WikiLeaks Strikes Again

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/02/122923/wikileaks-makes-all-its-us-diplomatic.html

They just released everything they had.

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...

Get back to me when some brave soul has dug through it all and found the juicy bits.

What's precedent ever done for us?

Assange's ego just keeps growing.

edited 2nd Sep '11 1:00:39 PM by silver2195

Currently taking a break from the site. See my user page for more information.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - everyone at Wiki Leaks can go fuck themselves with a red hot fire poker.

I have naught but contempt for Wiki Leaks.

edited 2nd Sep '11 1:03:54 PM by MarkVonLewis

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/08/31/122766/cable-massacre-of-iraqi-family.html

While I'm not jumping to conclusions, this could be a very serious scandal.

Edit: A Google search suggests that reputable news sources haven't picked up the story.

Edit 2: Well, The Guardian picked up the story, but had a somewhat different perspective from the articles in left-wing blogs and the like: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/02/wikileaks-iraq-massacre-inquiry

edited 2nd Sep '11 1:17:39 PM by silver2195

Currently taking a break from the site. See my user page for more information.

I hate WikiLeaks.

If I were the President and their founder guy who's name I can't spell and don't care to learn how to spell got caught in the US, I'd execute him for treason. Interfering in an active military campaign, endangering lives, and then having the nerve to say they're in the right? What a bunch of dicks...

I am now known as Flyboy.

The people love 'em over here. They adore Anonymous, too.

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:25:15 PM by MilosStefanovic

The sin of silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.

I couldn't care less about what Anonymous thinks, and I'm sure Serbia loves it since, yet again, it's another country the US is fucking with, for reasons I'm not entirely sure of (since we sure as hell don't need another base in Europe...).

I am now known as Flyboy.

Bravissimo, you just killed the wrong guy for the wrong reason.

(Please note, I neither have a positive nor negative opinion regarding WikiLeaks.)

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:03:15 PM by Lock

Programming and surgery have a lot of things in common: Don't start removing colons until you know what you're doing.

Oh, all the people in the US Government who helped them can meet the firing squad, too.

He's just especially blatant about being a dick. Although I suppose I can't execute a foreign national for treason, can I? Bleh... I'd find a way...

Oh, I know, I'd make him and honorary citizen and then draft him, before dropping him off somewhere nice and hot in Afghanistan. If they don't kill him, our guys will...

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:09:43 PM by USAF713

I am now known as Flyboy.

You know, Wikileaks does serve a purpose in overcoming censorships. Unless you support the Chinese Govenment's coverup of Tiananmen Square?

I know, I know, I'm not playing fair. But it's not a black and white issue, and wikileaks was formed with noble purposes in mind. The issue is that there's a difference between censorship and withholding information to protect people...but then again, that varies depending on what country you're in. I don't suppose Wikileaks leaking information that puts innocent people of ours in the army in danger for no better reason then 'freedom of information', but I also think you shouldn't paint the entire organization with the same brush as you paint those people.

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:27:06 PM by Katrika

"You fail to grasp the basic principles of mad science. Common sense would be cheating." - Narbonic

I support Wikileaks in principal.

People need to find out things like if our own soldiers killed civilians.

Withholding information is something we can't go unnoticed.

Drafting non citizens and then relocating them? I think you're getting too emotional and irrational over this.

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:27:28 PM by Thorn14

WikiLeaks wasn't trying to be pro-freedom of information, they just wanted to fuck with the US. What "high and mighty goal" does releasing random diplomatic cables (which are immaterial to the public anyhow) and the names of informants on terrorists accomplish?

Perhaps I am being irrational. I can't think of a better way to shut them down, though...

I am now known as Flyboy.

Every time someone like USAF makes a post like the ones in this thread, my mixed feelings for Wiki Leaks slowly nudge closer towards the supportive side.

Really, that bloodthirsty, ignorant American stuff is supposed to be an unfair stereotype, but if this is how we're really going to act, we don't deserve any better than the treatment that Wiki Leaks has to offer. If there's a bottom line, I feel it's this - Don't act like an asshole and then be offended when people stop trusting you.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

I think that the idea of shooting everyone who dares to leak information, regardless of intention, would make us facist. Imprisoning them on charges of treason? Alright, that's fair, they knew what they were getting into and they did it anyway. Lining them up against the wall and shooting them? Good god, man, look at what you're supporting! Seriously, LOOK AT IT. It quite frankly revolts me.

