Well, I fail to see any WikiLeaks topic in here. Is anyone keeping up to date on this. Last time I read about this was when Julian Assange turned himself to police. Any news on this? I also asked myself a question: is this a matter of freedom of speech or he is just illegally leaking secret documents from government, should we have insight into such documents? Discuss.

Well, it seems that he was released on a bail minutes ago. US's gov denied Sweden's deportation request. What a lucky bastard

Well, in my opinion people deserve to know the truth. It’s part of democracy. I tried to find bits of the information posted on WikiLeaks after I heard about it. Naturally I couldn’t find much, but the stuff I did find showed me how the “guys on the top” used their position. I was shocked.. I still wonder if I should believe, what I read.. Well, enough about that.

Actually I was surprised when Julian Assange was suddenly accused of having raped someone.. Isn’t that a bit suspicious? I mean they couldn’t get him for WikiLeaks so they had do find something else to accuse him of.

Well, that’s only my point of view. I can’t say I understand much of that stuff but I guess it’s worth trying to “analyse” it. Also, I don’t live in the US, so I most likely view things in a different way.

I too would like to hear your ideas about this. It has really piqued my interest.

Well, I agree on the rape charges being suspicious part. They couldn't get him deported for breaking law by publishing info on WikiLeaks so they found something else. Strange, the best thing about those dispatches is that they contain information quite different from U.S. public statements, like the nature of their partnership with UK.
UK used to think they are on some special terms with US and one dispatch from embassy in UK says otherwise, I believe it was something along the lines: "They are stupid thinking we give them some special treatment".

The real charge on Julian was "making sex without condoms by force", what is ridiculous. They were desperate to arrest him.

Anyway, some people from /b/ and other dark places of the web gathered and formed the "Anonymous" (oh, original name), to fight for WikiLeaks. As the governments made PayPal stop accepting donations to WikiLeaks, and some banks freeze Julian's accounts, the "Anonymous" attacked the sites of these organizations and bringed them down for some days...

In other words, chaos is spreading.

And rumor says that there are other groups of people who are gathering contributions to open other sites like WikiLeaks.

I think it's sick how banks are not accepting donations to Wikileaks. People should have the freedom to give money to people they want, right?

>>6
Of course not. Would you rather have more people funding the Al Qaeda and all those bad guys?
And wikileaks is fucking stupid in the sense that it ruins the fragile diplomacy America has built with a lot of countries. More harm than good.

And fuck freedom. Seriously? Freedom? If we had "freedom" to do certain things, we certainly would be running around half-naked doing stupid things. Laws, rules, and truth hidden from us are in place to keep up in order.
Why would the government not tell you why aliens exist? Or ghosts? Or anything that will scare the living shit out of us and cause mass hysteria.
Seriously, telling everyone everything will most certainly cause mass hysteria and you know, that's always bad.
Take it on an easier level. Ever had a pet when you were young? Do your parents just go ,"Hey junior, your pet dog just died and is never going to come back and most probably going to rot in our back yard, have a good day now." when your pet pass on?
They don't, because they are sensible, and so is the government in that sense.
If you don't understand this, you should not vote.

>>10
Keke. Your comment about aliens and ghost made me smile. Was your parents a bit over protective?
I did have a pet when I was young :< I saw it dying and I buried it together with my mom : D simple as that.
Being sensible is rubbish. It's like treating others as if they were stupid.
I wonder what did 7 and 8 say.. Anyone happened to see them?
I'm not a Wikileaks fan since I'm not sure what their motive is. Do they really want us to know the truth or do they just want to create commotion and be something "cool" cause they got bored. ..And get money at the same time.
I also think people should have the freedom to run naked at the streets T^T Why are they always arrested.

>>11 Or maybe my brains are just too slow?

>>11 You forget one simple fact.
On average, people are stupid.
On some level, everyone is extremely capable of making bad decisions, and given their level of relative freedom, they are in the perfect position to do so when left to their own devices.
Not telling people things they don't need to know is just a way of preventing - or stalling - this.

