Lets get some topical discussions on the go. Is Wikileaks right to release the information it has done and what do you think of the recent arrest and charges made against Julian Assange in Sweden?
Printable View
Lets get some topical discussions on the go. Is Wikileaks right to release the information it has done and what do you think of the recent arrest and charges made against Julian Assange in Sweden?
I had no idea such a thing had happened since our news these days is wholly dominated by the much more pressing issue of our country being unable to cope with something called snowfall *end sarcasm*
A phenomenon that is regularly associated with this season/time of year and one that we have quite regularly endured in years gone by yet one which we seem entirely unable to deal with every time it rolls around! *end rant*
Okay, topical discussion. Err...ummm...
Alright Gary, how's it going? :proud:
Lol well I can see this thread dying a quick death. I don't even know why I bother sometimes.....trying to bring some meaningful discussions in here.......might as well start another randomness thread.......*grumbles incoherently* :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Sorry Gary been busy
I think the idea of Wikileaks is on the whole a good idea, it is about time the general public found out the twisted world that our governments inhabit. there is a lot of bad things happening and about to happen, so hold on to your hats guys it is going to get very bumpy!!!
I think exposing security flaws is good, but I'm not too happy with the possibility of lives at risk by Wikileaks' behaviour.
The main problem I have with the wikileaks causes deaths argument is that there is no way to quantify it. It's a wishy washy argument that loses all credibility in my eyes when you consider how many deaths have been caused by the lies involving weapons of mass destruction etc.
I think I see Wikileaks in very much the same way as i do greenpeace. I quite like Greenpeaces objectives, i just disagree with a lot of the direct action which in the main is unlawful so i find it very difficult to give them any financial support.
Wikileaks has obviously published some sensetive documents which to be honest i am quite ambivelant about what i have heard so far. It's a bit embarassing in general but not earth shattering stuff. A revelation that Prince Andrew is a bit of a loud mouth stuck up pratt or that the yanks don't like us was not really the biggest shock I have had recently.................in fact i was a bit more shocked last time my toaster popped up :proud:
BUT I do think that the mentality of yesterdays attacks on mastercard and paypal etc by hackers seeking revenge for the withdrawal of services is not something i can really condone. It's just stinks of an organisation that will persue its objectives in anyway possible and is prepared to use its technical expertise to cause serious disruption to anyone and everyone to persue its aims.
I also think that people should be held to account for their actions and answer whatever charge is made against them. There is an alegation of rape against the man in charge. It was raised before these things were published and may or may not be justified. I think that trying to portray that this charge has simply been made because of the leaks is at best disenginious. Are we really to believe that justice in Sweden (not a third world country with the death sentence) is so bad that it can be manipulated in the full glare of the worlds media? Such a plot would have been ambitious even for Bush who would have been stupid enough to condone it.
Andy
(Swaps thinking head for beer drinking head)
Quote
It's just stinks of an organisation that will persue its objectives in anyway possible and is prepared to use its technical expertise to cause serious disruption to anyone and everyone to persue its aims.
I'm sorry,
I thought for a moment you were talking about the American Secret Service :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
I'll save that rant for another time but yes, them too!!Quote:
Originally Posted by craig_colliass
(They could also be the third world country with the death sentence I was referring to :rofl: :rofl: )
The attacks on various websites, as far as I've been able to gather, haven't come from the wikileaks organisation but rather from another organisation called anonymous which are sympathetic to the wikileaks cause. Although trying to get concrete info rather than opinion can be quite tricky in these situations :)
The arrest of Julien Assange on the charges cited are suspect because they are exactly the same charges that surface from time to time (mostly against soccer players) - all seem to involve 2 women - charges easy to cause shock or concern but incredibly hard to prove especially since these particular allegations date back to August and had already been dismissed by the Swedish court.
As for the leaks themselves......from what is nothing more than what could be called 'tittle-tattle' it has exposed the paranoia of the government of the USA. They have exerted thier influence over the likes of Paypal into witholding donations to Wikileaks and have likely had the same influence over Mastercard and Visa to do same.
Wikileaks have done the world a service - the air badly needed clearing of the dark and dirty world inhabited by the diplomatic services.
....that's my 2p worth :)
The argument is not that it causes deaths, but it can put lives at risk because there is no unaccountability for the material being published. Once it is out there it is impossible to retract. Just because something hasn't happened yet doesn't mean the argument is invalid. One should always err on the side of caution in cases like these.Quote:
Originally Posted by typhoon_driver
That really is a non sequitur, one is not related to another. Had the WMD portrayal been real the wikileaks documents would still have been published anyway and the threat of putting lives at risk would still be the same.Quote:
It's a wishy washy argument that loses all credibility in my eyes when you consider how many deaths have been caused by the lies involving weapons of mass destruction etc.
