6 ms·

Let's wait and see. Besides, whore or not, the world is a better place due to wikileaks.

by iwr 16y ago

hugh3 16y ago
That remains rather unproven, but I don't feel like arguing about it.
citricsquid 16y ago
How so? What changes have actually happened because of the leaks that happened? We'd all forgotten within a week.
- steveklabnik 16y ago
  It has to start somewhere. It hasn't gotten better yet, but it still might. History is hard to see while it's being made...
  - hugh3 16y ago
    ... or it might get worse! Potential informants, no longer trusting the US to be able to keep their identities secret, clam up. Intelligence dries up. Bombs go off. People die. Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria.
    - ThomPete 16y ago
      What evidence do you have that that is actually what will happen?
      - nano81 16y ago
        The point is that leaks of this magnitude have much broader effects than you can imagine. You can argue about whether it is a net positive or negative, but there WILL be negative consequences and to pretend otherwise is just fooling yourself.
        steveklabnik 16y ago
        It's also a matter of whose perspective you're coming from. "The US is hurt in diplomatic relations" is bad for some, good for others.
        ThomPete 16y ago
        I think it's fooling yourself to claim that you have any idea as to whether this will affect future informers.
      - hugh3 16y ago
        None at all. I'm the one arguing that we don't know whether it is a net good or bad. Much like throwing pennies off the top of the Empire State Building, though, uncertainty about whether something will have positive or disastrously negative consequences is generally a good argument against doing it.
      - jacquesm 16y ago
        What evidence is there that informants no longer trusting US handlers is a bad thing ?
- iwr 16y ago
  No institutional change per se, but a realization that state institutions enjoy too many information protections. These protections are ostensibly in place to further "national security", but are in fact a means to cover up crime. Julian Assage's demeanor or persona is irrelevant.
- vaksel 16y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Notable_leaks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Notable_leaks some of those had a little bit of impact
  - hugh3 16y ago
    The one with most direct consequences I can see was that a police officer got sacked because he was a member of the British National Party. How the hell can that be legal? Are police officers banned from joining all political parties or just the BNP?
    - davnola 16y ago
      Membership of BNP is incompatible with being a police officer because it's incompatible with the police force's equal opportunities policy. Police officers are contractually obliged to follow the policy. Rightly or wrongly (rightly imo) that's the justification for sacking him. Membership of, say, the Green Party, does not conflict with the officer's obligations.
      - yters 16y ago
        How does someone's party affiliation keep the police force from following its equal opportunities policy?
        antipaganda 16y ago
        The BNP is an overtly racist party. If you join them, it is assumed you follow their policies and general belief structure. Those policies and beliefs are incompatible with what the police are ordered to do as part of their jobs. It's better than a policy of ignoring the beliefs of your officers, isn't it?
    - epo 16y ago
      Perhaps because the police are supposed to be impartial and serve all equally. The BNP is overtly racist and advocates explicit discrimination against and persecution of minorities. A member of the BNP is by definition not a proper person to be a policeman.
- Zakuzaa 16y ago
  "We'd all forgotten within a week." [citation needed]
- aw3c2 16y ago
  You already forgot about Iceland? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Modern_Media_Initiative http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Modern_Media_Initiati...
- mcritz 16y ago
  How about the WikiLeaks attack helicopter video? It was a reminder for many Americans of the true horrors of war. The American press has been embedded and self-censored out of relevancy when it comes to war reporting.
  - commandar 16y ago
    My issue with the "Collateral Murder" video is that it was released in such a heavily editorialized manner; the raw footage would have served the same purpose. Instead, we got a video telling us exactly how we should interpret the footage. Not a fan of that, personally.
    - nhangen 16y ago
      and it's also taken completely out of context. It's easy to play armchair general unless you're the guy flying that bird.
      - commandar 16y ago
        Exactly. And my thing is, considering fog of war, I do think the aircrew of that chopper ultimately made the right decision given the information they had; which is far more horrifying than the editorialized nonsense Wikileaks published. In war, you can make all the right decisions and innocent people will still needlessly die. It's a far stronger statement of the horrors of war and the need to avoid it than the ridiculous claim that the military was intentionally targeting reporters and children.
- mdolon 16y ago
  Apparently this leak will show that an additional 15,000 civilians have died in Iraq. While that may not sound like much compared to the total who died, but think about it - 15,000 people like you and I died and the state department decided to hide this. If any other government did this there would be mass hysteria and public outrage.
- ajays 16y ago
  I haven't been able to look at this set, but one of the intriguing topics is that the Saudis are urging the US to attack Iran. This piece of information makes an attack on Iran (and the subsequent bloodshed and mayhem) less likely, once the light has been shined on the Saudi hand. This, IMHO, is a good thing. If we have to attack Iran (and I'm not saying we should), then we should do so because Iran is a threat to US, and not to the Saudis.
lushootseed 16y ago
Look at all those who claim they need proof that how he made the world a better place? I really feel sorry for all of those who feel so. I believe in full transparency with respect to the wars that has no end is sight. Our governments aren't telling the truth. Thanks to Assange for revealing the status quo on the wars and making a difference however minimal it is. I cannot believe people have been numbed down so much that they can't get up from their couches to do something positive (including me). Lets have some appreciation for someone who is doing it rather than being in the sidelines and commenting about it. It is easy to question motives folks...

