I'm in complete agreement with stevenlmeyer on this. I have been reading through the cables as they are released and have yet to find much which surprises me. I wonder how it would have played out if the Americans were to starve these stories of oxygen by stating 'we will not discuss diplomatic matters in public' or something equally irritating and effective.

As for Assange, he made the mistake of putting himself as the face of wikileaks, thus promoting himself to celebrity, with the scrutiny of his private life to match. I am happy that this info was leaked as I find it interesting to read. I would also find it interesting to read the latest weapons research, or perhaps how the SILEX method of uranium enrichment works. But this doesn't mean that this info should be leaked, does it? What would Assagne do for these examples I wonder?

gosh! i cannot believe it! a genuinely (generally) rational discussion about the issues for once. the author of the article is to be congratulated for having generated a discussion that does not swoop into rabid madness - not even madness - and that maintains a genuine (and generally) moderate tone of debate, discussion and exchange. one up for olo. every good wish, jas

Personally, I am far more impressed with Wikileaks co founder John Young than with Assange.
the term 'Non Profit organisation' leaves a good bit of wriggle room, doesn't it? Administrators can be very well paid.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20011106-281.html

I can't say I disagree with James Page:

So long as the leak is of something of relevance to the public (business misconduct, misconduct of government offices, or public servants by use of their powers, privileges or money);

And as long as it does not leak the ID of non-guilty participants who may be endangered (eg government intelligence operatives, spies or soldiers who were merely following orders);

And otherwise respects the private lives unless the above are violated by the persons/offices;

Then Wikileaks is otherwise in the right- and so far, it has been sticking to these principles.

Leaking diplomatic cables is particularly important- It is important for every country (especially their voters) to know exactly what kind of deals their governments are organizing.
Tell me, what would you think if it were leaked via Wikileaks that Gillard was going to secretly take in every resident of Guantanamo Bay and set them free in the community because she wanted to be invited to Hillary Clinton's birthday?

I love to say this, and I will say it again- if you hate Wikileaks and want it stopped, then you hate democracy too; and would be more comfortable in a dictatorship.

King Hazza*, I don't particularly hate Wikileaks, but I do thoroughly dislike Julian Assange. Separate issues, but far too many people (including Assange himself) have conflated the two. The fashionable leftists screeching that Assange's personal legal problems are a conspiracy against Wikileaks have yet to produce any evidence whatsoever that this is so.

Your last sentence didn't rise much about the Neocon's 'why do you hate freedom?' strawman, I hate to say.

(*Just for laughs, and no insult intended - your name always makes me think of King Boo. I have a mental picture of you somewhat like this: http://images.wikia.com/fantendo/images/c/c8/King_Boo_MMWii.png

Yes, I obviously *do* need to get out more.)

"if you hate Wikileaks and want it stopped, then you hate democracy too"

Ah yes, the "either you're with us, or you're against us", school of statesmanship .. and to think President George W. Bush was so derided over that sort of outlook.

Some information should be in the wild, some should not, sounds good doesn't it?

Clearly Diplomatic cables are fun, reading someone else's mail, how delicious .. but

"as long as it does not leak the ID of non-guilty participants" what? and who's going to decide that?

Assange? Surely not, he doesn't appear to give a toss about the whistleblowers and appears more concerned with his immediate stellar personal popularity than for potential victims .. this is a man making vague threats to bring down a bank, except the rumour is all he has is a stolen laptop he can't make head or tail of, but is certain it's sure to be explosive, look at me! If he could work it out it would be released instantly .. more fame!

Non-guilty participants, what about non-guilty organizations? If you have a bigger international political and commercial picture, the cables mean more, if you are an ordinary person without that background you have no idea what is or is not being revealed.

I can just see Assange poring over every cable, analysing it, the background, the implications, the potential issues for anyone involved .. sure, then released 15,000 at once .. if you gave every cable 5 minutes, that's 1,250 x 24 hour days of analysis, 3,750 x 8 hour days.

Then we're promised there's more to come, to maintain a reasonable level of fame .. sorry, democracy. Assuming any analysis is done at all, and it seems highly unlikely .. it's low level traffic, which thrills the uninformed.

Still, it's always nice to finger point and laugh at those dumbos in the USA is it not?