Wikileaks - your thoughts - no politics

[LOL!]

Here's an interesting background article on where the cables came from:
BBC News - Siprnet: Where the leaked cables came from
Apparently, none of the e-mails had a "top secret" designation.

 

[Leonidas]

Assange is a twisted little freak who was irrevocably warped by a bizarre upbringing (35 different schools attended as a kid would twist anyone).

I watched the helicopter video and kept waiting for the provocative part that was supposed to shock me. Seeing people get killed is a shocking experience, but people being killed in a combat zone is not unusual or criminal. And journalists who willingly attach themselves to combatant groups who are engaged in hostile activities in a combat zone risk getting killed just like a combatant.*

This latest wikileaks leaking seemed to be more of the same, except even more boring, until I started reading some of what has been released.

There were at least two instances in which anybody in the subject nation would have been able to name the source of extremely embarrassing information about the country's leaders. And these in countries where such things get one disappeared. Just imagine some poor schmuck, who gave information to us with the promise that his identity and information would remain a secret, is at this very moment learning that there really are experiences worse than death.

Just for that, I would stand in the firing squad for PFC Manning's well-deserved execution.

My memories are dim now, but I recall that while some of the standards on what was classified and what wasn't did not deal solely with national security, but also with the potential for national embarrassment. And that is what a lot of this current leak is all about - it reveals what people say about other people when they think their words will be held in confidence. It involves candid assessments of the character, behavior and motivation of foreign leaders in areas of mutual (or competing) concern.

Neither PFC Manning nor Mr. Assange have done anything wonderful or brave. They're just two warped idiots who need to meet their maker sooner rather than later.

I will admit to snickering a bit when I read that Ahmadinejad got the piss slapped out of him by the top general of the Revolutionary Guards.

*I know two children were seriously injured, if not killed, in that incident. There has never been any explanation given for why those children were there, but they, like the journalists killed, were in a group of armed combatants in a battle. Some adult obviously recklessly endangered them by placing them in that situation.

 

[Westernskies]

Assange is a twisted little freak who was irrevocably warped by a bizarre upbringing (35 different schools attended as a kid would twist anyone).

I watched the helicopter video and kept waiting for the provocative part that was supposed to shock me. Seeing people get killed is a shocking experience, but people being killed in a combat zone is not unusual or criminal. And journalists who willingly attach themselves to combatant groups who are engaged in hostile activities in a combat zone risk getting killed just like a combatant.

This latest wikileaks leaking seemed to be more of the same, except even more boring, until I started reading some of what has been released.

There were at least two instances in which anybody in the subject nation would have been able to name the source of extremely embarrassing information about the country's leaders. And these in countries where such things get one disappeared. Just imagine some poor schmuck, who gave information to us with the promise that his identity and information would remain a secret, is at this very moment learning that there really are experiences worse than death.

Just for that, I would stand in the firing squad for PFC Manning's well-deserved execution.

My memories are dim now, but I recall that while some of the standards on what was classified and what wasn't did not deal solely with national security, but also with the potential for national embarrassment. And that is what a lot of this current leak is all about - it reveals what people say about other people when they think their words will be held in confidence. It involves candid assessments of the character, behavior and motivation of foreign leaders in areas of mutual (or competing) concern.

Neither PFC Manning nor Mr. Assange have done anything wonderful or brave. They're just two warped idiots who need to meet their maker sooner rather than later.

+1

 

[Tigger]

The story is on all newssites. Some of the more interesting links:

An Interview With WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange - Andy Greenberg - Forbes

WikiLeaks US embassy cables: Live updates on how the world reacts - The Guardian

 

[youbet]

Assange is a twisted little freak

I haven't had time to research Assange, but I did look at a picture of him in Forbes. Sheesh...... What a twisted little freak!

 

[MichaelB]

One thing I find curious about Wikileaks is it claims to have a global focus but seems pretty focused on the US. I would imagine there is some pretty interesting stuff to tell about Russia, China, Venezuela, just to name a few.

I think public scrutiny is useful, but I'm not sure that this qualifies as scrutiny.

 

[Tigger]

One thing I find curious about Wikileaks is it claims to have a global focus but seems pretty focused on the US. I would imagine there is some pretty interesting stuff to tell about Russia, China, Venezuela, just to name a few.

I think public scrutiny is useful, but I'm not sure that this qualifies as scrutiny.

