many people seem to have actually noticed them, care about them as issues, or simply fail to realize how serious they are.
It is also a matter that for a government department to send a message (especially via an embassy), they would keep semantics out of it in case it WAS leaked or stolen (they would always have a minimum of information without pages of the national leaders' feelings which he can simply express on his next visit in private).

For example- the Saudis requesting the US government invade Iran shows collusion with a dictatorship and conspiring with them to invade another country. Of course, why the King wants it is anyone's guess (desperate plea for protection from a rogue nation- or a dodgy deal to bump off a rival)?
Only the basic demand is necessary, the rest can wait instead of risk sending in the mail, essentially.
Posted by King Hazza, Tuesday, 15 February 2011 9:01:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And as I understand it, Hazza, not just Saudi Arabia but other Arab (mainly Sunni) countries demanded that the US launch attacks against (Shi'ite) Iran, but the US has declined, or at least prevaricated.

Of course, no foreign minister would be so half-witted, one would think, as to set out all of his/her complaints, demands, suspicions and insults in emails: as you point out, they would save them for face-to-face meetings. So, from one point of view, no wonder we don't find much incriminating in the Wikileaks, but from another point of view, they may not be there to begin with. Take your pick :)

From my own point of view, the US - anti-US is not the only dynamic in town: what well may be looming as more serious is a democracy-vs-fundamentalism dynamic. We'll see if and when the dust settles in the Middle East, and elsewhere.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 15 February 2011 10:24:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I disagree with the US/Anti-US dynamic Loudmouth.
A lot of people are assuming (or trying their best to portray) the Wikileaks movement as little more than an anti-US/anarchist vendetta mob, when motives could vary from anti-US, to staunchly Pro-US patriotic in some forms (eg the "I want the best for my country"/"I want my country to run ethically" persons- to staunch First-Amendment advocates, and Democracy advocates- or just generally percieve only positive changes to occur from leaking misconduct.
Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 16 February 2011 3:56:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hazza,

Yes, but above and beyond all that, what well may be looming as more serious is a democracy-vs-fundamentalism dynamic. I don't mean just the US, but all-of-modern-society vs. a fundamentalist return to pre-capitalism and autocracy, that sort of world-wide and to-the-death struggle. A sort of re-run of the Thirty Years' War, but across most of the world and with nukes. I hope that doesn't sound too hysterical and over-blown :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 16 February 2011 6:09:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wikileaks is much more than it's perceived anti-US agenda. If a government seeks to abuse its power the "anti" comes from those actions not via others who by contrast seek to expose them. Many other nations other than the US have fared badly in these exposures. Corruption will always fare badly, and it is kneejerk to shoot the messenger than seek for internal reform in the first instance.

It is doubtful that the US, even with pressure from the ultra-Conservative wing, will ever charge Julian Assange with a crime, thus far it is only the rhetoric that is contributing to the hysteria. However for the person involved, Assange, even aggressive rhetoric calling for his assassination must give one pause for thought and fears of personal safety.

However, despite recent polling in the US showing 70% support for a judicial case against Assange and Wikileaks, I think many Americans who support support WL and the concept of better democracy are largely muffled by all the anti-WL noise. It was afterall pressure from within that led to withdrawal from Vietnam in particular after the release of the Pentagon Papers. The US has been down this road before.

US Ambassador Bleich made some more reasoned comments recently, probably influenced by the overwhelming support for Assange in Australia and worldwide.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/11/3135975.htm
Posted by pelican, Wednesday, 16 February 2011 11:32:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That would be the dynamic indeed Loudmouth- old dictatorships getting pro-democracy uprisings, to existing sort-of-democracies suddenly finding itself with authoritarians coming out of the woodwork in places the rest of us never really expected (The US Democrats party, the Swedish Center-right coalition, the Australian Labor Party) and are getting a very strong taste now of how little "democracy" actually means to some people, with Sweden trying to frame someone for made-up charges, senior commentators in the USA (including government) calling for illegal assassinations, and Australian politicians jumping way ahead of themselves- or remaining eerily silent over Assange's treatment, all short of cheering support for his enemies (adding an interesting angle to their internet censorship policy).

Which is another reason why these leaks have been such a great thing, as the reactions by the different governments have probably taught us just as much as the leaks themselves.

Even so in the USA, Pelican- although huge swarms of the Tea Partiers now find themselves beating their chests for their enemies, the Democrats- everyone else is getting a good idea of how not-liberal that party truly is.
Hopefully someone over there will start making some noise and shining the light on some better politicians come next election, instead of the country falling into the trap "If we don't support THIS party anyway, the opposition will get through"- and to be fair, the Republicans are downright terrifying. I guess the ideal would be for that Ron Paul guy (who, at the very least, supports freedom of speech enough to support the leaks), to climb to the top of the democrats and get elected.
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 17 February 2011 9:30:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Hazza,

You know for sure, do you that 'Sweden [is] trying to frame someone for made-up charges ... ' ? Why not wait until he is found guilty before you proclaim his innocence ?

No, you're right, why wait ?

I'm not sure what the crackpots and fruit-cakes in the various Tea Party fragments have to do with Wikileaks. You might be barking up the wrong tree there, Hazza :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Thursday, 17 February 2011 11:46:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is one of the many articles about it
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/the-truth-lies-trapped-in-a-web-of-intrigue-20101223-196mv.html

My suspicions that the charges are false are based on the following (making me about as batty as the Sydney Morning Herald).

-That the charge is actually 'Sex without permission to not use a condom', known as "Sex by Surprise"- which was only made up recently by a member of the political party running at the moment. It has been applied to absolutely nobody else.

-One of the victims is actually a member of that party, and was reported (by the Herald) to have been hosting a Crayfish party during the time the offense allegedly took place, had breakfast with Mr Assange afterwards, and never made any attempt to evict him from her house. Also, (a claim supported by the Herald), she had deleted from her Twitter page, entries referring to the Crayfish party and how amazing it was, and an entry about how to punish ex-lovers
Similarly, the other victim made suspiciously little attempt to press these charges, continuing relations with Mr Assange long after the offense.

-The case was only started after the two got together, and was dropped by the then presiding judge because not a shred of evidence was presented. It was only recently re-opened by another judge, at request of that politician I mentioned above.

-That the Swedish government is refusing to actually present evidence to the UK government to substantiate their accusations.

As for the USA government- so far, they have acted within their laws, but the commentators I mentioned are quite extensive- Sarah Palin, among quite a few senators have been calling for Assange to be assassinated, "dealt with like a terrorist" and made to disappear.
Generally just sharing their feelings about it (Which happen to be highly disturbing).
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 17 February 2011 5:47:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, the story has proven that he was completely right where not being absolutelu trustful to his "followers".
Posted by Tatiana, Wednesday, 2 March 2011 1:35:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy