Assange talking about Wikileaks
-
Hmm, this wikileaks fiasco is too easy to justify a stand on one side; on one hand I fully support the freedom of the press, and its ability to ferret out and display the otherwise hidden crimes and/or foolishness of governments, corporations or people; on the other hand, damaging foreign relations by revealing personal opininions of diplomats and presenting critical infrastructure targets is dangerous at some level.
As far as the criminal charges against Assange go, we'll never know whether or not they are true; but if you keep poking sharp sticks in hornets nests, eventually you'll get stung.
-
I find it funny that they say "web activists", as in the plural. It's probably just one person acting alone, just like Gary McKinnon was or that one bloke who shut down the entire US Naval service (US naval? it could have been someone else- I can't remember) a few years back, by bombarding the server with millions of emails. It just takes one "activist" to do something really silly, and the whole world then has to suffer the consequences of their actions. I don't even have to mention Bin Laden, who at first apparently, knew nothing about the bombings in NYC on 9/11, but then later took the credit, because he probably realised that being made enemy number one was a great way of looking 'cool'.
In England, a (very) small group of 'terrorists' go on the rampage in London, kill and seriously injure people (which was an utterly terrible thing to any human being), and then to show that the British government are doing something, they introduce all these stupid laws which effectively remove our freedom of speech (and shoot some poor innocent Brazilian guy in the head- I think only as a sick PR stunt).
I agree with Assange about 'freedom of speech', what at what cost? He may look like a hero now, but when the internet is a closed system and we are not going to be able to access it any more (or at least we are spied on even more than we already are), are we really going to look back at him as this great hero that we are seeing him as now?
And the actions from these American corporate companies was just as stupid- almost as if they just need to be seen to be doing something. A government that has run out of ideas, so it has to tell its conservative citizens that it is at least doing something.
You guys need to brush up a bit on some Enlightenment! I would recommend Immanuel Kant for starters, especially "public and private reasoning" To quote a passage from Wikipedia- note it's the last paragraph which is important;
@unknownuser said:
Private and public use of reasoning
Private use of reason is doing something because we have to. For example: rational workers in a specific occupation use private reasoning to complete tasks.
Public use of reason is doing something on the public sphere because we choose to improve our private function. Although someone may find their job or function disagreeable, the task must be completed for society to flow consistently. They may, however, use public reasoning in order to complain about the function in the public sphere.
A military officer is required to obey the orders of his superiors. A clergyman is required to teach the doctrines of the church that employs him. But the responsibilities of their office do not preclude them from publicly voicing any opinions that may conflict with those responsibilities. We expect office holders to stay in character at all times, but Kant gives examples. A clergyman is not free to make use of his reason in the execution of his duties, but as “a scholar addressing the real public through his writings, the clergyman making public use of his reason enjoys unlimited freedom to use his own reason and to speak in his own person.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Answering_the_Question:_What_Is_Enlightenment%3F
-
Wikileaks let the world see and read what the American gouverment thinks about the leaders in the rest off the world. But i guess the other contry's off the world have also their thoughts about the leaders in America and other country's in the world.
So that's not the problem or the main issue. It is the fact that people can reach that information and make it public. There should be an investigation to conclude who this could happened. Not the people off wikileaks are bad, but the people who sleeped while the information is leaked out are.....
-
Everythin leaked so far in 3 minutes, or Wikileaks for Dummies:
SOUND ON.
[flash=600,400:2f1dtg1q]http://www.youtube.com/v/-7GkIZCepzI&feature=player_embedded[/flash:2f1dtg1q]
-
with all honestly i think this wikileaks stuff it's a CRIME and this will just stop when someone get hurt or dies.
The latest news is that wikileaks just revelad that the american have intel about mozambique prime minister and other political entities beeing related to drug traffic.Do this guy even realised that this puts in danger the people helping gathering information about this crimes? What's next? Revealing all the names of undercover cops? reveal the adresses of their families while you're at it...
This is not freedom of speech, This is stealing private info and making it public. Not even that but CLASSIFIED info. It's classified for a reason, it's not gonna cure all the diseases or end the hunger. This is not in the interest of people! If this is legal, then stealing and turning public formulas for new farmaceutical meds or the new engine plans for BMW, AUDI or even NASA, should be legal too (and even that would be more in the interest of people than this)
Yes, this really gets me...
-
@unknownuser said:
The Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee has called for whoever leaked the 250,000 US diplomatic cables to be executed.
Hmm why am I not surprised?
And now 'scared little white man' is in on it, we all suffer. Thanks Jules. Thanks a bunch mate. 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/01/us-embassy-cables-executed-mike-huckabee?intcmp=239
-
-
@unknownuser said:
This is not freedom of speech,
No, your wrong. This is exactly what it is, freedom of speech. But it isn't journalism either, it's voyeurism. If you like, Julian Assange is nothing more than a respectable version of David Icke (remember him? The BBC TV sports personality/ presenter who went on a crusade to stop what Icke called 'lizards', or "The Illuminanti"??).
What the really scary thing about all this, and yes, there probably will be blood spilt- somewhere (and being arrested is probably the best thing for Assange right now), the scary thing are the US and other worldwide governments, who feel "something needs to be done about this traitor".
