Discuss? Is anyone bothered, does it make a difference that we now know some details to things we probably were aware of anyway? Has out security been threatened?
I think it is disgusting!
Everyone has an opinion which is usually spoken behind closed doors.....it serves nothing by outing this! All it does is embarrass and move us further away from everyone tolerating each other!
I think the journalists should start looking into the people that work at Wikileaks and see if they have any skeletons in their closets.....see how they like it!
The Denial Of Service attacks in response are quite interesting... Wonder if people are just using support of wikileaks as an excuse?
Not really sure where I stand on this. For the most part, I believe that it\'s better to have things out in the open, and that being open and honest is a good thing.
I also think that there should be less secrets in general anyway.
On the other hand I can also see an argument for some secrets to be had.
Oh and one other thing, it is fine for goverments to know everything about us, yet we are not allowed information on them. I think transparency is a good thing.
Obviously this is an over simplified view, but thats my opinion.
Mark
Is it really ground breaking news anyway, im sure we all suspected such things, but just didnt know the details. Does knowing the details change anything or the way we think.
I think at the beginning of this year scientists were outed as falsifying and exaggerating figures that we/humans are mainly responsible for global warming in order to keep their funding etc, has that made any difference, the people that believe still believe, the people that dont just accepted the info as what they had already decided.
Let the truth be told...
Everyone has a right to know what those high up are doing and the lies they are telling us to feed their own objectives.
When the truth is being told America is worried because they will be exposed as the real t3rr0rists...
Vietnam, Iraq (weapons of mass destruction???), Afghanistan... I will find a full list of countries ivaded later
I think it\'s a very good thing that wikileaks has published this information, as it should be open in the first place. Why should anything the government does ,that has been voted in, have to create secrets. The reason is that it\'s deep corruption and has a agenda that is forced upon it by massive powerfully companies/countries. All of it comes down to trade and money
Most of the information leaked shows that Britain is just doing the bidding for other countries. We are the essentially the b1tch to the rest. I agree that the way the documents were obtained was not right however how else are they going to be seen.
Let the truth be told, but not for the reasons given above to embarrass a single country or fuel an agenda. The equivalent leaks from China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, middle eastern countries etc. are missing and certainly deserve comparison. I dare say that the human rights records there need equal scrutiny, as well as how they conduct government.
What the leaks do show is how the trivial can be over classified. How the candid view (so important to share accurate impressions and information in diplomacy!) can be used to bring shame once made public. The leaks also show up how our press react to this kind of information (focus on those that cause maximum embarrasment), and also how only part of the story is only every made public.
The release of the Lockerbie bomber is a good example. At the time it was based on "medical grounds only", however we now know that Libya suggested there would be demonstrations and even violence if they didn\'t get their way. Rather strangely the Scottish government has now "spun" it as support for their decision, forgetting that they told us it wasn\'t a consideration in the first place!
So long as government believes that secret means secret then the opportunities for parts of government to operate outside of public awareness grows. The release of this information goes some way to address that - a secret that might be "outed" makes it harder to have secret agendas.
As I said at the start - it would be better to see the equivalent leaks from other governments and regimes before jumping on the "I hate America" bandwagon...
Ian.
On the one hand I feel what they are doing is right. Where we have seen that the reason a government has done something (the Lockerbie example is a good one) is not the same as what they have told the general public, I think this whole episode can serve as a warning that this sort of thing can be found out in the end. Whilst it hasn\'t had that many \'political\' repercussions as of yet, my hope is that there will be a bit more truth in the public face of politics (though I don\'t expect we will get to a stage where we are told the whole truth).
On the other hand, some of the cables released recently do nothing but damage. My example here would be the list of places vital to the US. I can\'t see how releasing such information has helped anyone? All it does is earmark such places as targets, not just for terrorists, but other nations who in the future (for whatever reason) may end up at war with the US. At this point I feel that Wikileaks and indeed the media, have been a little irresponsible.
I think the whole debacle has raised a very important question that\'s almost unrelated to the content Wikileaks have (or have omitted) to "publish" and that is... can governments legitimately expect to censor the internet? I think that this issue could prove the thin end of a very wide wedge, and could prove to be the beginning of the end of the internet as an independent entity. Obviously no-one in their right mind objects to the censure of sites such as those peddling kiddie porn etc, but as far as I can see, Wikileaks have broken no laws and are only guilty of disseminating information that those responsible should probably never have sent if they didn\'t want it making public. So, is it ethical and acceptable for the embarassed governments to do everyhting in their power to close the site and hound those responsible? Surely that\'s one step closer to a polonium sushi for anyone who dares question or compromise a government in a way they don\'t like? One more level of civil liberty and freedom of expression ground underfoot by the privileged elite clinging on to their dictat of power.....
Interesting points Mr Greek.
Perhaps you will see public opinion changing if the internet is censored because of the wikileaks dude.
It also begs the question, has he dug his own grave and will soon end up in some unfortunate accident?
There\'s a conflict of interest between the freedom of information and the Official Secrets Act on Wikileaks.
The problem is the release of classified information to the general public, it\'s classified for a reason, I am not going to go into the levels of classification but the information is classified because its release to the general public puts personal safety at risk. My view is that Wikileaks has neglected this and therefore may have put people\'s lives at risk. I don\'t think it\'s their place to do that and therefore I reckon Wikileaks operation is irresponsible.
If information was never intended for the public domain, then it shouldn\'t be forced into the open.
In many cases secrets are important, at least in the short term.
Would you be happy to openly share all your thoughts and details?
As stated above, there\'s going to be a lot of ling term harm because of this... Freedom of information yes, but only where appropriate. (The DPA states that you should only obtain details that you need, and likewise only share information that is genuinely required)
The basic rule with sharing sensitive information is that the person has to be appropriately cleared AND needs to know.
I\'ve just been cleared to an alarmingly high level but it does not mean I can go into GCHQ and demand the transcripts of diplomatic phone taps because I don\'t need to know.