The Wikileaks dessemination megathread (Cablegate and beyond)

[BeauJangles]

Not true, the wikileaks story is that the US government successfully pressured Germany into not prosecuting the people who kidnapped the victim in the first place. The US used it's leverage or had some bargaining chips so that the wrongdoers escaped justice, that is morally unacceptable and is also a big story.

Even if it wasn't ever officially known, it was pretty obvious what happened. Germany issued arrest warrants for 18 CIA operatives believed to have been involved in the kidnapping and then the story disappeared from the media. No surprises that the US put political pressure on them to drop / ignore the charges.

I stand corrected about the lack of new information.

 

[Infohawk]

Another leak that puts thousands of lives at risk... OMG!

Edit: Also saw that Assange is on the verge of being charged by the US under the espionage act. Despicable. If he's guilty then so is every media outlet that reported on the leaks. The UK/Sweden better refuse to extradite.

I made that leak up...

 

[Blackjack200]

I made that leak up...

Woosh...

 

[irwincur]

Up to now not a single leak has really surprised me. Anyone with a brain and some knowledge of world politics could have guessed most of them.

Other than that, I just don't see anything too terrible being leaked. What I see is a United States that is looking out for its best interests. Wow, isn't that the job of a government, to protect itself and it's people. Every other nation in the world does the exact same thing, most are probably an order of magnitude worse. This just does not paint the US and the evil scheming corrupt entity that most of the far left would like to see.

 

[bamacre]

WikiLeaks’ release of classified information has generated a lot of attention world-wide in the past few weeks.

The hysterical reaction makes one wonder if this is not an example of killing the messenger for the bad news.

Despite what is claimed, information so far released, though classified, has caused no known harm to any individual, but it has caused plenty of embarrassment to our government. Losing a grip on our empire is not welcomed by the neo-conservatives in charge.

There is now more information confirming that Saudi Arabia is a principle supporter and financier of Al Qaeda and this should set off alarm bells since we guarantee its Sharia-run government.

This emphasizes even more the fact that no Al Qaeda existed in Iraq before 9/11, and yet we went to war against Iraq based on the lie that it did.

It has been charged, by self-proclaimed experts, that Julian Assange, the internet publisher of this information, has committed a heinous crime deserving prosecution for treason and execution or even assassination.

But should we not at least ask how the U.S. government can charge an Australian citizen with treason for publishing U.S. secret information, that he did not steal?

And if WikiLeaks is to be prosecuted for publishing classified documents, why shouldn’t the Washington Post, New York Times, and others that have also published these documents be prosecuted? Actually, some in Congress are threatening this as well.

The New York Times, as a result of a Supreme Court ruling, was not found guilty in 1971 for the publication of the Pentagon Papers. Daniel Ellsberg never served a day in prison for his role in obtaining these secret documents.

The Pentagon Papers were also inserted into the Congressional Record by Senator Mike Gravel with no charges being made of breaking any National Security laws.

Yet the release of this classified information was considered illegal by many, and those who lied us into the Vietnam War and argued for its prolongation were outraged. But the truth gained from the Pentagon Papers revealed that lies were told about the Gulf of Tonkin attack which perpetuated a sad and tragic episode in our history.

Just as with the Vietnam War, the Iraq War was based on lies. We were never threatened by Weapons of Mass Destruction or Al Qaeda in Iraq, though the attack on Iraq was based on this false information.

Any information that challenges the official propaganda for the war in the Middle East is unwelcome by the administration and supporters of these unnecessary wars. Few are interested in understanding the relationship of our foreign policy and our presence in the Middle East to the threat of terrorism. Revealing the real nature and goal for our presence in so many Muslim countries is a threat to our empire and any revelation of this truth is highly resented by those in charge.

Questions to consider:

1. Do the American people deserve to know the truth regarding the ongoing war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen?

2. Could a larger question be: how can an Army Private gain access to so much secret material?

3. Why is the hostility mostly directed at Assange, the publisher, and not our government’s failure to protect classified information?

