Wikileaks
Wikileaks, good or bad
0
Like it or hate it?
WikiLeaks is a non-profit organization that exposes government secrets to the public thru its website http://wikileaks.ch/ . It is very controversial. Some think it damages the country, some thinks that the citizens have a right to know.
Long story short -> Wikileaks is a whistleblowing websites, like that kid in kindergarten that keeps telling the teacher about you flooding the school toilet
So, do you support Wikileaks, or do you disapprove of wikileaks' doing?
WikiLeaks is a non-profit organization that exposes government secrets to the public thru its website http://wikileaks.ch/ . It is very controversial. Some think it damages the country, some thinks that the citizens have a right to know.
Long story short -> Wikileaks is a whistleblowing websites, like that kid in kindergarten that keeps telling the teacher about you flooding the school toilet
So, do you support Wikileaks, or do you disapprove of wikileaks' doing?
2
Takerial
Lovable Teddy Bear
This isn't a black and white situation. While some of the stuff that they have revealed is indeed something people have a right to know. A good deal more is information THEY SHOULD NOT RELEASE. Things that can ruins situations with allies, things that could endanger the lives of soldiers and others. Things that could ruin our economy even further.
Information is and always will be one of the most valuable resources. And you have to be very careful with how you deal with it.
Because it can and will endanger people needlessly and completely alter relations with other countries in a bad way.
Not to mention that there are too many freaken retards in this country that will blow out of proportion and completely fuck things up when they are just better off not knowing even though they have a right to it.
Information is and always will be one of the most valuable resources. And you have to be very careful with how you deal with it.
Because it can and will endanger people needlessly and completely alter relations with other countries in a bad way.
Not to mention that there are too many freaken retards in this country that will blow out of proportion and completely fuck things up when they are just better off not knowing even though they have a right to it.
0
People have the right to know what the country doing behind their back.
At least keep the most sensitive material secret, at least. Freedom also come with it's sacrifice.
Yet if revealing the corrupted government, i will gladly support them. A corrupted government is really the reason a country never advance.
At least keep the most sensitive material secret, at least. Freedom also come with it's sacrifice.
Yet if revealing the corrupted government, i will gladly support them. A corrupted government is really the reason a country never advance.
0
I think Kalistean hit the nail on the head with the first remark. This isn't a black and white situation. I don't even really want to try to go in depth regarding it. Simply put, there are some things that we citizens are better off not knowing. It's a huge case of being overly idealistic and perhaps even romantic that we have this given right to know everything that our government is doing. That's simply not the case.
There are certain things that need to be handled with deftness and without the interference of citizens questioning and complaining about the situation. However, there are obviously things (particularly ones that affect our lives as a core) that we should always be made aware of and actively participate in the decision making process where able.
As for Wiki Leaks, I don't read the site and I'm not terribly fond of them. I guess if I was forced to choose I would say the site should be shut down, or at least censored.
There are certain things that need to be handled with deftness and without the interference of citizens questioning and complaining about the situation. However, there are obviously things (particularly ones that affect our lives as a core) that we should always be made aware of and actively participate in the decision making process where able.
As for Wiki Leaks, I don't read the site and I'm not terribly fond of them. I guess if I was forced to choose I would say the site should be shut down, or at least censored.
1
I think they should release even the most sensitive information.
with any luck, this may lead to governments beings scared of leaks so much that they might just start being more careful about the things they do and the things they say.
with any luck, this may lead to governments beings scared of leaks so much that they might just start being more careful about the things they do and the things they say.
0
As long as they unveil some Russian/Chinese/Iranian ETC state sectets im cool with it but if their just gonna constantly be douchebags who reveal all our secrets (Embarrassing ones and important ones) to anyone who wants the information then I say fuck them! Close their bitch asses down and send them to the man --->
Governments and Politicians are always gonna be snakes but even though their corrupt as fuck... Momma dont like tattletales!!
Spoiler:
Governments and Politicians are always gonna be snakes but even though their corrupt as fuck... Momma dont like tattletales!!
0
As it have been stated, this is no simple matter. Personally I support Wikileaks for the most part, and even if I ultimately believes that the people have the right to know every dirty little secret that governments around the world have I'm not naive enough not to believe that it would work. But I believe that their work is for the most part important and justified.
I must say though, that I find the US' duckhunt after Julian Assagne quite amusing.
I must say though, that I find the US' duckhunt after Julian Assagne quite amusing.