In fact, wikileaks is a perfect example of "doing stupid shit given the opportunity" by trying to cause mass hysteria.

The only thing we can do with the information the government has withheld (and subsequently revealed through wikileaks) is rage about it - nothing constructive. Ignorance is bliss, after all.

>>13
..There already are stupid people making bad choices behind our backs?

Are you saying that those who tell us what to do are smarter than normal citizens? Super human, better brain? Know always what is right and wrong? Just kidding don't get mad. I am just agreeing to what you said, everyone is capable of making bad decisions.

But what if something bad happens in your country? (Evil man wants to take the money from the poor children HARR HARR!!) You still don't want to know about it? You always have your vote just like Enni meantioned earlier. At least you can vote for the guy who wants to prevent the mass hysteria getting any bigger when you know who it is.

Isn't just the act of trying to show the truth important? Even to us stupid people?

And about freedom.. Of course laws are necessary. But WHAT IF wikileaks wasn't a bad thing? What if it only existed to bring truth to people?(I'm not saying it is, it sounds too perfect). Law (actually it's some random people but we have no idea who)sees it as a very bad thing. And just like that we are raped from the freedom to decide ourselves whom we help and people are actually agreeing to it. I think it's the same thing as taking our freedom to vote. You are stupid you have no freedom to vote. Sounds like Enni, maybe Enni should be our great leader? All hail to Enni.

... Be free to enlighten me again because my brains are still saying it's wrong to hide things from the public. If it's a good thing why hide it? If it's a bad thing you don't care?

Anyways.. I am bored... and hungry.

Hmm... I believe everyone's view is correct, as democracy means "freedom of speech" and allows the general public to have right to know. Yet it is also true that this creates commotion as the truths are vehemic and cruel, something people don't want to forgive. My personal view is "if you want to know, seek it yourself and don't let it flow from one creek only, let many knowledges to pool into one deep sea of understanding." There is more than one side to every story, and one should not judge or take rash actions based on the cover alone.

>>15 You're saying it like they hide everything. They only hide what is not conducive to peace.
Remember that, in a democratic government, each state is represented by a number of people, on different levels - congress, state governments, etc. It's not as if one person is going "let's hide this from everyone" and it goes. And if something bad happens, if you knew about it, what would you do, honestly? Stone the one responsible?

Chances are, anything that's being withheld is either a minor detail or a major one that doesn't concern us at all. Not telling the populace is another way of saying "don't worry about it." They're not doing it maliciously - they have to have a reason. Otherwise they'd be impeached by now.

Wikileaks wasn't taken down for being a source of freedom, but you're right in one way. They were targeting it, because it was interfering with the governmental process outside the bounds of the law. They're actively trying to poke holes in its legality, which is somewhat corrupt but considered "legal," but they still can't deny that it is their right to release this information.
But consider this: what if they leaked something gravely important? What if they got a hold of security flaw information, and leaked it on a global scale? Then it would be a matter of national security, caused by "free speech." This is why we can't have nice things like "perfect freedom."

But are you saying you feel personally offended? Are you, on an individual level, affronted by this, and it's restricting your daily life?
People get so gung ho about defending their liberties that they don't realize they've got it good enough already. Don't fix what's not broken, after all. If they start quartering soldiers in your home during a time of peace you can go riot, but this wikileaks thing isn't a big enough issue to defend.

I think wikileaks is correct in what they are doing he is taking information that was hidden from us and releasing it Assange is a hacker so he believes in freedom to information thats just his train of thought and this information is't usless it opens peoples eyes what is going on around us some of the leaked cable point to secret wars you didn't even know about also there is stuff about wire tapes on phones and my favorite one that was release on Jan 1st even talks about SADDAM'S MESSAGE OF FRIENDSHIP TO PRESIDENT BUSH. The only people trying to cause mass hysteria is the media if they would stop reporting on it and just let the people that care view browse through as they please the "stupid people" wont need to worry they can carry on there bliss life

The media consists of anyone willing to spread the information. By saying "it would be fine if the media didn't blow it up," it's almost the same as saying "it would be fine if nobody found out about it on a large scale."
Word of mouth is more powerful than you would believe.