4. Are we getting our money’s worth from the $80 billion per year we spend on our intelligence agencies?

5. Which has resulted in the greatest number of deaths; lying us into war, or WikiLeaks’ revelations or the release of the Pentagon Papers?

6. If Assange can be convicted of a crime for publishing information, that he did not steal, what does this say about the future of the First Amendment and the independence of the internet?

7. Could it be that the real reason for the near universal attacks on WikiLeaks is more about secretly maintaining a seriously flawed foreign policy of empire than it is about national security?

8. Is there not a huge difference between releasing secret information to help the enemy in the time of a declared war – which is treason – and the releasing of information to expose our government lies that promote secret wars, death, and corruption?

9. Was it not once considered patriotic to stand up to our government when it’s wrong?

Thomas Jefferson had it right when he advised: “Let the eyes of vigilance never be closed.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDp1izlMQT0

 

[db]

Rough cut Documentary on Wikileaks, worth watching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhTfOL9_HBE

 

[Phokus]

Rough cut Documentary on Wikileaks, worth watching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhTfOL9_HBE

Thanks for this, very interesting. Sweden is a fantastic country for having those strong freedom of expression laws, i hope they don't change them.

 

[yllus]

Just a couple of things from late Friday and the weekend:

Julian Assange accuser "still in Sweden": The coordinator of a Christian outreach group in the West Bank denied reports Friday that one of two women accusing WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of sex offenses had left Sweden and traveled to a town in the Palestinian territory. (Source)

Pope wanted Muslim Turkey kept out of EU: The cable released by WikiLeaks shows that Ratzinger was the leading voice behind the Holy See's unsuccessful drive to secure a reference to Europe's "Christian roots" in the EU constitution. The US diplomat noted that Ratzinger "clearly understands that allowing a Muslim country into the EU would further weaken his case for Europe's Christian foundations". (Source)

Cuba to be insolvent within 3 years: A newly released confidential U.S. diplomatic cable predicts Cuba's economic situation could become "fatal" within two to three years, and details concerns voiced by diplomats from other countries, including China, that the communist-run country has been slow to adopt reforms. (Source)

 

[yllus]

I'm a little bit busy lately, but there's breaking news that Mr. Assange has been granted bail by a British judge. Reuters is confirming the story.

 

[bamacre]

I'm a little bit busy lately, but there's breaking news that Mr. Assange has been granted bail by a British judge. Reuters is confirming the story.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moore/why-im-posting-bail-money_b_796319.html

Michael Moore forked over $20k for his bail. :biggrin:

 

[rudder]

If you can't trust a communist ally who can you trust? So Chavez thought he was being nice and providing China with oil at $5/barrel.

China does the capitalist thing by reselling the oil and profiting.

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/...its-off-cheap-venezuelan-oil/?mod=rss_WSJBlog

 

[yllus]

Again not a whole lot of time on my hands to look over stories, but I have seen a story on the conditions that the person accused of originating the cable leak, Mr. Manning, is enduring:

The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention

Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime. Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture.

Interviews with several people directly familiar with the conditions of Manning's detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed, establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions likely to create long-term psychological injuries.

Since his arrest in May, Manning has been a model detainee, without any episodes of violence or disciplinary problems. He nonetheless was declared from the start to be a "Maximum Custody Detainee," the highest and most repressive level of military detention, which then became the basis for the series of inhumane measures imposed on him.

From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch).

For the one hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from accessing any news or current events programs. Lt. Villiard protested that the conditions are not "like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the hole," but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out.

 

[bfdd]

I honestly don't care how the government treats Manny. He signed up and became their property.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Poor Manny - he signed his ass over to Uncle and also knew what he was doing.

Of course those that support his actions are going to complain - he did nothing wrong in their eyes

 

[Harvey]

Poor Manny - he signed his ass over to Uncle and also knew what he was doing.