0
Transparency is the only way to battle corruptions so I'm all for wiki leaks. They way the U.S. is dealing with it is really stirring up the U.S. hate over here tho.
It's a bit embarrassing that Assange is wanted for rape because he had sex with a girl, and then did it with her friend and they found out about each other a few days later and decided to screw him over as you don't need proof that someone's guilty of rape in sweden in order of to convict them. It's accused ones work to prove that he's innocent.
It's a bit embarrassing that Assange is wanted for rape because he had sex with a girl, and then did it with her friend and they found out about each other a few days later and decided to screw him over as you don't need proof that someone's guilty of rape in sweden in order of to convict them. It's accused ones work to prove that he's innocent.
0
Takerial
Lovable Teddy Bear
You people don't seem to understand.
They're not releasing just information about corruption and such. They are releasing things like locations of secret facilities and key points that can be entirely disastrous to the country as it makes them vulnerable to terrorism.
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/06/wikileaks/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn
This is an exact case on how information can severely hurt us. And is one of the reasons why I don't like wikileaks.
They seem to think that need to release ALL information and that couldn't be further from the truth as some information is secret solely to protect people.
They're not releasing just information about corruption and such. They are releasing things like locations of secret facilities and key points that can be entirely disastrous to the country as it makes them vulnerable to terrorism.
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/06/wikileaks/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn
This is an exact case on how information can severely hurt us. And is one of the reasons why I don't like wikileaks.
They seem to think that need to release ALL information and that couldn't be further from the truth as some information is secret solely to protect people.
0
I understand perfectly, but I still support most of what they do, emphasis on the "most". The thing is that they release information that the public have a right to know, so that they can't be misused by the governments. Now I do realize, and know that they have released things that even I think have been bad choices to leak out to the public, since it's a greater danger when everyone knows about it.
And about the thing with Assange being accused of rape, he's not convicted, he's only accused so far, they still need to prove that he is guilty. Now the problem with that is that it's been reviled that some politicians, and these girls have been offered big sums of money in order to try and get Assange convicted, since if he does, the US can demand him to be released form Swedish custody and held in the US instead.
And about the thing with Assange being accused of rape, he's not convicted, he's only accused so far, they still need to prove that he is guilty. Now the problem with that is that it's been reviled that some politicians, and these girls have been offered big sums of money in order to try and get Assange convicted, since if he does, the US can demand him to be released form Swedish custody and held in the US instead.
0
Takerial
Lovable Teddy Bear
And like I said, I do agree that some of the stuff revealed should be revealed.
But they are not be careful with how they reveal information. And that is my biggest beef with them. And personally, if they are that careless with information then I don't think they should be the ones responsible for revealing information like this.
I would rather have people who take the time and examine information and THINK about the consequences it could have on things like national security and the lives on soldiers as well as the way it could disastrously affect our relations with our allies before releasing secret information.
Information kept secret because our government officials don't want to look bad should be revealed. But that is a different sort than the information they released in the article I posted. Information that should be kept secret not because it makes someone look bad, but because it keeps people safe.
Releasing something just because the government labeled it top secret is not the fucking way to go. And someone who has that type of mentality should not be anywhere near the information.
But they are not be careful with how they reveal information. And that is my biggest beef with them. And personally, if they are that careless with information then I don't think they should be the ones responsible for revealing information like this.
I would rather have people who take the time and examine information and THINK about the consequences it could have on things like national security and the lives on soldiers as well as the way it could disastrously affect our relations with our allies before releasing secret information.
Information kept secret because our government officials don't want to look bad should be revealed. But that is a different sort than the information they released in the article I posted. Information that should be kept secret not because it makes someone look bad, but because it keeps people safe.
Releasing something just because the government labeled it top secret is not the fucking way to go. And someone who has that type of mentality should not be anywhere near the information.
0
Agreed, the information in the link should have been left undisclosed, since it's not relevant to the life of any everyday citizen, neither is it anything that anyone was trying to cover up for unjustified reasons. And I can see why this is a big deal for someone who live in a country that this involves, and I'm happy they haven't released any information of this kind about Sweden, even if I doubt that we would be a viable target anyway.
But yeah, Wikileaks do some stupid things, that is completely undeniable, but when it comes down to it they do (in my opinion) more good things than bad.
But it seems we can agree do disagree on this, since it's just a matter of priorities.
But yeah, Wikileaks do some stupid things, that is completely undeniable, but when it comes down to it they do (in my opinion) more good things than bad.
But it seems we can agree do disagree on this, since it's just a matter of priorities.
