Poll: WikiLeaks - Good or bad?

[EasySt17]

BTW, I'm curious: could an American please tell me how your ridiculously biased news stations are treating this stuff please

Well Fox news wrote this http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/11/30/yes-wikileaks-terrorist-organization-time-act

As far as real new agencies the Wall Street Journal just reports information they post, with some commentary about antibuisiness behaviors.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

It's good. It exposes just how corrupt the government is and why you shouldn't vote for them.

Great idea, don't vote, that should fix the world.

Actually, I meant it gives you a reason to vote for an other party.

 

[awesomeClaw]

I like it. A real good politican doesn´t need secrets. They should let their people know what they´re doing and see if they approve or not. WikiLeaks is just doing it in a more dirty maner.

 

[Robert0288]

A real good politican doesn´t need secrets.

No, a real good politician knows how to keep secrets the best. Politics is all about information, and information is power.

 

[Jack and Calumon]

Now THIS is celebrity gossip I can get behind!

Calumon: Maybe if you're gonna say bad things you don't want people to know, you don't write it down? Silly! :3

 

[wammnebu]

i liked what one diplomat said to hillary clinton about wikileaks "oh, don't worry you should see what we say about you"
frankly why is anyone suprised, if diplomacy was only able to be polite, and straightforward, governments would not bother investing in it. I am more than positive that these are what every diplomatic cable looks like.

In the long run this is probably going end the romance between governments and the internet. Other countries are probably going to start using other methods to store and keep information rather than the world wide web, so i hope you all enjoyed that whole "internet is the key to the worlds information" because thats not staying around.

Oh and to all those talking about the evil backhanded tactics of diplomacy, just to point out we could all go back to old-fashioned world wars if you want. Those were pretty straightforward and honest policies "I want this, so i will kill you for it".

 

[Catalyst6]

Do you people think that this leaking of information is a good thing or a bad thing? On the one hand, it sheds light on corrupt government dealings. On the other, it raises global tensions in a world that really doesn't need it right now.

I have mixed feelings about Wikileaks. For the purpose of the recent examples, you have to wonder if throwing out all that name-calling was actually worthwhile. However, it does push one idea that is absolutely paramount to Wikileak's validity: that they will leak EVERY piece of info that they get. If you pick and choose which pieces to release then you let bias creep into the proceedings and lose everything.

On a whole, I think that it's a good idea, in general. Utterly batshit crazy conspiracies aside, Wikileaks usually has interesting things, although a disappointing amount of it is about the US gov trying to take down their site (Which sounds a lot like a blogger squealing in glee when someone comments on his obscure site).

However, there's always flaws. For example, releasing the names of undercover operatives might seem like a good way to show that we're spying, but it also means that those people will almost certainly be killed.

However, you must take what they say with a grain of salt. How to put this... okay, so Wikileaks basically teaches us not to trust anything without something else to back it up, right? So, why should we trust Wikileaks? They could be making most of their stuff up. Hell, they could be an offshoot of the government, in place to keep us pacified. Of course the last part is a bit out there, but you get my drift.

Really, the site shows us that there's more to the government than meets the eye, which is a valuable thing to have.

 

[Fumbleumble]

Without a doubt it's a good thing.

Yes, unfortunately, people may be put at risk because of it but that's a lesser evil than everything gov'ts do being hidden.

We need people like Wikileaker, without them we'd never find out what nefarious dealing our public officials are up to.

They are TRUE patriots, risking themselves to bring us this info.

 

[theevilsanta]

Information is power. The more information the general public has the less various governments have. In my opinion that's a good thing. But I'm a libertarian (sort of) so you may not agree.

 

[uc.asc]

snip
The fact I mentioned Israel not being part of any scandal or dirt, is because they are buddies with the USA to put it bluntly, which is why I said Wikileaks is a controlled opposition of the USA itself. Once again, not going to cite sources buy merely throwing my probaly non credible/uninformed statements around. But I stand on with my point still.

I don't know of a particular reason why a lot of dirt on israel should have come to light because of wikileaks. It seems to me that there's plenty of dirt on israel out in the open already; since most of their issues pertain to actual conflicts, when they go overboard it comes to media attention in the form of dead people. Also our relation to them is pretty simple, amounting as far as I can tell to unconditional support despite the occasional weakly-worded suggestion that maybe they should go easy on the oppression and stuff.

But, okay. I'll accept the idea that you're not a nutter for now.

The idea that wikileaks might be targeting the US is interesting, though I think you'd have a hard time proving it. Even if a strong majory of what it publishes comes from US institutions, one could point out that they are the most active country in the world in terms of foreign affairs; that they did instigate the invasion of iraq and afghanistan (and have performed attacks in many other countries); that US banks (and laws) did precipitate the global financial meltdown; and that the US government is large, hilariously dysfunctional, does a lot of embarrassing shit that it then tries to hide, and has poor information security. All of these things would tend to generate more leaks from the US, and no other country can claim anything like the same combination of factors.

 

[Ham_authority95]

It's too early to say whether it's "good" or "bad".

 

[Ham_authority95]

The leaks about the North Korea situation with China in particular show just how dangerous that site is and how WikiLeaks would just as soon cause World War 3

It won't start World War III. The US is too dependent of China to make stuff cheaply, and China is too dependent on the US because our consumers support their economy.

It isn't worth it to China to stand up for the bratty little kid that is North Korea.