And yet, he stood up and followed his conscience. Sometimes, the only cleanser for deception and corruption is the bright white light of truth, and sometimes, it's worth the price. :thumbsup:

Of course those that support his actions are going to complain - he did nothing wrong in their eyes

SCOUT: Ummm... General Custer. There's a whole lot of Injuns waiting in ambush around that valley ahead, sir.

GEN. CUSTER: What Injuns? I don't want to hear about no Injuns. FORWARD MARCH!

 

[irwincur]

And yet, he stood up and followed his conscience. Sometimes, the only cleanser for deception and corruption is the bright white light of truth, and sometimes, it's worth the price. :thumbsup;

Sorry, it was his job to protect this data, whether he liked it or not. He committed a deceptive act against his nation. I could care less what happens to him.

 

[Phokus]

No surprise that conservatives would condone torture. Manning is a hero.

 

[Harvey]

Sorry, it was his job to protect this data, whether he liked it or not. He committed a deceptive act against his nation. I could care less what happens to him.

Sometimes, REAL duty to the nation is contrary to rules, orders and protocol. I believe this is such a time.

He knew the possible consequenses, and he made his choice. I respect that, and I could care less how "sorry" you are.

 

[bamacre]

I give our resident Lefties some credit for opposing their own party in power on this issue. :thumbsup:

 

[Perknose]

Poor Manny - he signed his ass over to Uncle and also knew what he was doing.

Of course those that support his actions are going to complain - he did nothing wrong in their eyes

Please read the entire article yllus linked to above about the conditions Manning has been held in for the last 7 months. I came here to post this very same article.

This is the United States of America, he is innocent until proven guilty, and yet the conditions he has been subjected to are considered TORTURE in much of the civilized world and even by dint of prior decisions of our SCOTUS.

I find your dismissive response shallow and repugnant.

 

[LumbergTech]

I give our resident Lefties some credit for opposing their own party in power on this issue. :thumbsup:

when you see cronies on both sides squirming, you know it may be worth thinking over carefully

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Poor Manny - he signed his ass over to Uncle and also knew what he was doing.

Of course those that support his actions are going to complain - he did nothing wrong in their eyes

Once again, the retarded neocon playbook in action:

"Someone you don't like = throw out the law, do whatever you want."

He should be protected under the UCMJ just like any other soldier that is accused of a crime. Do you somehow disagree with following the law?

Unless the military treats all soldiers accused of crimes like they are treating Manning, it shouldn't be happening.

He should be treated the same, given a court martial according to the UCMJ, and let the jury/judge determine his guilt or innocence. Thats the law. Sorry you feel that anytime it's someone you don't like, you can ignore these little things.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

First off, I support the general goal of transparancy. I also fully understand that sometimes things need to be secret. I might not agree with how WikiLeaks/Assange have put commentary/edits on documents to make them anti-american (the gunship footage of "journalists" that were killed). If they released things unedited, save for protecting names and things like that, versions then I would fully support that.

I have been in a few debates in the past week or two about this subject with both a die hard liberal and a die hard conservative who are basically on opposing ends of the political spectrum. What I find surprising is they both agreed that Assange/WikiLeaks is a problem and needs dealt with, even going so far as to say they are cyber terrorists. I completely disagree for a few reasons.

First, the information published doesn't really show anything that is surprising (the cables or otherwise). Honestly, what has been put out there that really came as a surprise to anyone? Diplomats/people say shit about others behind their back. Shocking. Countries are trying to get nukes. What a revelation. In a war zone people get killed that appear to have weapons on them (and you can clearly see an AK47 in the gunship footage if you ask me). I never would have guessed. The stuff published basically conflicts with our fantasy of the US being this perfect country who is always in the right. It makes us wake up to reality, even if just for a moment.

