Sooo... Wikileaks "rewriting history"

Okay, so it's probably a bit more serious than that, but most news sources over here get hung up on diplomats calling politicians names and Saudi Arabia's king bitching at the US to attack Iran. Well, more seriously there are suspicions about North Korea supplying Iran with missiles strong enough to hit European cities (and Iran would do that knowing they would be turned into a glass bowl within an hour, why?) and diplomats instructed to spy, which isn't really that much of a shocker even if it's unpleasant.

On the other hand, experts are crying out that the world in one fell swoop is a much more dangerous place and this wreaks havoc on everything the US is doing out in the world.

Source.

What's your take?

Setting aside for the moment the question of whether or not the leaking these documents is a good idea, I ask, HOW THE (expletive deleted) was anyone (or any small group) able to access, copy and transmit this data to wikileaks without being caught at it?

Ghost in the Machine wrote:

Setting aside for the moment the question of whether or not the leaking these documents is a good idea, I ask, HOW THE (expletive deleted) was anyone (or any small group) able to access, copy and transmit this data to wikileaks without being caught at it?

This. How the fuck did Wikileaks get this information?

Lady Anne wrote:

Ghost in the Machine wrote:

Setting aside for the moment the question of whether or not the leaking these documents is a good idea, I ask, HOW THE (expletive deleted) was anyone (or any small group) able to access, copy and transmit this data to wikileaks without being caught at it?

This. How the fuck did Wikileaks get this information?

Well to begin with, you can thank one douchebag in particular who's going to spend the rest of his life up the river.

I'm of the opinion the WikiLeaks falls on the same side of the spectrum as radical environmental groups such as the Earth Liberation Front - your message may be well and good, but your tactics make it very difficult, if not impossible, to support that message.

I also get the feeling that there's an ulterior motive behind the timing - it just so happens this information about missiles comes along just as the big push to ratify the START treaty in the U.S. Senate gets going? Sorry, doesn't pass the smell test to me.

Library of Congress blocks Wikileaks

Quote :

The Library of Congress, which recently shutoff access to WikiLeaks on its computers, may be unintentionally undermining the research its analysts perform for lawmakers, classification expert Steven Aftergood, who regularly publishes a government secrecy newsletter, blogged on Monday.

Quote :

"It's a difficult situation," said one CRS analyst. "The information was released illegally, and it's not right for government agencies to be aiding and abetting this illegal dissemination.

You know... Once information is out, it's out... You can't just ignore it because it was obtained illegally.

A while back the Daily Telegraph obtained, possibly illegally, records of MP expenses... Which it then published in instalments over the next month in a scandal that dominated UK political discourse for most of last year (and continues to play an important role) No one, not even those accused by the paper of the most arguably fraudulent activities, had the gall to say: "Well, this information was obtained illegally, therefore discussing it constitutes 'aiding and abetting [an] illegal [activity]'.

The Expenses scandal is only one example... Just have a look back at any top scandals, I can pretty much guarantee that much of the more important info was obtained illegally.

This reminds me of the aftermath of Belgrano affair

Anyway... That's my view on it... I think this whole thing is scary. Not what the Wikileaks documents contain, but the amount of censorship that's coming off it, and the amount of vitriol by supposed reporters at a guy who, clearly, is doing investigative reporting far better than they are.

What do you think?

WD40 wrote:

What do you think?

I think Assange is an odious gasbag, and eventually what he's doing will backfire because nation-states will go to greater lengths to keep things opaque and avoid leaving document trails.

Do I think he's committed a crime? Well, no. But he's playing chicken with the Russians, the Chinese and a few other countries who are a whole lot less squeamish about eliminating loose lips than we are. They aren't going to care if he has a "poison pill" document dump just waiting for someone to take a shot at him.

Once things have been posted on Wikileaks, does anyone really think that blocking the site will keep the information from being disseminated? This is the Internet age. Copy, paste, and send--and information is everywhere.

Oh, fun. Anonymous is getting in on the game by engaging in "Denial of Service" attacks on companies that have cut Wikileaks off.

With friends like them, who needs enemies?

Spotts1701 wrote:

Oh, fun. Anonymous is getting in on the game by engaging in "Denial of Service" attacks on companies that have cut Wikileaks off.

With friends like them, who needs enemies?

Oh Anonymous, your crazy antics, whilst probably being illegal, do amuse me so.