Some intelligent musings on Wikileaks issue.

[Jakes Progress]

http://www.salon.com/news/wikileaks/index.html?story=/tech/dan_gillmor/2010/11/29/wikileaks_a_few_questions

Everyone seems to have an opinion. This Salon article seems to ask the questions that I would have. Basically, it seems hard to find the good guys here.

Dan Gilmore asks some really good questions of Assange, the US government, and journalists.

My favorite examples are:

For Assange:

When are you going to focus your relentless and often valuable energies on other governments, especially the ones that are even more noted for secrecy than the United States government, not to mention more repressive.

For the government:

Is stamping "Secret" on everything that moves helpful or detrimental to our national security?

For journalists:

Why does it take WikiLeaks to get the information you agree is so worthy of public exposure? Why aren't you doing your own jobs better in the first place?

[Arctic Dave]

1. Good questions for all. nt

[truedelphi]

2. My answer for the question about journalists -

Most journalists that have any ability for an outlet of their writing regarding anything high minded, such as Iran/Contra, Intel Pro, or other juicy pieces, are not allowed to pursue such information.

One has only to examine the careers (And untimely end) of Danny Casolero, and/or Mr Webb of the San Jose Mercury, to see what happens to true journalists.

The Corporate controlled media doesn't want any time wasted on anything worthwhile concerning our "Diplomatic efforts."

Far better to flood the news market with stories about Paris Hilton.

In the day and age when the MIC is in full control, why would these Powers allow for a truly informed public?

And the huge ability of the Big Oil, Big Pesticide, Big Pharma and Big Money to control the portion of the news that the CIA doesn't, that too has been documented many times by many people.

Ever wonder why the pharmaceutical companies have endless ads for their products, even though surveys show they don't garner customers? Well, it works to control the news departments of the Major Networks - what Major Network ever talked up the notion of Single Payer Universal Health Care during the 2009 news cycle?

None. The money for the ads worked. No network wanted to lose the funding from their friends in the Big Pharma marketing department.

[Jakes Progress]

6. I agree with your points here.

I worked in the field (journalism) back before it got so controlled by the money. We are a long way from Murrow and company, but what happened to them is even more in evidence today. It would help if the public showed more interest in foreign affairs than the most recent kidnapped white girl. True as it is that big money influences the media, it is also true that if there were money (audience) enough for real news, someone would supply it.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. Good questions, all. The most pointed one being the one aimed at Journalists.

[robinlynne]

4. I like the third question the best. The answer to the first is obvious.

[Jakes Progress]

7. Third is a good question, but easily answered.

I like the second one. I think it is probably the most pertinent. If everything from the brand of sugar used in the embassy coffee bar to the addresses of the local informants is classified as the same, you are diluting the importance of your security program.

[stray cat]

5. Also, what is right to disclose - is Cheney also heroic?

[starroute]

8. When you're the sole global superpower, you get the attention

I don't really think anybody's panting at the bit to read the diplomatic cables of Albania or Kazakhstan.

[Jakes Progress]

11. A little reaching?

Who said they wanted to read the cables from Albania and Kazakhstan? I sort of would like to see what China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, India, and a few others were saying. I know we are big, but we aren't the whole ball of wax anymore.

[fascisthunter]

9. He Already has released info on other nations

besides, we are supposedly the most powerful nation in the world and our policies have had a global effect.

for Assange: "When did you stop beating your wife?"

[Hydra]

10. I agree

Assange is a Hero, but we can't have that. The Evil Empire is good, therefore its "enemies" are evil.

Currently, our biggest "enemy" is daylight. Dark is all that's keeping it all together.

[Jakes Progress]

12. Link?

And yes we are a powerful nation, but it isn't just our messes that cause bigger messes. Other countries have just as much potential to screw up the world. We are doing a great job of screwing the planet and its population, but you would have to be very myopic to think that we are the only dangerous nation and that the world's bad guys all live in Washington. It's sort of like the Democrats getting all their dirty linen (of which there is plenty) aired in the media while the republicans get a pass.

Perspective.

[fascisthunter]

13. look around this site...

I spent 30 seconds and found this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4633286

how could you have missed this?

Here's another from another site:
http://www.rferl.org/content/wikileaks_cables_us_leak_iran_arab_israel/2234156.html

This isn't just about the US.

And another regarding China and N.Korea
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea

[Jakes Progress]

14. Read your own links.

"sent from or to the United States embassy in Bogota"

That is the first link. They are US embassy cables about Bogota.

The second link is again, cables sent to US officials.

In your third link you don't have to go past the first paragraph. " according to leaked US embassy cables"
This is information from US officials to US officials that detail their thoughts and findings.

Did you not read them or did you not understand that what diplomats in Saudi Arabia would privately say to diplomats from India or Iran would be more like the leaked US documents?

[fascisthunter]

15. Are other Nations and their leaders involved and spoken about?

yes... the US's government is not the sole target or even a target. The release of these documents are exposing truths we pay for, secrets that effect us and everyone around the World. You just want to make this personal... go for it. I could care less... I hope all of it is released so we can see the corruption and unethical behaviour by world leaders.

[Jakes Progress]

17. Not even a good try.

You seem to be the one taking it personally. I simply pointed out that you didn't seem to understand the questions from the article. Quite reasonably the author asked for secret missives from other countries. You missed that idea when you posted links that showed secret messages to and from US embassies. The point of the article's question was that if it was beneficial to read US diplomat's messages (for the most part I think it was) then wouldn't it be beneficial to read the same thing from other countries, their secrets and true intentions. If you believe in openness then you should be in favor of that question being answered.

Just don't get all hinky because I had to point out that you didn't understand. I don't know another way to say that you didn't seem to get it. Rather than keep defending a weak post and then getting huffy with me and accuse me of taking it personally, a better reply would have been to say "Oops. I see. Sorry."

[fascisthunter]

18. lol... whatever buddy

[AndrewP]

16. Good questions n/t