And about Saddam's message of friendship, would it have really mattered? The only thing most people would get out of it is "BUSH WAS A BAD PRESIDENT," as if it excused Saddam's war crimes in the first place. I'm not up to par on details of this, but it's just an example why information like that is counterintuitive and unnecessary. They don't serve to change any of the status quo and they certainly don't help the problems - in fact it fuels them.

I mean mostly the news talking about how bad it is and Sarah palin talking about how Assange should be Executed as for fueling i dont think it does at all its just something to look back on and say oh thats what also happened some stuff will help us make changes in the future others shed light on a situation like how some reporters where killed because of negligence i just think the truth cant hurt it can only help.

>>17
Hiding it all? Nothing like that...
"or a major one that doesn't concern us at all." Yes, not us but maybe someone else?

You asked if it affected me. Nope it doesn't. Luckily I live in a small country where things go well. I am happy. My life is very good, so good that I am so bored and have so much time to think what is happening in other parts of the world. I realise that not everyone is having a good time and still I'm not doing anything about it. I am a hypocrite so my words have no value.

This is why a hypocrite thinks wikileaks is a good thing:
If something is wrong the more people know about it the better. It creates pressure and there is a bigger chance that something is done about it and that it won't happen again. Public opinion is important. We are all creating it together.

And yes, wikileaks has to be careful of what they release but fearing it would cause war is silly. Even if something happened we couldn't blame wikileaks alone. Instead we should look at the source of the dispute.

We here in this site are people who are doing nothing to make things different. We are only part of the public opinion. I understand that you are only being realistic, Misuto. But not everyone is like us.

"They only hide what is not conducive to peace." Are you serious? I'll blame my country so you won't get offended.

I was glad that wikileaks leaked information about my country. One of them was about web censorship. There were sites that was censored and labelled as child porn that wasn't actually child porn. Something we weren't aware of before. Right now people are already being active so web censorship won't get out of hand and at the same time people started being more aware of child porn. More people are getting interested in politics and getting motivated to create a better place to live in.

The hype might be temporary but it is better than nothing. The people gets to see politicians' real motives and realize who they should vote next time.

Ah, I seem to have misspoken. I'm not that aware of the affairs and issues of other countries. That said, I'm not fully aware of politics in the US either. I've been speaking in general without specifics in mind.

In your then, you're right that it can have a positive effect, leaking the information. It's two sides to a coin - some information is withheld because of the general interests of the governed people, and some information is withheld for other, less directly beneficial reasons. In the same way, leaking information is sometimes beneficial and sometimes detrimental. What I was trying to say was that it's normally the latter - with few exception, most people will take it with the first impression that comes to mind without considering both sides of the issue. This often leads to the "Why didn't they tell us about this sooner?!" mindset and completely skips the "Why didn't they tell us sooner...?" thought process.

I'm just tired of seeing the generic "Our government is wrong, again!" message some people try to promote upon hearing they withheld anything from the masses. It's created undue distrust for the government, which by nature can not be perfect anyway. I might come off as patriotic just to be different, but this in particular is what I would qualify as "not conducive to peace," when cumulative events like these leaks start to pile up against the credit of the government itself.

>>22

Ah, yes.. Guess it really depends on the information and country it concerns. I'm just worried that if majority is against wikileaks that it will get harder for people to raise their opinion about freedom of speech.

In my country we got it easy and that's why we don't pay attention and without noticing it might slowly get worse. Not saying we should go into a riot, but being alert?

Hhee.. I don't know how things are in other countries right now. It must have caused lots of headaches ^^;
I am curious ..

I don't know how illegal it is for him to be leaking such documents, but I support what Julian's doing. These documents should be in the open. It seems the leaked information hasn't directly harmed anyone, but it also seems every action that's been taken has been for the better.

However most of the 'stupidity' I see in average humans is due to ignorance, self induced or otherwise.

I don't think it's right to value pride above another's life, but alas things are never that simple.