The Real Impact Of WikiLeaks

[werepossum]

In the continuing series of WikiLeaks releases, we now have a cable that can easily serve as a global terrorist targeting list.

While some of the identified critical sites do have high levels of security for obvious reasons, others, including medical and infrastructure locations, have little.

It will now be incumbent on the various national security services to respond to this release by tightening the physical security of identified sites as they immediately become locations of interest to a wide range of terrorist, revolutionary and criminal groups.

To understand the risk, consider that Al-Qaeda is not the only terrorist group in operation. Consider Al-Ummah, Lashkar-e-Toiba, the Caucasus Emirate and other groups to now also have a target list vetted by local U.S. diplomats as vital to the security interests of the United States and of the host nations.

WikiLeaks, which can now be considered the world's most dangerous neo-anarchist group, is offering all radical groups the strategic intelligence they need to strike where it will hurt the most.

This kind of stuff qualifies Assange for a couple of small-caliber slugs in the back of his skull. Hopefully this will happen sooner rather than later.

 

[SP33Demon]

I like Ann Coulter's summary of spy history...

Wow, you look up to the racist/bigot Ann Coulter. That explains it all. Is your motto also: "beloved patriot talks tough, beloved patriot faces consequences"?

 

[PJABBER]

Wow, you look up to the racist/bigot Ann Coulter. That explains it all. Is your motto also: "beloved patriot talks tough, beloved patriot faces consequences"?

Who do you look up to? Quentin Crisp?

Trying to keep a serious thread going here, suggest you choose one of the hundreds of others in this forum that are not, nor ever likely to be.

 

[between]

..

 

[PJABBER]

because that's what America is all about - killing people you disagree with...

Actually, that is what the neo-anarchists and neo-leftists at WikiLeaks believe. They are anti-American, anti-democracy and anti-capitalist. If you spend a bit of time reading what they are saying, you will find that their interest is in the collapse of Western democratic capitalist societies, and particularly the United States as the leading society of its type.

Do you expect that collapse, should they succeed, to be bloodless?

Maybe the WikiLeakers are not planting physical bombs, that still has to be determined, but they are great enablers of those who do. And thus should be held as accountable.

Which raises another significant consequence of this anarchist attempt at destruction. In defense of such societies, it is incumbent on the governments to do what is necessary to protect the freedoms they are pledged to protect. Democracies flounder in coming to a clear determination or course of action unless the threat becomes so serious that it cannot be ignored.

Has that point now been reached? And is the necessary response a wholesale criminalization and prosecution of all parties associated with such examples of information warfare directed at free societies?

 

[JSt0rm]

This kind of stuff qualifies Assange for a couple of small-caliber slugs in the back of his skull. Hopefully this will happen sooner rather than later.

^^^ another fascist.

Amazing how you mistrust your government to give LaQuanda on east 99th food stamps but when it comes to keeping massive secrets from the populace about war and propaganda you want to kill the messenger. How does it feel to have your head so far up your own ass?

 

[SP33Demon]

Maybe the WikiLeakers are not planting physical bombs, that still has to be determined, but they are great enablers of those who do. And thus should be held as accountable.

Which raises another significant consequence of this anarchist attempt at destruction. In defense of such societies, it is incumbent on the governments to do what is necessary to protect the freedoms they are pledged to protect. Democracies flounder in coming to a clear determination or course of action unless the threat becomes so serious that it cannot be ignored.

Did Ann Coulter tell you that? Or did she tell/teach/train our own military to leak our own documents?

If Wikileaks is an "anarchist attempt at destruction" then so is the internet. Let's just shut it down folks, and enact a PJabber police state that Ann Coulter would approve of.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Actually, that is what the neo-anarchists and neo-leftists at WikiLeaks believe. They are anti-American, anti-democracy and anti-capitalist. If you spend a bit of time reading what they are saying, you will find that their interest is in the collapse of Western democratic capitalist societies, and particularly the United States as the leading society of its type.

Do you expect that collapse, should they succeed, to be bloodless?

Maybe the WikiLeakers are not planting physical bombs, that still has to be determined, but they are great enablers of those who do. And thus should be held as accountable.

Which raises another significant consequence of this anarchist attempt at destruction. In defense of such societies, it is incumbent on the governments to do what is necessary to protect the freedoms they are pledged to protect. Democracies flounder in coming to a clear determination or course of action unless the threat becomes so serious that it cannot be ignored.