-
@tfdesign said:
@unknownuser said:
This is not freedom of speech,
No, your wrong. This is exactly what it is, freedom of speech. But it isn't journalism either, it's voyeurism. If you like, Julian Assange is nothing more than a respectable version of David Icke (remember him? The BBC TV sports personality/ presenter who went on a crusade to stop what Icke called 'lizards', or "The Illuminanti"??).
What the really scary thing about all this, and yes, there probably will be blood spilt- somewhere (and being arrested is probably the best thing for Assange right now), the scary thing are the US and other worldwide governments, who feel "something needs to be done about this traitor".
I must agree, that the published "CLASSIFIED
informations" are much more gossip than important info..
But who knows, what kind of serious problems will be discovered between those 200.000 cables ..The traitor was probably Manning - not Assange..
-
Gossip? Yes. I agree with you.
-
-
Ron Paul:
[flash=640,480:67xjkpuc]http://www.youtube.com/v/ywoInPNXZJk?fs=1&hl=en_US[/flash:67xjkpuc] -
They granted Julian bail today.
-
@tfdesign said:
No, your wrong. This is exactly what it is, freedom of speech. But it isn't journalism either, it's voyeurism.
So what's the difference between this and breaking an NDA? stealing industrial plans and revealed it? Getting info about the identity of undercover cops and point them? By this logic (steal non-public info and share) all of this is "freedom of speech", and shouldn't be a crime or condemned. Where does this "freedom" ends and starts the "privacy"?
I don't really have a problem in most of the stuff wikileaks is showing, most are gossips or completely pointless info (I certainly didn't need classified info to know Berlusconi likes women a lot...lol), but things that can start jeopardising others people's life (like the stuff on drugs I mentioned above) i'm completly against, and if he didn't even reveal half the documents who's evaluating what should not be revealed?
Raising other question: why is Assange a judge of what should or should not be public?I think is astonishing a thing like could these happen in the US. For the people in the USA, is these the buzz of the moment too there? or more of "these is bad but not too bad, more of joke on the government"
This new era of "freedom" can be scary sometimes...
-
@unknownuser said:
So what's the difference between this and breaking an NDA? stealing industrial plans and revealed it? Getting info about the identity of undercover cops and point them? By this logic (steal non-public info and share) all of this is "freedom of speech", and shouldn't be a crime or condemned. Where does this "freedom" ends and starts the "privacy"?
i dunno, what's the difference between this and, say, lying to an entire country and/or world in order to start a full fledged war?
seems super tweaked to me that the u.s. gov't has the blood of a million or so people on their hands this decade then have the nerve to try to paint assange as some sort of criminal because someone might die if he puts these documents on the internet..
-
@unknownuser said:
i dunno, what's the difference between this and, say, lying to an entire country and/or world in order to start a full fledged war?
That's a great point Jeff, but for me that's a crime too and the problem is: it wasn't condemned. But now 2 bads make a right? what's the difference between him and the others now, where does this freedom stops and start privacy, and who judges what it's public interest or not?
@unknownuser said:
seems super tweaked to me that the u.s. gov't has the blood of a million or so people on their hands this decade then have the nerve to try to paint assange as some sort of criminal because someone might die if he puts these documents on the internet..
I don't think they have the moral to say that too. but keep in mind I was the one saying that these can put at risk other lives (my concern) not the government (I don't know if the US use that argument or not...).
Amazingly I think a thing like this would be better if it had happen during the invasion of Afghanistan and revealing all the papers that said there's no WMDs. For me that would be "public interest" and justifiable.
-
@unknownuser said:
That's a great point Jeff, but for me that's a crime too and the problem is: it wasn't condemned. But now 2 bads make a right? what's the difference between him and the others now, where does this freedom stops and start privacy, and who judges what it's public interest or not?
i don't really know what to think to be honest.. of course wrong+wrong doesn't equal right but seriously, i don't trust my own government one bit.. if this is how i have to get info (or at least confirmation) on their actions then so be it.
it's sad to say but the united states of america is going down and i think the bush administration will be seen as the beginning of the end.
we truly had/have so much potential to make the world a better place for everybody but that potential is being shot down by a bunch of crooks..@unknownuser said:
Amazingly I think a thing like this would be better if it had happen during the invasion of Afghanistan and revealing all the papers that said there's no WMDs. For me that would be "public interest" and justifiable.
meh, we (the u.s) shouldn't have ever been there in the first place.
[but hey, i'm going way off topic and i don't have the energy and/or desire to continue talking about this crap]
-
@unknownuser said:
it's sad to say but the united states of america is going down and i think the bush administration will be seen as the beginning of the end.
we truly had/have so much potential to make the world a better place for everybody but that potential is being shot down by a bunch of crooks..Nah, cut this "humans/ and or Americans are all bad" crap. The USA is a great place, which many of us in the world look up to. Just think of all the humanitarian things that America have achieved? What about medicine and science, literature and philosophy, the arts, engineering, R&D, etc etc? It's good! Just because you have had a bad experience with a xenophobic dingbat for a president!
I don't think I know of one decent, current politician. They are all idiots! -
Apparently, even some of his stanches supporters are beginning to questioning Assage's motives. Didn't some of his workers just break away and put up a competing site.
-
I still can't understand what all the fuss is about? All these so called "leaks" are news items that have been floating around for months. To me it's a sign that most people rely on current newspapers to give them the news, or the TV. I really don't understand why Assange is such a hero (or anti-hero)?
Advertisement