0
I agree with it about 90 percent so I voted yes, there are a few things that should be kept secret for the sake of our alaiances and place in the world, but generally
I belive we have the right to know, yet at the same time I understand why people keep secrets.
I belive we have the right to know, yet at the same time I understand why people keep secrets.
0
I get that people would want to make sure that the government doesn't abuse its power, but seriously, why even have a government if you're going to tie its hands behind its back. I never agreed with the kind of things that wikileaks does, its unpatriotic in the bad way. Being unpatriotic in that you question your government is important in resisting corruption, but pulling its pants down for all to see is just nasty in more ways than one. As it is, the government has a hard time functioning when anything it does is always wrong no matter what it decides. For a giant to walk, it will step on things, so if you want it to walk, things must be stepped on.
0
I don't really care. Someone made a great point about how Wikileaks didn't reveal anything that investigative journalist didn't already know. Basically, people looked at the news and said, "Yeah, they always talk about conspiracies and such. I bet they either aren't telling the whole truth, or they are making it all up for ratings"
Wikileaks only gave credence to what reporters have always been finding out (and doing it in the same way wikileaks does - by having informants pass on info). Since Wikileaks is "Outside the system" people give it more credibility. Notice, nothing has really changed in a tangible way. The only thing that really changes is how the governments of nations have to now be perceived to be acting towards other nations. After all, their people would not be happy if they sat back and said, "Yeeaaaahhh... we've known this all along but it was better not to say anything... We didn't feel like causing trouble."
Wikileaks only gave credence to what reporters have always been finding out (and doing it in the same way wikileaks does - by having informants pass on info). Since Wikileaks is "Outside the system" people give it more credibility. Notice, nothing has really changed in a tangible way. The only thing that really changes is how the governments of nations have to now be perceived to be acting towards other nations. After all, their people would not be happy if they sat back and said, "Yeeaaaahhh... we've known this all along but it was better not to say anything... We didn't feel like causing trouble."
0
Aura-Desu
Beautiful and Twisted~
I voted yes but I still believe there should be a limit to just exactly what they tell some information in general we should know but places that should be kept secret shouldnt be told so just anyone can know where its at.
0
I voted no. I'm up for informing the people about what the government does behind their backs but there are some things better off not known. I mean eventually a government has to make decisions to keep the peace that are best not known to the public thats how the world works.
0
While I like their core value of informing the citizens of information that is relevent to them, but covered up by the government, and whistleblowing on big companies, I can't agree with their current method of obtaining the information or the distribution of information.
They're being too rash, irresponsible, and completely noncooperative in terms of legality. The very nature of what they handle is sensitive, and although you have to be wary of government intervention, you shouldn't disregard the sovereignty of any nation in pursuit of your own ideals.
The information they send out en-mass has enormous reprecussions on international relations, making the recent releases the political equivalent of a hurricane. After doing so much damage, they brazenly threaten for more releases, all of which could cause traumendous damage to stability and peace all over the world.
Information is the most deadly weapon avaliable. It is the source of our strength, and so can also be the source of our downfall. To be irresponsible to this extent, not caring who gets hurt so as long as the goal is achieved, is unacceptable. That the government choose to sweep their dirt underneath the rug is unagreeable, but neither is indiscriminately distributing classified information.
WikiLeaks is not a government organization. They can claim to have experts in any field, but there is no possibility that they can be so comprehensive in their analysis of political, military, or civilian matters that they can predict the outcomes of releasing classified information better than any government. Just because they think the information can't be used dangerously, doesn't mean others can't find a way to use it in that fashion anyways. Simply releasing the documents could be like opening pandora's box, and if they have no idea what's inside of the box, what business do they have opening it, especially when there's no guarantee that they can close it?
They're being too rash, irresponsible, and completely noncooperative in terms of legality. The very nature of what they handle is sensitive, and although you have to be wary of government intervention, you shouldn't disregard the sovereignty of any nation in pursuit of your own ideals.
The information they send out en-mass has enormous reprecussions on international relations, making the recent releases the political equivalent of a hurricane. After doing so much damage, they brazenly threaten for more releases, all of which could cause traumendous damage to stability and peace all over the world.
Information is the most deadly weapon avaliable. It is the source of our strength, and so can also be the source of our downfall. To be irresponsible to this extent, not caring who gets hurt so as long as the goal is achieved, is unacceptable. That the government choose to sweep their dirt underneath the rug is unagreeable, but neither is indiscriminately distributing classified information.