Has that point now been reached? And is the necessary response a wholesale criminalization and prosecution of all parties associated with such examples of information warfare directed at free societies?

you live in a bizzaro world to believe WL is going to be the downfall of our country and government. We've done quite well to self destruct on our own. How strong are we if the lowest level secret intelligence can take us down?

if its incumbent on the gov. to protect our freedoms then why are they continually being eroded by the same gov. that is to be protecting them.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Did Ann Coulter tell you that? Or did she tell/teach/train our own military to leak our own documents?

If Wikileaks is an "anarchist attempt at destruction" then so is the internet. Let's just shut it down folks, and enact a PJabber police state that Ann Coulter would approve of.

Make no mistake they want to. Nothing would make them happier than to have China's firewall here.

 

[Fern]

The Real Impact Of WikiLeaks

An obvious question in light of the on-going leaks.

I've been thinking about it for some time, I think it's far too early to tell.

As has been mentioned, there's the possibility of affecting how our diplomats conduct business among themselves; mainly a reduction in the recording/sharing/flow of information. What are the possible effects of this? Too soon to tell.

How may this change how foreign governments interact with us? I think it doubtful any benefit can come from their reduced confidence in communicating candidly.

Will any of the foreign countries face challenges because their 'real' positions were exposed? I'm thinking of examples like the ME countries' private stance encouraging us to act against Iran, which was the opposite of their public stance.

How will tech/info protocols change in response to this? How can a rather low-level person download this huge amount of data without triggering some alarm bells? Do people have access to all kinds of data they have no legitimate use for? If so, why? Will that be changed?

How can the NYT leak all sorts of data but are allowed protection under the 1st amendment, yet not WL? How is WL different from the NYT? Will our laws change? If so, how?

Will this encourage copycats? Will we see even more leaks?

Will the WL be seen as some sort of new terrorism: info-terrorism? Pending release of the bank's info, will have some kind of eco-terrorism using info leaks to damage banks/companies/economies?

IDK know what the impact will be; could be big but perhaps just as easily not. We'll just have to see how it plays out.

Fern

 

[SP33Demon]

An obvious question in light of the on-going leaks.

I've been thinking about it for some time, I think it's far too early to tell.

As has been mentioned, there's the possibility of affecting how our diplomats conduct business among themselves; mainly a reduction in the recording/sharing/flow of information. What are the possible effects of this? Too soon to tell.

How may this change how foreign governments interact with us? I think it doubtful any benefit can come from their reduced confidence in communicating candidly.

Will any of the foreign countries face challenges because their 'real' positions were exposed? I'm thinking of examples like the ME countries' private stance encouraging us to act against Iran, which was the opposite of their public stance.

How will tech/info protocols change in response to this? How can a rather low-level person download this huge amount of data without triggering some alarm bells? Do people have access to all kinds of data they have no legitimate use for? If so, why? Will that be changed?

How can the NYT leak all sorts of data but are allowed protection under the 1st amendment, yet not WL? How is WL different from the NYT? Will our laws change? If so, how?

Will this encourage copycats? Will we see even more leaks?

Will the WL be seen as some sort of new terrorism: info-terrorism? Pending release of the bank's info, will have some kind of eco-terrorism using info leaks to damage banks/companies/economies?

IDK know what the impact will be; could be big but perhaps just as easily not. We'll just have to see how it plays out.

Fern

It will obviously make the protection of such information stronger. The Army/State Dept/Embassies will undoubtedly have to change protocol regarding Secret information if they haven't already.

 

[PJABBER]

you live in a bizzaro world to believe WL is going to be the downfall of our country and government. We've done quite well to self destruct on our own. How strong are we if the lowest level secret intelligence can take us down?

Not at all, at least in the sense you mean.

Do you understand the strategic intent and means of anarchy and nihilism, of revolutionary progression?

If you hate Western democracy, liberalism, capitalism like Assange and friends do, and the invasion of external powers is not likely or even co-opted as is the case with Russia and China, you try to cause systemic collapse.

Not through the triggering mechanism itself (ie leaking everything possible on diplomatic efforts toward a more or less stable and peaceful world) but through the possible, even likely, over reaction that such leaking engenders. In effect, the society adopts more restrictions of freedom in an attempt to preserve itself as a free society.