Secondly, people attempt to make the argument that the information will lead to deaths of innocents. Show me any proof of this and that it's not just speculation. Things our government says/does could cause deaths as well. How about we stick to actual facts/evidence and not get sucked into the Fox News altered reality where everything will cause the end of the world and Glenn Beck cries. WikiLeaks needs to black out names and details like specific locations of bases/outposts/etc where knowledge of those specifics could directly lead to deaths. Publish the general ideas of them without the specifics that could cause loss of life, and this is non issue.

Third, what exactly has Assange/WikiLeaks done wrong? Nothing, other than publish things we don't want published in the public eye. Palin says he is a traitor. He's not a US citizen. He hasn't stolen/hacked anything, so those options are out. What about the Espionage Act of 1917? He hasn't caused military disobedience nor has he caused any information to get out to support our enemies (at least not to the point where an impartial jury would agree). Please explain what, exactly, is wrong about what he is doing, because I can't see anything that is wrong about it.

Fourth, leaking of information is not exactly new with the Pentagon Papers being a prime example. In the digital/internet age it's even easier. If the problem is that the information is getting leaked then how about we address the actual problem at it's source. With over 800,000 top secret clearances and who knows how many secret clearances currently out there, this is not an easy problem. Also add in that we have to be able to communicate effectively and quickly internally in our government (i.e. 9/11 could have been prevented if intelligence agencies worked together right?). A few things can be done about this, and none of it's anything ground breaking since it exists already in the IT/networking fields. Starting with the use of any kind of external media on the PC you access the intranet on. USB ports need to be disabled, CD/DVD should be read only, and there shouldn't be access to the actual internet on the system either. Even better is physically securing the system and not allowing external media in/out of the room with access to this intranet. Printing should be restricted, and securly disposed of. Also, use of a AAA/IPS type system that actively monitors accounts and looks for excessive/questionable usage. Nobody should be able to access thousands of documents in a short period of time. If a user hits a questionable limits (done through research studies of typical use) in a time period, their account is locked until it's reviewed.

Finally, a lot of the information is more diplomatic in nature where people are giving honest opinions on another person/government. This should not be done through cables since they are stored. For example, if I am at work I wouldn't send an email about my manager being a dick and idiot. That could be stored and get out later. No communication this way should be anything other than just the facts. Offer opinions through encrypted non-official channels (word doc that' then encrypted and emailed, ideally on a VPN).

Assange/WikiLeaks has made mistakes, but I think it's needed. Also it will never go away, so perhaps we should look internally to our government first instead of trying to persecute externally. Oh and there is already another site that is joining in the WikiLeaks circle. It operates differently, but it's purpose is the same (just might get around the legal issues). The website is OpenLeaks, and Wired has an article about it here (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/openleaks/).

 

[Wreckem]

No surprise that conservatives would condone torture. Manning is a hero.

It is not torture. Nor is it cruel and unusual punishment according to the laws of the United States and the Supreme Court of the United States..

There are people that have spent years and years in 23/1 solitary lockup. There was a guy in Va. that spent 10 years in 23/1 solitary lockup for not cutting his hair.

There is/was a 70 year old in California who spent 14+ months in solitary for refusal of paying a $47,000 fine for filing paperwork a day late. He wasn't convicted, he merely refused to pay a judge imposed fine of $47,000 and then refused to tell the court his assests. SCotUS denied his motion.

Terry Nichols is spending a life sentence in solitary confinement. Both he and mcviegh were in solitary prior to and throughout their trials.

Bottom line is the use of 23/1 solitary confinement is not torture or cruel and unusual punishment according to the laws of the United States. Should he have pillows and blankets? Sure. Its it torture that he doesn't have them? No.

 

[Throckmorton]

DisgruntledVirus, I take issue with your "show me evidence of people being killed" talking point.

The act of releasing the identities of those Afghans to the Taliban is unethical. It doesn't matter if we can dig up evidence to show you to win an internet argument. It's exactly the same as ratting out Jews to the Nazis. I bet you'd realize that was unethical without needing evidence that they were killed as a result. If you think it's somehow different, you'll have to explain.