Not being able to sleep tonight I was just looking at current news and for the first time had the opportunity to view wikileaks.ch. Whats your view, is this site good in that it exposes the real conflict of war and shows the horrific actions carried out by all sides. I refer to a video I watched recording the US opening fire on a group of people from a helicoptor on what turned out to be a Reuters photographer and two children among others. Was this an isolated incident or a routine attack carried out by gun-hoo yanks, those of us old enough to remember Vietnam have seen this type of footage before. I realise that there are so many other areas, other than war, discussed on this particular site such as corruption and general misgivings but this was the topic I happened to read. Or is this site not acceptable in that it is open to misuse and propagander and also compromises national and international security and exposes us to terroists.

I know that is not really the site to discuss this subject and I should concentrate on more lighter areas like our great hobby of building cars,however, it is also nice to get the views of like minded people. Barry

Is anyone really that surprised about anything that has come out?

IE no-one trusts anyone else, lots of inappropriate things go on when you decide that human life really isn't that important after all and let people with guns roam round a country killing, and Russia's heavily influenced by the mafia.

Most of the "leaks" have been overwhelmingly obvious (ie they didn't need confirming)

and the only bit which (IMHO) was bad to publish was the list of critical infrastructures, that's really not a wise move. Although you could say that it's like having plans for a nuke on the web (IE anyone with enough connections and know-how to do it doesn't need a plan!).

My only worry is that there will be a knee-jerk reaction by governments who will waste billions on tightening up cable security without recognising the fact that the weakest link in computer security is usually the plonker sat at the keyboard....

"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself."

wikileaks is good and necessary for democracy when lying by governments and poor human rights (even by us in UK) are so fashionable.


For what its worth. The Americans have gone about addressing this all wrongly. Questionable charges*, so he can be extradited to Sweden, and then to America all adds to the credibility of the site. Why they didn't swamp the site with credible miss-information and consequently discredit and mask the data that is on there. Much cheaper and really would have diluted the whole problem.


Matt


*my complete sympathy if the charges have any truth, but you've got to wonder.

this is just the tip of the iceberg ,
the usa are happy its coming out it hides whats going on evrywhere else south korea just to name one.
ever wondered where al qaeda get there money and wepons .
most people only see news like the bbc "very sensored "

On the other hand the "leaks" may just be a bunch of tittle tattle emails from bored embassy staff with no real credence - a bit like us discussing it don't you think?

Would you buy a 2nd hand car from that guy?

What about all the chaps working at the engineering workshops he has put at danger for a quick bit of fame - and their partners.

You can guess I'm not impressed - he is just a wanted man for a sleazy crime.

Cheers

there may be some truth in some of it, but i reckon there's a lot more false, and probably completely made up stuff in it.
i think this guy's more interested in pissing off governments. every day its in the news for something else, and its just causing more problems than its ever going to solve imho

Wikileaks should not be party to what is in effect espionage, the founders of Wiki leaks claim high principals of openess but actually anarchists with an expressed agenda of the longterm undermining all governments. Exposing wrong doing is one thing what is currently gettting published by Wikileaks on is politically motivated.
However I also take the view that a lot of what gets out from the USA is is actually covertly sanctioned by the US Government agencies.

On the otherside of the coin I strongly disprove of the buckling of Paypal, Mastercard, Visa, et al to pressure from the US Government --- that is wrong.
Careful scrutiny of the validity of the sexual assault case must also be made particularly in light of the over the top response of US to the Garry McKinnon fiasco.

What I want to know is how the hell is he supposed to have had sex with someone whilst they were alseep. Do what? Falling asleep during is one thing but not waking up at all?

On a purely legal point of view (ignoring the Swedish thing which all sounds a bit Al Capone if you know what I mean) what exactly has he done wrong? He didn't hack the computers, he just published the information hacked (in the loosest sense of the word) by someone else.

Mostly what he's done wrong is made the US government look rather silly (ie that the "top secret" information got leaked), but the actual information itself is hardly damning.

And its all true , absolutely true and irrefutable because .......er........I forget why........... Oh, because it's wikileaks and non of it has been planted by anyones enemies and it's mostly anti America or anti government and we all like that and there's no smoke without fire.
Sad each new generation forgets the lessons of the last. Reminds me of arguing with extreme left wing friends at University back in the sixties. We could only ever talk of principles, ideals and justice. The realities of the actual existing communist states and the bloodbath rule of Stalin and Beria were never able to be discussed. Same sort of c**p here.

quote:

---

Originally posted by thunderace
this is just the tip of the iceberg ,
the usa are happy its coming out it hides whats going on evrywhere else south korea just to name one.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by thunderace
ever wondered where al qaeda get there money and wepons .

---

quote:

---

Throughout the 80s <<bin Laden>> was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.

---

id steam roller the twat.

Wheres the public interest in publishing a list of important targets? That man's for the high jump, in a very big way.

the one thing that annoys me about wikileaks is the fact the 'west' haven't realised they can use it for their advantage (or at least level the playing field).

We're all looking at the site going "oooh, isn't that awful that X was said / happened".

Why not publish all the information on the 'bad guys' currently aka Al-Qaida. How they did x, threatened y, tried to do z.

We'd then get a more balanced view and hopefully go "you know what, the good guys are a bit stupid but blooming heck, the bad guys are REALLY bad. Glad to see we're trying to stop the bad guys".

From what i've seen what has been released is mostly obvious - for example,
American diplomats asked to gather information about their compatriots ......... OH-MY-GOD what a shock, diplomats spy on the opposition.
American diplomats worried we can't do the job in Helmans ........... OH-MY-GOD what a shock, didn't one of their generals get repremanded for saying just that months ago?
Brits scared we don't have a special relationship with America ............ OH-MY-GOD didn't we have it all over the news that Brown went Obama got it and Cameron went when he got it and both came back saying "we've still got it", we always panic we've lost it every time something changes.

Ok, perhaps the really juicy stuff has been held back, the list of important sites is worrying and shouldn't have been released.

I must admit to having a WTF moment when the 'revelation' was made that Prince Andrew was thought to be cocky and rude.

EVERYONE who has ever spoken to the man knows this!... thoroughly dislikable chap (bit like his father)!

quote:

---

Originally posted by britishtrident
Careful scrutiny of the validity of the sexual assault case must also be made particularly in light of the over the top response of US to the Garry McKinnon fiasco.

---

Ah, but ........ we have an arrangement with the US, if they want someone they just whistle and we deliver them (shame we've got to provide evidence that a US judge agrees with if we want someone).

What isn't clear is if the EU arrest warrant overrides the US request (if made) for the bloke. What's also curious is what law he's broken with regard to wikileaks.


finally, Prince Andrew - I was shocked, i was sure it was going to be Prince Philip

Wikileaks was notified that the documents in question were stolen.

Wikileaks refused to return said documents.

Wikileaks solicits donations which makes it trading in stolen goods.

If even one person from the US has donated to the wikileaks site, it falls within US's legal juristiction.

Why isn't the US hunting down the editor of the NY Times for publishing it?