Assange wants a systemic breakdown. The only way he can do that is by having the freedoms of a democratic society turn on itself.

His ideal society is some wacky form of "perfect" totalitarianism, how closely do your ideas of a "perfect" society coincide?

if its incumbent on the gov. to protect our freedoms then why are they continually being eroded by the same gov. that is to be protecting them.

That is the game that is being played and you are a pawn in that you are given a voice in a democracy. Be assured that should Assange succeed in his attempts, you will not have any voice at all, for that voice will be counter-revolutionary and punishable by death. Read some history if you don't believe me.

 

[Nebor]

If Wikileaks is an "anarchist attempt at destruction" then so is the internet. Let's just shut it down folks, and enact a PJabber police state that Ann Coulter would approve of.

I think that's becoming a more realistic alternative every day. The government (all governments, or a global government like the UN, but with it's own organic military) need to have much stricter control over the internet. Someone shouldn't be able to hop from server to server as we try to play catch up by shutting them down one at a time. I think a good first step would be government ownership of all key internet hubs. That way in the event that some information terrorist starts something like this wikileaks fiasco, the entire internet (or more realistically, the majority) can be brought down until that information is found and eradicated.

I was always for net neutrality, and against sales taxes on the internet, but if these terrorists are intent on using the internet as a weapon, it's time that we control as a weapon commensurate with it's ability to do damage.

 

[SP33Demon]

I think that's becoming a more realistic alternative every day. The government (all governments, or a global government like the UN, but with it's own organic military) need to have much stricter control over the internet. Someone shouldn't be able to hop from server to server as we try to play catch up by shutting them down one at a time. I think a good first step would be government ownership of all key internet hubs. That way in the event that some information terrorist starts something like this wikileaks fiasco, the entire internet (or more realistically, the majority) can be brought down until that information is found and eradicated.

I was always for net neutrality, and against sales taxes on the internet, but if these terrorists are intent on using the internet as a weapon, it's time that we control as a weapon commensurate with it's ability to do damage.

Sure sounds like an infringement upon freedom of speech. And shutting down the internet until information can be found? That'd never work because people who downloaded the info could just copy it onto a hard disk and hide it. Once the info is posted, there is no going back. The best thing to do is protect the info better at its source, such as allowing stricter access to data.

 

[Nebor]

Sure sounds like an infringement upon freedom of speech. And shutting down the internet until information can be found? That'd never work because people who downloaded the info could just copy it onto a hard disk and hide it. Once the info is posted, there is no going back. The best thing to do is protect the info better at its source, such as allowing stricter access to data.

Well obviously you would need a great deal of physical enforcement to accompany such an aggressive system of national defense. Log those individuals that are able to download dangerous files before shutting down the internet to prevent further spread. Trace those that downloaded the file, search their homes, business, cars for any electronics that might harbor threats to national security and confiscate them.

It's not an absolutely fool proof system, but it would buy us time until the internet as we know it can brought under stricter control and scrutiny. Also the deterrent effect of having your house torn apart and being labeled a traitor to your nation (or a threat to US national\global security) shouldn't be ignored. You have to realize that even the conversations we have here have the potential to spill potentially damaging national security secrets. A more one-directional flowing "futurenet" in which all information comes from designated, authorized media sources and user to user communication is strictly scrutinized would provider a sounder foundation for the future.

 

[flexy]

The government (all governments, or a global government like the UN, but with it's own organic military) need to have much stricter control over the internet.

Uhm, NO, NO...and triple NO. I am amazed to hear this from an American's mouth. It's you who are otherwise very "fond" of government involvement - if they pat your crotch on the Airport (for good reason, i might state)..you are flipping out.
If there is any kind of gvt involvement, you are the first to cry "Communism" and "Police State".
But then at the same time advocating more "government control" in regards to the net - as IF IT WERE A GOOD THING. Cheezus.

The sad thing is that the recent events might indeed trigger such developments, blame it on Assange and his "glorious" idea.

Before sweeping around in the net and trying to find the dirt:

The problem is NOT the net...but the horrible lack of security in their system which obviously allows every intern/idiot to access this kind of "moderately" sensitive data.

 

[cubby1223]

As much as if he were straight it would prove that no straight people can get clearance.

Your bigotry is strongly exposed in your post. But let's answer your question.