 

[Mcface]

As long as no classified info that has the impact to harm anyone serving or any civilians.
However, there is a LOT of misinformation in the wikileaks.

People see this and assume everything it says is fact, even though much of it was altered.
Like the UAV video of the Apache engaging the white van and "innocent civilian reporters"

the reporters were WITH enemy combatants. Doing a story on "the other side of the war"
they were filming and interview when the battle started, and decided to stay and film the battle. From the side of the insurgents. In the video there are clearly 2 men with RPGs, and one with an ak-47BEHIND and infront of the men with the camera. This is why they were engaged. But CNN ant the NY times wont tell you that, neither will Al Jazzeria.

The wikileak showed pictures of the site, the van, and SOME of the bodies.
What they didn't show you, was the pictures of the dead combatants with small arms and shoulder fired rockets.

The Van was indeed a civilian casualty. The van was pulling over to get the wounded to a hospital from what I gather. (it is possible that they were also trying to help them escape) But that kind of thing happens.

 

[Shivarage]

I think if you honestly thought the government wasn't corrupt then you are severely naive. If you think that governments haven't always been corrupt you are severely deluded, and if you think people need to know about the workings of government you are severely, um, wrong?

Just kidding. I don't like Wikileaks, mainly for the above reasons. I tend to go with Bismarck's approach to things 'Laws are like sausages, you should never seen them being created' (paraphrased). Governments, politicians, they have to do shady backroom deals because that is the entire nature of the game and always has been. There is no getting away from the fact that running a country is and always has been a matter of keeping from the public what the public doesn't want to know, and a website like this is just going to cause masive problems in the long run.

Seriously, leak the wrong document and I would not be surprised if World War 3 was declared and led to the nuclear extinction of the entire human race, and then Wikileaks wouldn't look like such a good idea would it?

Yes, we should totally just ignore any ass-rape we recieve from any politician who decides he is above the law and the people of the country who fund his income...

/sarcasm

 

[The Youth Counselor]

As long as no classified info that has the impact to harm anyone serving or any civilians.
However, there is a LOT of misinformation in the wikileaks.

People see this and assume everything it says is fact, even though much of it was altered.
Like the UAV video of the Apache engaging the white van and "innocent civilian reporters"

the reporters were WITH enemy combatants. Doing a story on "the other side of the war"
they were filming and interview when the battle started, and decided to stay and film the battle. From the side of the insurgents. In the video there are clearly 2 men with RPGs, and one with an ak-47BEHIND and infront of the men with the camera. This is why they were engaged. But CNN ant the NY times wont tell you that, neither will Al Jazzeria.

The wikileak showed pictures of the site, the van, and SOME of the bodies.
What they didn't show you, was the pictures of the dead combatants with small arms and shoulder fired rockets.

The Van was indeed a civilian casualty. The van was pulling over to get the wounded to a hospital from what I gather. (it is possible that they were also trying to help them escape) But that kind of thing happens.

Actually the official Army report says only one firearm was retrieved from the attack. It was a Kalashnikov, and Iraqi citizens are allowed to own them.

Although the report does indeed state that two RPGs were retrieved one of them which was identified by both intelligence officials and pundits on Fox News is clearly too short. A kid who played a first person shooter or saw a movie should know how long RPGs and shoulder launched anti tank weapons are and how they're held. As someone who has experience working with video, I instantly saw a camera with a telescopic lens. The other was too blurry to make out, but was held in a non-threatening and mundane manner in broad daylight. The only evidence is in the report, which is on trial.

You also made no mention of the Hellfire missile strike on the apartment complex seen at the end of the video. Three families were living in that building.

 

[The Youth Counselor]

sorry double post!

 

[The Youth Counselor]

Sorry double post!

 

[Spencer Petersen]

Tearing down the wall of caked on shit that surrounds government in this modern age can only do good in the long run. The real opposition to this sort of stuff are the types who profit or stay in power due to the deniable nature of anything they do. America may be getting the first taste of it, but give it time and when we see some other major players get the truth shaft they will understand that they can no longer treat international politics like the circus it is now.

 

[Zizzousa]

I really don't see what the fuss is about here. None of this is actually news, in the sense of news being new information. The Saudis don't like Ahmadinejad?! NO WAY! I mean, it's not like they've been conducting covert operations against the guy or anything, is it? And politicians and diplomats ***** about one another behind their backs (almost as if they were...I dunno...people or something)?! People apart from the General Public know that Silvio Berlusconi is a little bit old for the party scene (or not, depending on your view)?

Assange is trying his level best to make it seem like he's got something worth making noise about here, and he does not. The only thing he's done is demonstrably show that the American intelligence system (up to the level of 'secret', anyway) is not watertight and brought right out into the bare light the extent of American UN spying for the first time. The Americans have always spyed on everyone in the UN, in much the same way as everyone else in the UN spys on everyone else in the UN and always has. The only people this poses problems for are diplomats whose jobs are threatened, and American intelligence-gathering agents, who are going to have a harder time persuading informants that they're a safe bet.


I guess one upside is that Wikileaks is making itself the Heat Magazine of politics, so maybe it'll get people more interested...?

I'll sit up and listen when they release that Bank of America hard drive they're sitting on, unless it turns out to be lunch receipts or something. Til then, Assagne is a pretentious, attention-grabbing hack, and the news media have really shown themselves up by making a fuss on his whim.