In defense of Wikileaks
walt.foreignpolicy.com
In defense of Wikileaks
1–10 of 39 posts
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#2I am thankful the world has wikileaks
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#3A good article. Too often I feel the debate about wikileaks has become polarised.
On the one hand you have those saying everything should be open and available. And then on the other hand you have those who say that nothing should be leaked because it puts people at risk.
There is no doubt that, in the world, there are some very unpleasant people who want to harm/kill other people, and for that reason surely some things should be kept secret? But then surely those trying to protect us should be held accountable? There is a fine line, and people draw that line at different points.
Wikileaks provides a valuable service, but I do find it ironic that, for an organisation that tries to cut through and destroy government PR/propoganda, Julian Assange is very good at using similar PR to further his goals.
John Young of Cryptome has been very happily leaking documents without the whole "not staying in the same place for than 2 nights" mentality that Assange has.
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#4>It is also increasingly clear that the U.S. taxpayer is funding a vast array of clandestine activities of which they are only dimly aware
Increasingly clear? This book was published in the early thirties [1]. This has been totally clear for decades for anyone who cared to look. The quest is; what (if anything) can be done to make people care what the government is inflicting on other peoples in their name and with their money?
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#5I think I agree with this article for the most part. In my opinion, for important things you need people on pushing the extremes so you can get to the healthy middle. My friend often quotes to me "If you get what you asked for, you didn't ask for enough", and I think people who make the extreme claims (there should be no secrets, all software should be open source) are helping us people that actually want a middle ground.
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#6I believe that human beings are more likely to misbehave if they think they can shield what they are doing from public view.
I do not agree. I think that people are more likely to misbehave when they want to misbehave, regardless of a shielding mechanism.
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#7>It is also increasingly clear that the U.S. taxpayer is funding a vast array of clandestine activities of which they are only dimly aware Increasingly clear? This book was published in the early thirties [1]. This has been totally clear for decades for anyone who cared to look. The quest is; what (if anything) can be done to make people care what the government is inflicting on other peoples in their name and with t…
I was going to question that idea too. That book you just brought to my attention is amazing. A man in that time, speaking out like that? Wow.
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#8There is also a good summary of the leak in this Spiegel article -> http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,druck-72402... (in English).
It's quite revealing just how brutal the war in Iraq has been, with all parties willing to commit atrocities (al-Qaeda, Iraq police and U.S. army). It's definitely a much stronger image than media have been serving to us about the war.
Also, for those who feel some sympathy towards al-Qaeda, the reports about their decapitations practices are also quite enlightening. ("A document dated Nov. 3, 2007, for example, relates that an Iraqi woman approached US troops to tell them that Islamists had cut off her baby's head. The officers sent out a few soldiers to look into the matter. The report ends: "Confirms baby is decapitated."").
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#9I did a very similar blog post back in August and took the other side, here - http://www.melonakos.com/2010/08/02/wikileaks/
Re: In defense of Wikileaks
#10>It is also increasingly clear that the U.S. taxpayer is funding a vast array of clandestine activities of which they are only dimly aware Increasingly clear? This book was published in the early thirties [1]. This has been totally clear for decades for anyone who cared to look. The quest is; what (if anything) can be done to make people care what the government is inflicting on other peoples in their name and with t…
You've already made the point that I'm about to make. That book is from the 30's, it hasn't made the best seller lists in decades; nor am I aware if it's required reading for most classes.
People need a modern reminder like Wikileaks.