Boingboing announces that more international stuff (Russia, etc.) is coming too:
Guardian editor on Wikileaks/Cablegate: "Terrible" disclosures coming - Boing Boing

They also link to an article that is supposed to clarify their motivations:
Julian Assange and the Computer Conspiracy; "To destroy this invisible government" - Boing Boing

These sure are strange days.

 

[NW-Bound]

One thing I find curious about Wikileaks is it claims to have a global focus but seems pretty focused on the US. I would imagine there is some pretty interesting stuff to tell about Russia, China, Venezuela, just to name a few.

I think public scrutiny is useful, but I'm not sure that this qualifies as scrutiny.

Other countries may have better security measures to protect their info. In addition, they would not be lenient to perpetrators.

 

[Westernskies]

One thing I find curious about Wikileaks is it claims to have a global focus but seems pretty focused on the US. I would imagine there is some pretty interesting stuff to tell about Russia, China, Venezuela, just to name a few.

I think public scrutiny is useful, but I'm not sure that this qualifies as scrutiny.

I really, really, hope he posts something that seriously upsets the Chinese... or the Russians... or some other regime without our Constitution or a sense of humor..

 

[Westernskies]

UPDATE:

Looks like life just got a little more difficult for this twisted little freak...
Interpol puts Assange on most-wanted list - CNN.com

 

[mh]

I haven't had time to research Assange, but I did look at a picture of him in Forbes. Sheesh...... What a twisted little freak!

I haven't done any research yet either so i'm reserving judgement.
The way he looks doesn't merit a 'twisted little freak' assessment in my book.

(a big) -1

 

[Ed_The_Gypsy]

Just for that, I would stand in the firing squad for PFC Manning's well-deserved execution.

+1

 

[retire@40]

I'm less concerned with Assange and more concerned with the person or persons feeding him classified or semi-classified information. Assange is just a devilish reporter. The real fiends are those who provided him with this information.

I say we give Assange immunity if he divulges all of his sources. Then we give those sources life in prison or the death penalty. Then let's see who else would be so willing to give up secret information to Assange or others like him.

Immunity would only purge him of this sin. After this matter is settled, Assange can be dealt with separately on his other sins, such as his alleged rape case and who knows what other points. People like this have all kinds of skeletons in their closets. Perhaps tax evasion, illegal drugs, etc.

 

[BigNick]

Oh please. Death penalty for the sources? For what crime, exactly? My guess is you'd have a hard time even firing many of them.

This is the electronic age. We already have very senior people spouting their mouths off on Twitter, and getting caught out. If you don't want it on the Internet, don't type it into a computer, other than (maybe) something with the highest security classification. The sooner the diplomats learn that, the better. You can't keep something secret when it's being legitimately read by more than 4 or 5 people; when several thousand are authorised to see it, it's going to leak, because there will always be disgruntled staff and there will always be troublemakers to repost it.

 

[Leonidas]

Oh please. Death penalty for the sources? For what crime, exactly? My guess is you'd have a hard time even firing many of them.

Manning is facing 52 years on the current charges. He is no Daniel Ellsberg, and with the possible exception of the helicopter video released earlier, this material is no Pentagon Papers. Remember that Ellsberg and his co-defendant were prosecuted under the Espionage Act which does carry the death penalty in its range of punishment. And they were never exonerated, the judge declared a mistrial because of the numerous bad acts of the government in the prosecution.

Where I think Manning put his life at risk was instances like this:

This is not to deny that WikiLeaks has done enormous harm. The leakers or hackers or whoever it was who obtained and published this information have put individual lives at risk. Toby Harnden of the Telegraph notes that one of the released documents names a U.S. informant in the region. The document identifies him as a U.K.-educated engineer from a prominent pre-revolution Isfahan family who once owned a large factory in Iran and is a former national fencing champion of Iran, a former president of the Iran Fencing Association and a former vice president of an Azerbaijan sports association. Harnden aptly asks: How many such persons do you think are out there?

Other than that, this material is interesting gossip. What did we learn as a people that we didn't already know? Karzai is a nutjob and his government is corrupt? The Iranian government is full of religious fanatics who may kick off a religious war? Where is the equivalent of LBJ lying his ass off to the American people about"... a subject of transcendent national interest and significance"?

Manning exposed informants living in totalitarian regimes because he was pissed at the Army.

 

[MichaelB]

Wikileaks web site refers to the Pentagon papers as an example of what they aspire to achieve. Nothing they have published so far is deserving of that comparison. It is mostly internal communication. The Iraq war information is emotionally charged and somewhat troubling, but nothing so far even remotely resembles the purposeful and systematic deceit that was identified by Mr. Ellsberg.