WikiLeaks is not a government organization. They can claim to have experts in any field, but there is no possibility that they can be so comprehensive in their analysis of political, military, or civilian matters that they can predict the outcomes of releasing classified information better than any government. Just because they think the information can't be used dangerously, doesn't mean others can't find a way to use it in that fashion anyways. Simply releasing the documents could be like opening pandora's box, and if they have no idea what's inside of the box, what business do they have opening it, especially when there's no guarantee that they can close it?
0
I like WikiLeaks in concept. An outside force that threatens various governments, essentially providing a check/balance against coverups and other like irresponsible behavior. "I see what you did."
I don't think that they're doing any real damage, or at least damage we don't deserve. Take the examples of the Diplomatic Cables leaked in the Dec-13, 10 issue of Time. Hilary Clinton having diplomats spy on the UN behind their backs? Ali Abdullah Saleh covering-up US missile attacks that may have been responsible for civilian casualties? Or perhaps Hu Jintao's admittance that his govt. was behind hacking Google?
These are the kinds of pesky, sneaky things that need very badly to be forced into the limelight on a regular basis. Hilary having Diplomats spy on the UN, why would it have been productive to allow that to go on? US missile attacks being covered-up; IMO every single civilian casualty of the two useless wars in the middle east we cause need to be firmly in our laps. and China? Need I say more? the more that government is exposed for the lying, slimy, totalitarian cowards they are, the better.
"It puts people's lives in danger." Yeah, Hilary, I'd buy that if WikiLeaks were disclosing troop locations, or government encryption keys, or the codes to the President's football. but Assange isn't. So far, the most scandalous thing has been the exposure of diplomatic communications and shown alot of people as the liars they are. He's just under alot of heat because the liars happen to be powerful liars.
I don't think that they're doing any real damage, or at least damage we don't deserve. Take the examples of the Diplomatic Cables leaked in the Dec-13, 10 issue of Time. Hilary Clinton having diplomats spy on the UN behind their backs? Ali Abdullah Saleh covering-up US missile attacks that may have been responsible for civilian casualties? Or perhaps Hu Jintao's admittance that his govt. was behind hacking Google?
These are the kinds of pesky, sneaky things that need very badly to be forced into the limelight on a regular basis. Hilary having Diplomats spy on the UN, why would it have been productive to allow that to go on? US missile attacks being covered-up; IMO every single civilian casualty of the two useless wars in the middle east we cause need to be firmly in our laps. and China? Need I say more? the more that government is exposed for the lying, slimy, totalitarian cowards they are, the better.
"It puts people's lives in danger." Yeah, Hilary, I'd buy that if WikiLeaks were disclosing troop locations, or government encryption keys, or the codes to the President's football. but Assange isn't. So far, the most scandalous thing has been the exposure of diplomatic communications and shown alot of people as the liars they are. He's just under alot of heat because the liars happen to be powerful liars.
0
Few points here...
One: Things are secret for a reason. People, as a general rule, are stupid, and have no business knowing or being responsible for pretty much anything. Full disclosure to every individual is just not practical.
Two: With that in mind, the general public isn't likely to do much with this information other then generally disapprove in the governments direction and remain mostly benign. Potentially, however, there are people who could use the leaked information in a sneaky and malicious manner, and that's probably not a good thing.
Three: It probably isn't that big of a deal anyway. As I said before, there is a potential for leaks of important security information and the like, but most of what I've seen on wikileaks is stuff about how governments kill people and act like dicks, and other entirely unsurprising things. The kind of thing you have some ideas about but never KNOW, specifically, anything about.
tl;dr It's probably fine, and I don't care.
The only thing that really bothers me is that Assange seems to think he's somehow doing something significant.
One: Things are secret for a reason. People, as a general rule, are stupid, and have no business knowing or being responsible for pretty much anything. Full disclosure to every individual is just not practical.
Two: With that in mind, the general public isn't likely to do much with this information other then generally disapprove in the governments direction and remain mostly benign. Potentially, however, there are people who could use the leaked information in a sneaky and malicious manner, and that's probably not a good thing.
Three: It probably isn't that big of a deal anyway. As I said before, there is a potential for leaks of important security information and the like, but most of what I've seen on wikileaks is stuff about how governments kill people and act like dicks, and other entirely unsurprising things. The kind of thing you have some ideas about but never KNOW, specifically, anything about.
tl;dr It's probably fine, and I don't care.
The only thing that really bothers me is that Assange seems to think he's somehow doing something significant.