Just came by here - after many moons - to see what's up and .... nary a word at all about Wikileaks! Not interested? Then again, even NYT seems reluctant to write much about it. Are people concerned about going on record about that topic?
Let me tell you, this thing is absolutely HUGE everywhere else!
For one, the documents are - apart from some chatty stuff - quite astounding and will most certainly have a major and lasting impact on how effective US foreign politics will be. Major loss of face and confidence. Sobering for those, who still had some positive feelings for the US and Obama.
Astounding, how poor the official handling of this matter has been. Instead of staying cool, there has been a flurry of highly questionable responses. The administration urging US corporations to take action against Wikileaks is what one usually associates with China. Makes Mrs. Clinton's speech from a year ago, in response to China's hacking of Google, seem like a bad joke.
Then there is that oh so timely "rape" charge against Assange. Interestingly, one of the two "ladies" had just spent several months in Florida, with a CIA run anti-Castro organization. She also wrote a blog, a few years ago, on how to "get revenge on an ex-boy friend" by calling wolf, and now she's left Sweden for Israel. That the two women exchanged glowing SMSs about their conquest and gave a party for their "rapist" after the nights together, only adds to the mystery.
One should also consider that the charge is based on a very unusual law in Sweden: There, even consensual sex can be declared rape (afterwards!!), when the woman claims she isn't feeling good about the sex anymore. In this particular instance, she complained to the police that their encounter had started with a condom and that - somehow - the rubber wasn't in place at the end! That's what the man is charged with. One has got to be pretty bushy tailed, not to smell a rat!
The real scandal is that the US kept supposedly secret (and easily copyable) documents on several servers, accessible to half a million people. To now act, as though someone had perpetrated a heinous crime is just stupid. Some of the public reactions are just astounding. Palin asking for the man to be hunted down, Lieberman musing, whether even the papers, which are reprinting the documents, ought to be charged, or ominous eMails to university students, warning them that visiting the Wiki site might jeopardize their future careers, well, what can you say?
Unless of course, the whole thing is only intended to facilitate further internet censorship and control. First the pedos, then the terrorists and now Wikileaks .... on our way to media fascism?
Anyway, just thought, I'd say hello.
"Humor ist, wenn man trotzdem lacht" (Humour means laughing despite of it)
. Your perspective on WikiLeaks is very interesting, thank you.
WikiLeaks does make the headlines everyday though. Take a look at CNN.com for example.
I'm not totally sure how the average American feels. The US government is angry as hell.
There was one thing that really, really bothered me when WikiLeaks brought out the first batch of documents last July. One document said that Pakistan's premiere intelligence service, the ISI, is helping the Afghan Taliban attack American troops. We give Pakistan a billion dollars every year to help in fighting terrorism. I look at it this way, we are giving Pakistan a billion dollars every year to help them kill US soldiers. That's got me angry as hell yet I never hear it brought up for discussion.
There are so many things going wrong right now; the financial crisis, the home foreclosures, the growing deficit, the high unemployment rate, the ineffectiveness of government. Maybe it's hard to focus on WikiLeaks. I don't know. .
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
The major thing that it will have an effect on is what people will be willing to document anymore. It is thought that rather than trying to make government more transparent, it will have the opposite effect of people actually just not writing it down. After statutes run out for information being held we won't have the documentation to be released.
Loc: Finland, on the Arctic Circle
Nope. Just that one Sarge posted. I've been wondering the same thing, but didn't want to start a thread and I guess it's sort of bubbling under here, anyway. Besides, I come to the Box every so often now anyway.
I mosty agre with you on this one, although that Mrs Clinton speech was a joke in the first place. :P
And yeah, the "official reaction" to this is somewhere in between ludicrous, hypocrite, disgusting, obvious and transparent. The last two being of course as in the smoke and mirrors dept. A big pile of BS. I think they are just shaking the tree hard at this point.
That blog thing Eckhard says about, btw. is pretty common knowledge here in Europe, folks. It's been on blogosphere especially.
The real scandal is that the US kept supposedly secret (and easily copyable) documents on several servers, accessible to half a million people. To now act, as though someone had perpetrated a heinous crime is just stupid.
I was quite impressed by dinner jacket's observation that the initial leaks were a thinly disguised exercise in anti-Iranian propaganda. That was pretty obvious to be honest but it went straight over the heads of the Western Media which lapped it all up at face value as some kind of scoop - even the Guardian was taken in.
SO wikileaks is no different from Robert Knovak that leaked Valerie Plame's name, or ABC, NBC, Fox, CBS or any other news. How about the Washington Post and Watergate...
IT's NOT ANY different !!
The private is the one who gets nailed !!
And the DOD is at fault for NOT securing the data if it was so sensitive !! What about their FUBAR activities ? My understanding is it wasn't "hacked" per se- it was just sitting there... unprotected**. Some there should be booted !
**The private still gets nailed because when you log into ANY Federal server (even for email) it warns you that anything here is the property of the USG. Protected or not, he's responsible for keeping it secure (i.e. don't share). But Wikileaks is protected under the Freedom of the Press. The USG can't do SHT legally !!
Is much of the information old news and not, to the last word, reflective of current U.S. policy and opinion? Yes.
Does this prove that indiscretion and a willingness to speak one's mind when an element of privacy is assumed is not the sole province of the average schmo? Yes.
Is this issue probably less important to most Americans than jobs, the deficit, and next week's/next month's/next year's economic outlook? Yes.
Is it a surprise that this is a perfect opportunity for those who relish the concept of the U.S. spiraling down the global toilet bowl to jump on that message under the not-so-subtle guise of wanting to "just say hello"? Nope.
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.