Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 211 posts

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#111

Post by adin »

isamuel wrote: post #59
mixmax wrote: post #26

As a European this comments really pisses me off "In other words, we do not need permission to apprehend Assange or his co-conspirators anywhere in the world." The political hatred the US has gotten from around the world stems largely from the idea that the US can do whatever it pleases wherever it pleases. Also " The United States has the capability and the authority to monitor his communications and disrupt his ope…

Yeah, the idea that the U.S. should blow apart its international alliances to apprehend someone whose activities are protected under American law is slightly insane. Then again, the author has a history of such things.

I hope not. Unfortunately the US doesn't have the best "track record" for respecting other countries laws. Off the top of my head the "extraordinary rendition" program and the SWIFT data records comes to mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition_by_the_... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05... http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/11/09/sweden-violated-tortur... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/15/swift_processing_hal...

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#112

Post by mkramlich »

zaphar wrote: post #19
mquander wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, then propose another way. If there's a gate, there's a gatekeeper. There is no doubt in my mind that I would rather have Julian Assange and the Wikileaks staff be that gatekeeper than the U.S. government and military, who have a track record of keeping horrifying, god-awful secrets regarding their own misconduct.

U.S. government and military, who have a track record of keeping horrifying, god-awful secrets regarding their own misconduct. This is true. However Assande and Wikileaks have put over a hundred peoples lives directly in danger through their leaks as well as potentially thousands more. Which effectively puts them all the way on the other end of the spectrum. Your saying that putting 100's of peoples lives at risk in…

Between Iraq and Afghanistan over the last 10 years arguably the US military has put millions of lives in danger, against their wishes. If releasing some documents might lead to a 100 deaths that would not otherwise have occurred is evil/criminal then how does that not pale in comparison to the field deployment of hundreds of thousands of soldiers and weapon systems in a foreign country which go on to cause 1000's of deaths that would not otherwise have occurred. If Assange's actions are reckless to any extent surely the US government's actions have been 100x+ more reckless and damaging.

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#113

Post by electromagnetic »

amanfredi wrote: post #70
electromagnetic wrote: post #14

The thing that concerns me is how panicked governments seem to be over the release of documents and their reaction is insane (IE seemingly trying to block out all free speech and free right to publication, etc) that I can't help but wonder what they're not wanting to be leaked. Someone without secrets doesn't worry about things being leaked. What secrets do these governments have that are huge to the point that they…

You don't need privacy if you have nothing to hide, eh?

Not particularly no, it's a nice thing to have and it certainly helps as a private citizen, however this is generally confusing anonymity with privacy. I'm comfortable sharing things online because I'm anonymous, because I'd prefer people in my personal life not know about certain things. However I don't keep this information to myself for an illicit benefit, however people don't have a reasonable expectation or justification to know what I'm doing at 10pm on a wednesday night. My boss does have a reason to know what I'm doing at 10am on a Wednesday, in fact he showed up at my job site - didn't concern me, because I wasn't doing anything I shouldn't have been.

However I have a reason and a reasonable expectation to know what my government officials are doing, or at least be able to appoint someone to supervise them. Yet I'm told 'tough shit' because my government for as far as I can see is embezzling my money to areas of government I have no legal rights to even have a trustworthy official even monitor them.

Security Intelligence Services is watchdogged, but why aren't members of my parliament as closely watched as fucking spies! Spies have a lot to hide, and they have justification to hide it, my MP does not have a reason to hide things from me because they got my vote.

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#114

Post by mkramlich »

damoncali wrote: post #60

I get the sense he thinks this a big political game. (after all, war is just the imposition of political policy via force). Having spent some time with the folks he is pissing off, I don't think it's an understatement to say that he may just get himself killed.

That will be the ultimate proof of whether he's truly a threat to any powerful interests. If he suddenly disappears or has an accident one day, that will likely be the other shoe dropping.

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#115

Post by kiba »

die_sekte wrote: post #100
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey I'm a systems guy -- technology systems and people systems. If you have a good idea for how a system of people would work to govern themselves, I'm game. Is there an example -- in the entire history of the planet -- of a government which had no need for secrecy? Sounds cool if it would work.

