Losing the 'Wiki'- argument

[Beavker]

Can some DU'ers more informed and knowledgeable than myself provide a few examples of some pertinent Wikileaks that truly affected the World, that didn't have to do with a 'gossipy' type of comment from a politician or leader of a Country that makes good 'gossip' but isn't 'real' news that could directly affect our World or our Country?

I feel that even these leaks are important, because if a prominent figure that could be involved with securing peace is bad mouthing or being 'chippy' with their counterparts, that tells me where their heart is, aside from the 'hurt feelings' that might occur.

My wife and I argued on this premise. I state it's more like true investigative reporting, that needs to be shed light upon to help the people of the World see what is truly going on, even it if hurts a few feelings, ruffles a few feathers and otherwise might make a relationship between factions go stale a bit.

She tends to think it's all gossip, and just eaves dropping on the personal comments that leaders or officials may have toward one another, and does nothing but just tick people off and ruin possible relations with others.

Help me DU. There must be good examples of true policy infractions and not just snarky comments that could piss someone off that you are trying to negotiate with. I sadly am not well versed, though I get the gist of what he is accomplishing.

Thanks!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. Hm. Tunisia, Jordan, Egypt,

knowledge that our embassies are staffed with some really smart and diplomatic people, knowledge that Israel is in a panic, made worse by Lieberman and his attacks on Mubarak and arabs in general, knowledge that Afghanistan is turning into VietNam Part II.

Yes, I'd say that wiki has done many things.

[xchrom]

2. some links

http://websearch.about.com/od/anonymoussurfingsafety/f/What-Is-Wikileaks.htm

http://www.mediaite.com/online/recently-released-wikileaks-cables-reveal-important-background-on-egyptian-uprising/

http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_assange_why_the_world_needs_wikileaks.html

http://lorla.com/has-wikileaks-changed-the-world/
i like the above link because of what former brazil president lula says.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks

'WikiLeaks posted its first document in December 2006, a decision to assassinate government officials signed by Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys."<36> In August 2007, The Guardian published a story about corruption by the family of the former Kenyan leader Daniel arap Moi based on information provided via WikiLeaks.<135> In November 2007, a March 2003 copy of Standard Operating Procedures for Camp Delta detailing the protocol of the U.S. Army at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp was released.<136> The document revealed that some prisoners were off-limits to the International Committee of the Red Cross, something that the U.S. military had in the past repeatedly denied.<137> In February 2008, WikiLeaks released allegations of illegal activities at the Cayman Islands branch of the Swiss Bank Julius Baer which led to the bank suing WikiLeaks and obtaining an injunction which temporarily shut down wikileaks.org.<138> The site was instantly mirrored by supporters and later that month the judge overturned his previous decision citing First Amendment concerns and questions about legal jurisdiction.<139><140> In March 2008, WikiLeaks published what they referred to as "the collected secret 'bibles' of Scientology," and three days later received letters threatening to sue them for breach of copyright.<141> In September 2008, during the 2008 United States presidential election campaigns, the contents of a Yahoo account belonging to Sarah Palin (the running mate of Republican presidential nominee John McCain) were posted on WikiLeaks after being hacked into by members of Anonymous.<142> In November 2008, the membership list of the far-right British National Party was posted to WikiLeaks, after briefly appearing on a blog.<143> A year later, on October 2009, another list of BNP members was leaked.<144>
'

[On the Road]

3. Some of the Earliest Impacts Was on Kenya

Couple of links to stories:

http://www.nowpublic.com/kenya-africa-arap-moi-and-looted-billions
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/aug/31/kenya.topstories3

Apparently the stories affected the most recent round of elections and led directly to rioting over the allegations of corruption. This is where some of the claims come from that Wikileaks has killed people -- it is true in the sense that the rioting led to casualties.

I have also heard that the Tunisian demonstrations were triggered by Wikileaks revelations of corruption.

[leveymg]

4. The succession of Mubarak to Soliman was pushed in 2008 by the Israelis

who were concerned at the time that Mubarak appeared to be in declining health.

