Thread: Wikileaks: Good or bad?

If it tells the truth and keeps people in the know maybe governments would not be so inclined to feed us full of BS. Hopefully it wont be bought out by a major media.

Wikileaks is a non-profit organization.

How is this type of leak any different than someone whistleblowing for a corporation or public official? This is the information age -- I think the notion that these particular documents are going to put people at any further danger than they're already in is just an excuse to keep the lid on.

Originally Posted by BrickBag

(this is by no means a personal attack on Glenn)
The people behind wikileaks want to build(or rather, have built) a platform where people can whistleblow when human rights are violated or the freedom of speech is in jeopardy.

They also want to push for a more transparent government which doesn't hide from it's responsibility to it's people(here I'm referring to the leakage of the war diary, which revealed way more civilian casualties than was publicly acknowledged).

And while the government says "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear"(while they do a cavity search when you fly), why do they hide from the people who elected them?

The way the documents were obtained is of course questionable at best, I do however support the efforts of wikileaks for keeping us free from oppression from what is becoming a totalitarian government(not just the USA, also here in EU).

Supporting human rights and transparancy of government is what every one wants.

But for you to to post on this thread that we should support a site which has published names of people that will be killed because the idiots running the wikileaks site cannot be bothered to read and edit out the documents they have been given you should be ashamed of yourself.

What has been published on the site is indefensible. If even a small amount of common sense had been used before putting the data on line non of this would have been a problem. Just a few red faces around the world so what. but what has been done is inconceiveably stupid.

I voted Bad - only because there was not a VERY BAD selection. The word 'traitor' keeps coming to mind every time I read about this...
(just expressing my opinion!)

I think Rep. King is dead on right! He has my respect because he uses a copmmon sense approach, and often takes a stand that many might find unpopular.
I also believe that the American that had access to, and leaked these documents should be tried for treason, and have expressed that view in letters to my own representatives.

Originally Posted by BrickBag

(this is by no means a personal attack on Glenn)
The people behind wikileaks want to build(or rather, have built) a platform where people can whistleblow when human rights are violated or the freedom of speech is in jeopardy.

They also want to push for a more transparent government which doesn't hide from it's responsibility to it's people(here I'm referring to the leakage of the war diary, which revealed way more civilian casualties than was publicly acknowledged).

And while the government says "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear"(while they do a cavity search when you fly), why do they hide from the people who elected them?

The way the documents were obtained is of course questionable at best, I do however support the efforts of wikileaks for keeping us free from oppression from what is becoming a totalitarian government(not just the USA, also here in EU).

So just to make sure here, if I obtain your personal info you are OK with me leaking it, whether it jeopardizes your life, liberty or happiness????
I have always found that when dealing with questions like this it is easier to make it very personal, so that people realize what is at stake...
So make sure you really think about your answer before you make it...Your idea of transparency is putting lives at risk...

Just to make sure here Wikileaks is not of consequence IMHO, the person that leaked the info is...

I think it's a very simple matter. The original guy stole the info and passed stolen mdse on to someone else. Whether it's a car or info should make no difference. If the site knowingly received it the owner broke U.S law.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

So just to make sure here, if I obtain your personal info you are OK with me leaking it, whether it jeopardizes your life, liberty or happiness????
I have always found that when dealing with questions like this it is easier to make it very personal, so that people realize what is at stake...
So make sure you really think about your answer before you make it...Your idea of transparency is putting lives at risk...

There's a difference between a citizen's bank account information or social security number, and our military striking civilian targets. People's lives were already at risk -- or worse, already taken -- and that information was withheld from us.

If I was part of an organization and had information that there were extremely unethical happenings, I'd like to think that I'd be the type to let people know about it rather than just continuing in the name of orders. This isn't "Hey Al Queda, here's where you should strike our troops!" -- it's "Hey America, your government and military leaders are saying one thing but in reality they're doing another."

Originally Posted by commiecat

There's a difference between a citizen's bank account information or social security number, and our military striking civilian targets. People's lives were already at risk -- or worse, already taken -- and that information was withheld from us.

If I was part of an organization and had information that there were extremely unethical happenings, I'd like to think that I'd be the type to let people know about it rather than just continuing in the name of orders. This isn't "Hey Al Queda, here's where you should strike our troops!" -- it's "Hey America, your government and military leaders are saying one thing but in reality they're doing another."

No it isn't...
This is exactly why I like to get down and dirty and personal, to many lofty "Ideals" with nameless and faceless...


BTW my feeling here "striking civilian targets" I agree Al Queda should not have killed innocent civilians...

Originally Posted by Bladerunner

I can appreciate the fall guy but really? I know when my staff is surfing the net instead of working, and this ain't tech heaven. The U.S. Army has the best IT out there. There is no way that one guy captured that amount of sensitive information. If he did we should just quit the defense biz for good.

That's a great question - and I could absolutely imagine a scenario where the US government would want some of this data to come out and be able to conveniently point to somebody like Manning and say "Wasn't us - it was him..." But I do find it hard to believe he's a dupe - he may very well have been a disaffected soldier with a penchant for snooping and they might have enabled his misdeeds.

Having said this, though, just because IT security is fairly easy to implement doesn't mean it is. I once held a military position that provided me access to some seriously amazing, seriously "is this real and not a movie" kind of intelligence and I was astounded at the level of detail, depth and breadth of access, and access to non-job related areas that I was provided by nature of my security clearance. I think the key word is "compartmentalized" - in my particular case I had access, should I choose to look, at things that had nothing whatsoever to do with my mission/job/focus/etc. The access was there by virtue of my security clearance. I'd like to think that many years have passed and that we do a much better job with restricting access to those that have a specific need to know vs. just a "would like to know".

At the end of the day, humans implement security protocols and humans are flawed beings.