Another example of an anarchistic region: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City Kowloon Walled City was essentially lawless, not set up as an anarchy, but becoming one by chance. Controlled anarchy seems like a strange idea, but maybe that's what we need. Personally, I'm a fan of zenarchy, the belief that perfect anarchy follows general enlightenment. It's both joke and serious theory.

While most people meant anarchy as "lawlessness", anarchists use anarchy to mean without rulers, which is a pretty big difference.

So as you can see, anarchists are not advocates of no laws simply because there are almost nobody advocate chaos.

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#116

Post by mkramlich »

b-man wrote: post #21

I would like to see how this guy would react if it was an American citizen leaking information about random_enemy_country . Should the federal authorities of said country have the right to violate foreign soil?

Exactly. The level of hypocrisy is astounding. It is well-known that the US has been spying on other countries for a long time. There is a track record of involving citizens of foreign countries to engage in acts which are considered treasonous by their own countries standards and, if they had been our own citizen, treason in our own as well. What the US calls "treason" against itself would just be called "smart intelligence gathering" by the other country.

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#118

Post by jquery »

mahmud wrote: post #6

FWIW, this guy and his employer earn their living by foaming in the mouth "for America". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Enterprise_Institute

Maybe you could elaborate on what you mean by "foaming at the mouth"? I read the wikipedia article you linked to and nowhere was that mentioned.

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#119

Post by indrax »

tptacek wrote: post #36
mcantelon wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>1) Wikileaks is really pissing people off This is because what they're doing is effective. Ineffective things don't piss people off and trigger military disinfo campaigns. The author of the WPO blog article is an AEI member, a player in the neocon agenda: not some random pundit. >2) Assange has more power than many 3-star generals I'm fine with that. Assange isn't killing people. 3-star generals are. >3) Anarchy is…

When you call those prosecuting the US/NATO side of the conflict in Afghanistan "murderers", you run the risk of implicitly taking the side of US/NATO's adversaries, who in this case are the Taliban. Here's what I'm wondering: when did it become fashionable to stick up for the Taliban? The Taliban aren't the Sandinistas. The Taliban aren't the North Vietnamese Army. They aren't even Hezbollah. It is conceivable --- e…

Murderers can kill bad guys too.

Calling someone a murder means you assert that they have murdered.

Don't make a leap of logic and then try to tell other people what they 'risk implicitly' doing.

The fact that you took this nonsense as far as you did makes me wonder whether you have some emotional need to justify these murderers, or if it's just part of your job.

Re: Wikileaks Must Be Stopped

#120

Post by grandalf »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #3

I am struck by four things. 1) Wikileaks is really pissing people off. I don't mean the nicey, lets-go-protest-down-at-the-student-union kind of protest. I mean people who are not normally angry with anybody else in the world talking about throwing him in jail and/or killing him. Devil or Angel, that's a whole heap of pissing off he's accomplished. 2) Assange has more power than many 3-star generals, yet he's just so…

You've had a lot of insightful comments about this isssue, and although I tend to disagree with your conclusions, I think the quality of your analysis/argument has been superb.

I'd respond with only two points:

First, if Assange makes it harder to keep things secret, then less will be kept secret. This will have good and bad consequences, but I think it's safe to say that strict control of information (secrecy + focused propaganda) is a tool that despots rely upon heavily. That open democracies rely upon it can be viewed (as you seem to view it) as a necessity, or (as I view it) as an excess.

Assange is risking his own skin by doing this. Surely one or more of the governments could/would arrange for his assassination. Which is why this essay puzzles me. This sort of right wing critique will fuel the fire that has helped Assange publicize his mission, and will have the effect of making wikileaks just go away much harder.

Keep in mind that so far the secrets being leaked are not particularly revealing in terms of their information content. The harsh words by government officials are because the leaked information might cause the public to question its propaganda message about the war.

What I have come to realize from all of this is just how tightly intertwined a war effort is with propaganda, and to a lesser extent secrecy. Assange just may put a huge hole in the ability of modern governments to do easily achieve the level of secrecy/propaganda necessary to get a comfortable, complacent yet principled people to approve of mass slaughter.

Post reply on HN