The cable, published yesterday, also tells us that the transition of power from Mubarak to Soliman has been planned since at least 2008, and who it is who has been pushing hardest for this particular outcome.

Here's the most relevant sections of the Telegraph report and, then, the actual cable:


The Telegraph write-up: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8309792/WikiLeaks-Israels-secret-hotline-to-the-man-tipped-to-replace-Mubarak.html

The new vice-president of Egypt, Omar Suleiman, is a long-standing favourite of Israel's who spoke daily to the Tel Aviv government via a secret "hotline" to Cairo, leaked documents disclose.

By Tim Ross, Christopher Hope, Steven Swinford and Adrian Blomfield 9:25PM GMT 07 Feb 2011

Mr Suleiman, who is widely tipped to take over from Hosni Mubarak as president, was named as Israel's preferred candidate for the job after discussions with American officials in 2008.

As a key figure working for Middle East peace, he once suggested that Israeli troops would be "welcome" to invade Egypt to stop weapons being smuggled to Hamas terrorists in neighbouring Gaza.

The details, which emerged in secret files obtained by WikiLeaks and passed to The Daily Telegraph, come after Mr Suleiman began talks with opposition groups on the future for Egypt's government.

On Saturday, Mr Suleiman won the backing of Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, to lead the "transition" to democracy after two weeks of demonstrations calling for President Mubarak to resign.

And, here's the most relevant section of the cable: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wikileaks-files/egypt-wikileaks-cables/8309338/DEFENSE-MINISTER-BARAKS-DISCUSSIONS-IN-EGYPT-FOCUS-ON-SHALIT-TAHDIYA-ANTI-SMUGGLING-AND-IRAN.html

5. (S) In terms of atmospherics, Hacham said the Israeli delegation was "shocked" by Mubarak's aged appearance and slurred speech. Hacham was full of praise for Soliman, however, and noted that a "hot line" set up between the MOD and Egyptian General Intelligence Service is now in daily use. Hacham said he sometimes speaks to Soliman's deputy Mohammed Ibrahim several times a day. Hacham noted that the Israelis believe Soliman is likely to serve as at least an interim President if Mubarak dies or is incapacitated. (Note: We defer to Embassy Cairo for analysis of Egyptian succession scenarios, but there is no question that Israel is most comfortable with the prospect of Omar Soliman.)

[jwirr]

5. It may not be what is in all the leaks that is the most important thing.

The very fact that there is now a way to get these things out to the world may be the most important change. Until now a whistle blower had a harder time telling the world what he wanted them to know. Now anyone in the world can place their story on Wikileaks and zip - the world can see it. I was around when Daniel Elsberg gave us the white papers and I was told what was in them but to this day I have never actually read them. Things have changed to a more open society. The dirty secrets are no longer safe.

[dougolat]

6. two problems...

  yes, he's done a lot of good, exposing lies and
misrepresentations, 
 but- first- it's  largely ignored:  the first big U.S. media
splash, the "Collateral Murder" video, clearly
showed the helicopter crew sighting a group of eight men, two
of them likely body-guards, crossing the street and milling
around like they're waiting for someone to show up, or a ride,
or a lunch meeting to start-  and describing it to command as
eight armed men moving out, and getting permission to
"engage" on the basis of that misrepresentation.
Next, when a make-shift ambulance shows up to get the one
survivor, they call it a weapon retrieval, and again get the
go-ahead to "engage".  Last, when our
boots-on-the-ground get there, and the chopper crew hears
about the children in the van, it's "well, they shouldn't
bring kids into a war zone!", neatly ignoring the fact
that the  "war zone" was brought to them.
  Now, most people only saw the clips on tv, and even the ones
who went on line for the entire 19 or 37 minute version didn't
get it the recognition it deserved.
  And, second, given Assange's statements about Israel and
9-11, we can assume most leaks about those subjects are not
given exposure (nor would the media outlets follow suit, if
they were)