What leaves the nation more vulnerable to blackmail:

Don't ask don't tell, where every gay member of the forces is subject to someone threatening to expose them as gay, ending their military involvement?

Or ending gay discrimination so there's nothing about their being gay to blackmail with?

Will you ever write a post that is based in the realm of reality?

Please?

PJABBER takes the approach more like "I have no control over what other people think or do, and this is how I think things play out."

You take the approach of "I'm a God-like figure who can control the minds and actions of everyone, and this is the way I declare things to be."

Oh but wouldn't it be nice if we had a magic wand we could wave and make everything in the world all wonderful and peachy! But we don't. Stop pretending that one exists.

 

[Nebor]

Uhm, NO, NO...and triple NO. I am amazed to hear this from an American's mouth. It's you who are otherwise very "fond" of government involvement - if they pat your crotch on the Airport (for good reason, i might state)..you are flipping out.
If there is any kind of gvt involvement, you are the first to cry "Communism" and "Police State".
But then at the same time advocating more "government control" in regards to the net - as IF IT WERE A GOOD THING. Cheezus.

Freedom is all well and good until national security is threatened. Then it's time to bring down the curtain.

 

[Infohawk]

Freedom is all well and good until national security is threatened. Then it's time to bring down the curtain.

But the people have the right to know about private discussions between diplomats about other governments!!! And I heard the TSA is going to rape Assange when he flies to Sweden... OMG!!! This is worst than living under Pol Pot.

 

[Nebor]

But the people have the right to know about private discussions between diplomats about other governments!!! And I heard the TSA is going to rape Assange when he flies to Sweden... OMG!!! This is worst than living under Pol Pot.

I can't imagine there's anyone actually naive enough to believe that governments operating in the realm of global politics can or should operate with complete transparency. Secrets are necessary. Exposing those secrets is treason for citizens, and an attack by foreigners.

Tell me, do you all want Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia to experience the same fate as Georgia did at the hands of Russia? Because our ability to defend those countries is compromised by the exposure of the agreement to do so.

 

[P4man]

The same argument has been used by totalitarian regimes over and over throughout history, to take over newspapers (and later radio and tv stations), to "protect national security interests" and stop terrorist propaganda and all that.

So now you would allow wikileaks to be named a terrorist organisation (which, btw, allows the president to order an extra judicial murder on its members). Thing is, the NYT and Washington post and others are posting the very same leaks, so you should allow them to be designated terrorist organistations too. Any newspaper or rag thats critical of the government, slam the label terrorist on it, and shut it down or bomb it. Thats what you're advocating. Before you know it you live in North Korea.

Sad to think that the US was once the shining beacon of freedom. Shocking how easily people are manipulated to give up those freedoms voluntarily to protect them from fabricated threats. Goebbels would be proud.

 

[Nebor]

The same argument has been used by totalitarian regimes over and over throughout history, to take over newspapers (and later radio and tv stations), to "protect national security interests" and stop terrorist propaganda and all that.

So now you would allow wikileaks to be named a terrorist organisation (which, btw, allows the president to order an extra judicial murder on its members). Thing is, the NYT and Washington post and others are posting the very same leaks, so you should allow them to be designated terrorist organistations too. Any newspaper or rag thats critical of the government, slam the label terrorist on it, and shut it down or bomb it. Thats what you're advocating. Before you know it you live in North Korea.

Sad to think that the US was once the shining beacon of freedom. Shocking how easily people are manipulated to give up those freedoms voluntarily to protect them from fabricated threats. Goebbels would be proud.

Yup, it's sad but it's the reality of the modern world. It's the only way forward. If people weren't such liberal dickheads, spouting tons of classified information on the internet, this wouldn't have to happen. So when I'm patrolling the streets of your city instead of Kandahar City, searching your house instead of Abdullah's, don't blame me. Blame Julian Assange and people like him.

 

[Infohawk]

I can't imagine there's anyone actually naive enough to believe that governments operating in the realm of global politics can or should operate with complete transparency. Secrets are necessary. Exposing those secrets is treason for citizens, and an attack by foreigners.

Tell me, do you all want Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia to experience the same fate as Georgia did at the hands of Russia? Because our ability to defend those countries is compromised by the exposure of the agreement to do so.

I was being sarcastic.

 

[Nebor]

I was being sarcastic.

I know. I wasn't really addressing you.