Wikileaks

  • Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!

    Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.

Thrasher:

The people who might commit sure hineous acts of terrorism would most probably have access to all of this information already - due to the lack of protection and massive accessibility of it throughout the world.

Governments say "this is dangerous information to leak" and when I've read it, it's only embarassing and provides proof that they've lied about the Iraq war for example.

You need to know shit like that, you need to know if elected officials who represent you, have plotted to deceive you. These people should not keep their jobs, they shoulld (in the non-existant perfect world) be replaced with someone who is more honest, has more integrity, and is working to maintain or improve your quality of life.

However these people in politics get extremely weathly from the decisions they make while in a position of responsibility and trust, and that shouldn't be the case. They should get exposed to thrown into prison like any other criminal who is dishonest and defrauds money from people.

They should not be protected by secrets, they shouldn't be immune from prosecution or unaccountable.
 
Exactly, power corrupts and always will, but if the politicians actually start being really afraid about being exposed. Then maybe yeah fear will keep them more honest and they wont even say and do stupid shit "in private"

Also I don't even see any link between the wikileaks confidential documents and attack on civilian populations/airplanes... It's not like the memos have blueprints on how to bypass security at airports or shit like that

It seems you choose the blue pill Trasher... whatever floats your boat i guess..
 
yawn most retarded argument ever, in this case.
Click to expand...

I think that statement literally speaks for itself really!

As for these leaks not harming anyones lives only "spies" lives,

Mr Pink: "you kill anyone?"
Mr White: "just cops"
Mr Pink: "did you kill any real people?"
Mr White: "No just cops!"


When you have friends who work in the services and they tell you its getting more difficult ,then you have a wish list of sites to bomb published its them who are on the front line. We have close friends on these very forums that do that job and to me they are very real people. When you have people who work in that area telling you its getting harder and things like this are making life a lot more difficult then that can not be good.

How does publishing a world wide list of sites vital to the US serve the public interest?

I dont think if my place of work was listsed that I would be to pleased.

I agree in the principal and that elected politicians need to be held accountable for their actions but as I said in my previous post some information is kept secret because it is in the public interest to do so, diplomacy and trade negotiations are conducted behind close doors because it has to confidential.

Power to the People, its out there now and nothing is going to stop the flow of information or the damage it will inevitably cause, I just hope that I and no one I know is adversely affected by it.

Edit: I should make this clear I am not against wikileaks and some of the things that have been leaked are of interest but I have used the word indiscriminate previously for want of a better word but I dont think its indiscriminate at al its sensationalist and calculated to do damage in the guise of public interest and simply some of the information should not have been put into the public domain, The New Delhi transmissions are being held back from publication at the moment obviously we have no idea what is in them but if there is sensationalist information in them that could destabilise an already fragile region and that information is published I can not see what good that is going to bring. Obviously thats hypothetical at the moment but you have to wonder why and for what motives are those documents being held back.
 
Last edited:
How much of it would have been available anyway under the Public Information Act? Or does that only apply to Britain?

Anyway, hunting Assange across the world just makes him look like a martyr. They should be trying to buy him off, not arrest him. Getting rid of him won't get rid of the information or the possibility of it being leaked.
 
Yes this is embarrasing. the rape allegations didn't start circulating until days after the first wikileaks release.. Swedish government are "yes men" to the USA unfortunately, wouldn't be the first time and it certainly won't be the last :(
 
TIME magazine have taken him off their Man of The Year poll - he was well ahead of anyone else. When I voted last night he was at something like 89% of the vote.
 
Don't get why he's so lauded. I suppose he's this month's cause célèbre but it won't last. This stuff should be on a need-to-know basis anyway, not leaked all over the shop. I'm not going to clap him on the back for that. Politicians should be held to account for misappropriation or lies or whatever, but there's ways to do things and ways not to. I think, like Rich says, it might do more harm than good, though I hope not.
 
I can't see how it can be justified that what he did was right, to me it seems what he did was a way to make himself infamous.

I have no issue with maybe the motive behind it but the method seems ridiculous, the information was stolen, you have to make an assumption that some of it is kept out of the public domain for a reason, yes some of the information is hidden because it obvious they dont want people scrutinising it but no doubt some is a security risk that will affect real lives.
If someone lied about something do you really need to know what they lied about exactly or just that they lied, what is the difference? the result is the same.

Im sure he could have kept this information private and still had the same result in that the people who are related to the documents could be held accountable, there was no need to make it public other than for publicity for himself in my opinion. To me it seems a lot of people are jumping up and down about the fact someone got one over on the goverments, power to the people and not that it will change the system for the better or if it will indeed change at all other than maybe better security in future.
 
Last edited:
I think all the people who are afraid of the "sensitive sites exposed" fail to see the bigger picture here...

Imagine if the wikileaks had happened in early 2003, right before the invasion of Iraq, and exposed all the world (and especially the US population) to the utter CONFIDENTIAL lies and bullshit about WMD's and Iraq actually being a threat to the USA.

That war is a prime example of what you current wonder system of information released on a "need to know" basis can do.

How many people died from the wikileaks sensitive sites exposal?
139 US soldiers died because of lies kept from the population
33 from the UK died because of lies kept from the population
accounts vary for civilian deaths.... some go above 7 THOUSANDS

I don't see any of you moping for these guys, but suddenly you get afraid that a handful of people may die... because of the truth?
Stalin in Red Alert 1 said something like: When you kill 1 person it is a TRAGEDY, when you kill thousands, it is a statistic....


:thumb: on believing stuff should be kept secret, keep watching FOX news and being spoonfed the bullshit our politicians throw at us.
 
Last edited:
There is a big difference between doing something with the information and mindlessly releasing it into public domain.

So knowing what you now do due to wikileaks how exactly would you have stopped any of those deaths? I'm guessing theres nothing you can do, you just like the fact that you know the details, there are people that can abuse the information, there are some that can use it to correct the system but the truth is the majority can do nothing with it and its a case of busybodies putting their nose into matters.
Its like being told that a murderer has moved in next door, do you need to know who he killed, where and when to be worried or is the fact that hes a murderer enough? It would be for me.
You shouldn't need fine details to make a decision, say a politician lies, present them the information, they will either have to admit it or deny, you would only need to publish it if they continually deny in which case they will look even worse. All I would need to know is them admitting they lied about something.

Not everyone in goverment is corrupt, the information could have been dealt with another way, he's released it publically purely for the attention in my opinion.
What was to stop him from giving it to officials and saying, I know this, do something about it and then trusting them to resolve the issue without publically releasing the information.
Im sorry but it is not a better world if you do not trust anything anyone says, it is also not a happier place if you know everything, sometimes ignorance is bliss.
 
what would have happened if he privately told the governments?

no one would have given a shit about him being on interpol for a ridiculous claim

also i think its not too farfetched to think he mightve been "privately" assasinated aswell


as for stopping any deaths in the iraq war, as a canadian i already did all i could and the canadian army didn't partake in that absurd invasion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back