On the Iraq WMD thing there is documented proof that they had and used against the Curds and Iranian forces in the
past Gas (a WMD)to kill people including women and children. were the WMD argument went wrong is, the Iraqi
WMDs were smuggled across the boarder in civilian aid aircraft to Syria 4 months before the invasion, and all paperwork
of there existence was destroyed!
The flaw in the western governments argument on this point was the probable deployment of WMD in a very short time,
20 minutes I think, in rockets to Israel who have a lot of WMDs, who would retaliate and BOOOM!!!!. :uhoh: :uhoh:
This of course was to justify the action of occupation in Iraq by the American forces, this of course had nothing
to do with oil!!! :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Tens of thousands of dead Iraqis later and we have a LASTING AND JUST PEACE :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
When we have information about the obvious lies from all governments Wikileaks dose the world on the whole a
service to us all,
it is just a shame we need such a service. :cry: :cry:
wiki leaks is obviously an evil corperation, the HQ is based on the moonraker base off james bond.
True but surely going to war in the first place over what was essentially a lie (or overhyped report) put a hell of a lot of lives in danger and if anything has meant that civil liberties mean sod all. When was the last time you went through airport security and weren't made to feel like a criminal incase you had a bottle of water in your pocket?Quote:
Had the WMD portrayal been real the wikileaks documents would still have been published anyway and the threat of putting lives at risk would still be the same.
It would appear that everyone, governments included, could do with someone taking an occasional look over their shoulder to make sure everything is above board.
Maybe it's just me but i actually find the airport security ok. Remember working in Belfast in the late 90's where you had to queue up at the international airport to put your bags through the scanner and the vast majority of people got frisked by hand. That was before you even got to check in and you also had to go through the airport security to get into the departure lounge.Quote:
Originally Posted by typhoon_driver
Wikileaks reminds me that all people who live in some sort of free democracy have a duty to those that will in
time follow, to maintain scrutiny of the elected leaders, and there actions, and bring them to account if they transgress.
As our representatives in the global arena. We as a nation are jugged by others on what our government do.
Always remember when you say I won't bother to vote,
someone died to give you that privilege, freedom was certainly not free for them!!
Democracy can survive war, tyranny, starvation, natural disasters and much much more, but it can not survive prolonged periods of apathy.
If you can vote then vote every time.
All damn good reasons to vote.
Unfortunately, I must stick up for someone's choice not to vote, as I do for anyone's right to vote. It is free will that our forebearers fought for not people telling others what to do - in this case vote.
However, as an electoral canvasser, there is one thing I cannot stand which is not signing yourself onto the electoral roll. Before anyone starts whining, it is the citizen's duty, not the state's. If you turn up at a polling station without a polling card - it is not their problem, it's yours.
Also the polling box locks @ 22:00, it is still your responsibility to get your vote in by then, queue or no queue!
Ok rant over.
Yeah but you just don't understand why we can't apply for a postal vote and post it up to two weeks before hand or why when they open at 7am we can't get there before 9.45pm even though we normally have at least six weeks notice.Quote:
Originally Posted by psychostorm
I really do tink I'll be struggling to vote before 10pm in the may elections, just not enough time to organise anything!! :rofl: :rofl:
But yes, it's probably more important for the student fees thread but if you don't register than you're not entitled to a say!!
I quite understand the argument of the people not wanting to vote, the reality of political freedom, would require this point to be accommodated,
My point to those who put this argument forward is, if too many people take this line, then democracy is weakened as the politicians do not have a strong mandate to govern, and the apathetic attitude of the ordinary voter takes us back to the dark ages of fighting factions split on cultural, economic, religious or ethnic lines. thenthe corporate lobbyist vermin take hold.
My response to those who don't know who to vote for, is to go and spoil the voting slip this shows you can be bothered to vote, but none of the candidates are worth voting for in your opinion, I wish they would put on the voting slip none of the above box.
For those who can not be bothered to put a cross on a bit of paper once every 4 or 5 years don't bother to complain if you don't like the government you end up with.
I have greatly enjoyed the revalations from Wikileaks and look forward to more. It is very instructive to see that our representatives were telling us one thing and telling the American government something quite different. You might say' no big surprize. I knew all along that they re devious bastards' but there is a world of difference between suspecting something and KNOWING it. An example from my line of work. The UK government announced that it wanted to create the largest marine sanctuary in the world, around the Chagos islands in the Indian ocean. This is the site of the Diego Garcia base and building it involved expelling all the Cahgos islands from their homeland. Among environmentalists there were two schools of thought:
1. A big marine sanctuary is a good thing and we should support it.
2. It was intended to make it impossible for the Chagoseans to ever return.
We dismissed 2 as overly paranoid and went with 1. We now know, thanks to Wikileaks, that the entire purpose of the sanctuary was to block return of the Chagoseans and it was intended to use the the environmental lobby against them.
We won't get fooled again!
Those unfortunate people with no political clout whatsoever (I had never heard of the Chagos Islands before) not being able to return to their homes for the sake of some far-off superpower to gain what I can only describe as envirnmental brownie points. It stinks!