Let's wait and see. Besides, whore or not, the world is a better place due to wikileaks.

by iwr 16y ago

Let's wait and see. Besides, whore or not, the world is a better place due to wikileaks.

hugh3 16y ago

That remains rather unproven, but I don't feel like arguing about it.

citricsquid 16y ago

How so? What changes have actually happened because of the leaks that happened? We'd all forgotten within a week.

steveklabnik 16y ago
It has to start somewhere. It hasn't gotten better yet, but it still might. History is hard to see while it's being made...
- hugh3 16y ago
  ... or it might get worse! Potential informants, no longer trusting the US to be able to keep their identities secret, clam up. Intelligence dries up. Bombs go off. People die. Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria.
  - ThomPete 16y ago
    What evidence do you have that that is actually what will happen?
    - nano81 16y ago
      The point is that leaks of this magnitude have much broader effects than you can imagine. You can argue about whether it is a net positive or negative, but there WILL be negative consequences and to pretend otherwise is just fooling yourself.
      - steveklabnik 16y ago
        It's also a matter of whose perspective you're coming from. "The US is hurt in diplomatic relations" is bad for some, good for others.
      - ThomPete 16y ago
        I think it's fooling yourself to claim that you have any idea as to whether this will affect future informers.
    - hugh3 16y ago
      None at all. I'm the one arguing that we don't know whether it is a net good or bad. Much like throwing pennies off the top of the Empire State Building, though, uncertainty about whether something will have positive or disastrously negative consequences is generally a good argument against doing it.
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      What evidence is there that informants no longer trusting US handlers is a bad thing ?
iwr 16y ago
No institutional change per se, but a realization that state institutions enjoy too many information protections. These protections are ostensibly in place to further "national security", but are in fact a means to cover up crime. Julian Assage's demeanor or persona is irrelevant.
vaksel 16y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Notable_leaks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Notable_leaks some of those had a little bit of impact
- hugh3 16y ago
  The one with most direct consequences I can see was that a police officer got sacked because he was a member of the British National Party. How the hell can that be legal? Are police officers banned from joining all political parties or just the BNP?
  - davnola 16y ago
    Membership of BNP is incompatible with being a police officer because it's incompatible with the police force's equal opportunities policy. Police officers are contractually obliged to follow the policy. Rightly or wrongly (rightly imo) that's the justification for sacking him. Membership of, say, the Green Party, does not conflict with the officer's obligations.
    - yters 16y ago
      How does someone's party affiliation keep the police force from following its equal opportunities policy?
      - antipaganda 16y ago
        The BNP is an overtly racist party. If you join them, it is assumed you follow their policies and general belief structure. Those policies and beliefs are incompatible with what the police are ordered to do as part of their jobs. It's better than a policy of ignoring the beliefs of your officers, isn't it?
  - epo 16y ago
    Perhaps because the police are supposed to be impartial and serve all equally. The BNP is overtly racist and advocates explicit discrimination against and persecution of minorities. A member of the BNP is by definition not a proper person to be a policeman.
Zakuzaa 16y ago
"We'd all forgotten within a week." [citation needed]
aw3c2 16y ago
You already forgot about Iceland? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Modern_Media_Initiative http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_Modern_Media_Initiati...
mcritz 16y ago
How about the WikiLeaks attack helicopter video? It was a reminder for many Americans of the true horrors of war. The American press has been embedded and self-censored out of relevancy when it comes to war reporting.
- commandar 16y ago
  My issue with the "Collateral Murder" video is that it was released in such a heavily editorialized manner; the raw footage would have served the same purpose. Instead, we got a video telling us exactly how we should interpret the footage. Not a fan of that, personally.
  - nhangen 16y ago
    and it's also taken completely out of context. It's easy to play armchair general unless you're the guy flying that bird.
    - commandar 16y ago
      Exactly. And my thing is, considering fog of war, I do think the aircrew of that chopper ultimately made the right decision given the information they had; which is far more horrifying than the editorialized nonsense Wikileaks published. In war, you can make all the right decisions and innocent people will still needlessly die. It's a far stronger statement of the horrors of war and the need to avoid it than the ridiculous claim that the military was intentionally targeting reporters and children.
mdolon 16y ago
Apparently this leak will show that an additional 15,000 civilians have died in Iraq. While that may not sound like much compared to the total who died, but think about it - 15,000 people like you and I died and the state department decided to hide this. If any other government did this there would be mass hysteria and public outrage.
ajays 16y ago
I haven't been able to look at this set, but one of the intriguing topics is that the Saudis are urging the US to attack Iran. This piece of information makes an attack on Iran (and the subsequent bloodshed and mayhem) less likely, once the light has been shined on the Saudi hand. This, IMHO, is a good thing. If we have to attack Iran (and I'm not saying we should), then we should do so because Iran is a threat to US, and not to the Saudis.

lushootseed 16y ago

Look at all those who claim they need proof that how he made the world a better place? I really feel sorry for all of those who feel so. I believe in full transparency with respect to the wars that has no end is sight. Our governments aren't telling the truth. Thanks to Assange for revealing the status quo on the wars and making a difference however minimal it is. I cannot believe people have been numbed down so much that they can't get up from their couches to do something positive (including me). Lets have some appreciation for someone who is doing it rather than being in the sidelines and commenting about it. It is easy to question motives folks...