And no, Wikileaks does NOT have a hateboner for America. Certain people contributing to it MIGHT, but I find it more likely that they think they're doing the right thing. Look at what it's done for other countries before you start frothing at the mouth. You can be a patriot without being a paranoid hatemonger! The thing you are missing is that the people contributing to wikileaks are a COLLECTIVE, and while some of them might have subversive motives, it doesn't mean all or most of them do. It's okay to be mad at the people who released harmful information just because they could. No really. It's not okay to say you want to shoot them all.

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:40:30 PM by Katrika

"You fail to grasp the basic principles of mad science. Common sense would be cheating." - Narbonic

Please, they put people in danger! I can only imagine the shitstorm that would have come if the terrorists had gotten to any of the people they ratted out.

If they were releasing stuff on some big bad evil the US Government was doing (poisoning the wells, eating babies, whatever), then fine, they'd be right. They're releasing random nonsense intermixed with stuff that can get our soldiers killed. That's unacceptable.

I am now known as Flyboy.

No, they weren't. Yes, you are (to some degree).

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:39:45 PM by Lock

Programming and surgery have a lot of things in common: Don't start removing colons until you know what you're doing.

Personally speaking, I think that this was the stupidest thing Assange and the other Wikileaks guys could have done.

Because, after using this "nuclear option" (which was what they said they'd do if Assange was extradited to Sweden)... They are left with nothing.

They can threaten no more with "shocking disclosures". They have no cards left to play with.

No matter what happens afterwards and what the fallout of this will be... I give Assange and perhaps other members of Wikileaks 6 months of life, at the outmost. I would bet my right arm that, at this very moment, fifty operatives from at least six different countries are being given the green light to eliminate him and possibly others. Wikileaks has no more "don't do this or we'll make XYZ public". They have made *everything* public. They have nothing more to threaten or bargain with.

Extremely stupid on their part, really.

GLUUUURK!

Hm. I didn't think of that. Where is SEAL Team Six? Bleh... this would probably be beneath their level of competence, though...

I am now known as Flyboy.

Wiki Leaks leaked this because someone was about to leak it anyway IIRC.

Dutch Lesbian

The thing you are missing is that the people contributing to wikileaks are a COLLECTIVE, and while some of them might have subversive motives, it doesn't mean all or most of them do. It's okay to be mad at the people who released harmful information just because they could. No really. It's not okay to say you want to shoot them all.

I agree that the information they released was, well...useless. If there was something in there that needed to get out, they should have released just that...not the whole big thing. There's a difference between censorship and security. Releasing images from Guantanimo Bay or reports of US soldiers knowingly killing civilians? fighting censorship. What these releases are? Undermining security. I GET that. But you need to calm down.

"You fail to grasp the basic principles of mad science. Common sense would be cheating." - Narbonic

Perhaps, if one wished to see the back of Wiki Leaks, all they'd have to do is manufacture such a scenario.

It's a foolproof plan (provided nobody leaks it, of course).

Just in case, I will clarify that this post is mostly in jest.

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:45:48 PM by TheGloomer

Oh yes, let's sink to the level everybody thinks we're at and kill people to frame other people. Brilliant plan.

I didn't say I wanted to kill everyone who runs WikiLeaks. Although most of them are probably guilty of treason for leaking anything classified, only the big names in the organization—and anybody who actually works for the government—is worth actually going after...

I am now known as Flyboy.

Come now, it was no more than a merry jape. Admittedly, I should have used the Sarcasm Mode pothole, but I'm not keen on potholing.

edited 2nd Sep '11 2:48:30 PM by TheGloomer

I would tentatively bet my other arm that, as of now, the relevant agencies have put into place tighter systems for information transfer that would diminish the risk of leaks of this sort.

I still think that it was a very rash action that will cost Wikileaks and Assange dearly. When you decide to do something like that, you always should try to keep at least some ace up your sleeve.

As it is, I think that Assange has signed his sentence with this.

GLUUUURK!