We do not know anything about Mr. Assange, his motivations or mental state. Clearly, however, his project is failing its stated objective. Perhaps someday some media outlet will notice this and report it.

 

[Leonidas]

Just found this and thought it brazen as hell.

Stengel asked Assange if U.S. Army PFC Bradley Manning, now detained in Quantico, Va., was the sole source of the megaleak. "We're a source-protection organization," Assange said, "so the last thing we would do is discuss possible sources." (Emphasis added)

Read more: WikiLeaks Founder Assange to TIME: Clinton 'Should Resign' - TIME

 

[MichaelB]

"I don't think it would make much of a difference either way," Assange said. "But she should resign if it can be shown that she was responsible for ordering U.S. diplomatic figures to engage in espionage in the United Nations, in violation of the international covenants to which the U.S. has signed up. Yes, she should resign over that."

This is a particularly anti-US view, as it ignores the conduct of others involved. The absence of critical thinking and useful analysis in our media is a shame.

My conclusion so far - perhaps premature - is that US gov't policy development and execution has been subject to so much public scrutiny over the past two decades the type of nefarious secret Mr. Assange et.al. want to expose does not exist in the US. Some things are rightfully kept secret and hopefully they will stay that way. The type of information being “leaked” is situational, not policy level, and shows no conspiracy, just ineptitude or mid-level leadership shortcomings.

Despite the references to leaks elsewhere, the bigger question in my mind is what is happening in the parts of the world where there is far less public scrutiny?

 

[Rustic23]

Diplomats spy! WOW now that really is news! NOT!

 

[REWahoo]

Diplomats spy! WOW now that really is news! NOT!

Yep, even superpower ambassadors have been known to do it:

YouTube - Dr. Strangelove-The War Room-3

 

[Westernskies]

Anyone want to post a prediction around when they are going to find the "twisted little freak" floating in an Amsterdam canal from an apparent "drug overdose"? He won't just disappear, some might misunderstand the message...

I'll say January 4th, 2011

 

[Tigger]

My conclusion so far - perhaps premature - is that US gov't policy development and execution has been subject to so much public scrutiny over the past two decades the type of nefarious secret Mr. Assange et.al. want to expose does not exist in the US.

I'm withholding judgement for the moment. But I'm interested in what's happening in the world in general and I'm curious to see where this will lead.

I'm not sure what you base your conclusions on. But I guess much depends on where you get your news. Some voice concern that both parties may be in the pockets of Wall Street and the big corporations that feed off the war machine, the healthcare system, etc. Some examples: Noam Chomsky, popular financial news site ZeroHedge, etc. Are they right? I don't know.

 

[MichaelB]

I'm withholding judgement for the moment. But I'm interested in what's happening in the world in general and I'm curious to see where this will lead.

I'm not sure what you base your conclusions on. But I guess much depends on where you get your news. Some voice concern that both parties may be in the pockets of Wall Street and the big corporations that feed off the war machine, the healthcare system, etc. Some examples: Noam Chomsky, popular financial news site ZeroHedge, etc. Are they right? I don't know.

We may be talking about different things. I think there’s no doubt about who influences our current elected representatives. There is a great deal of public scrutiny. Contributions are public record. Lobbyists do not hide in the shadows, they dine in public in the finest restaurants. This is voter apathy, not lack of scrutiny.

The secrecy and purposeful misrepresentation I was referring to covered things like bombing in Cambodia, the toppling of the Chilean gov’t, Iran-Contra, and using gov’t law enforcement and intelligence agencies to engage in partisan political repression. My opinion is this type of willful deceit has not been evident for the past two decades and our political system is more transparent than at any time in the past century.

 

[MichaelB]

Charlie Rose interviewed Rick Stengel (editor, Time magazine) on Nov 30. The link is not up yet but it was a very informative interview and I would highly recommend it for anyone interested in this.Charlie Rose - Rick Stengel on WikiLeaks The website says Rick Stengel but another earlier interview shows.

Mr. Stengel certainly feels that Mr. Assange is naively dangerous and clearly focused on the US.

 

[mh]

OK, so you think he's cute and give him a "not a twisted little freak' judgment based on that.

Get a life.......

i didn't ponder his cuteness. you just made it seem like you based your assessment of him (solely?) on his looks. if that's not the case, my apologies. that's how it appeared to me in your prev post..

i also said in my prev post that i reserved judgement since i didn't know
a lot about all of the details. If we're soliciting snap judgements on this thread, then i'd guess he's not a good guy.

I'm working on the get a life part.. Apparently w/ only mixed success