Originally Posted By ecdc Necessary transparency in an era of government abuse, or dangerous threat to American foreign interests?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Yeah, I'm of two minds on this. Sometimes things like this can go too far. It's the old adage "just because you can doesn't mean you should."
Originally Posted By SuperDry I am as well. If the leaks were limited to bona fide revelations of wrongdoing, scandal, or cover-ups, that would be one thing. But for it to be a blanket disclosure of diplomatic "cables" (which more or less means email between US embassies and State Department HQ), it's revealing a whole lot of things that legitimately should be kept private. Is it really in the US's best interest for foreign nations to feel that they can't communicate with US diplomats honestly, for fear of their words ending up on the Internet?
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 I believe we need a little more transparency, but as a general public we are not ready for full transparency. I also believe that this "leak" is mostly just intelligence games the U.S. is playing with other countries
Originally Posted By mawnck >>it's revealing a whole lot of things that legitimately should be kept private.<< Seems to me it's revealing a really lousy job of keeping these classified emails classified.
Originally Posted By Anatole69 ^^ They were never able to kill Castro, so what do you expect? - Anatole
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >They were never able to kill Castro, so what do you expect?< That's what you think.
Originally Posted By markymouse I agree with the general theme so far. There is a place for whistleblowing. But sharing every little private piece of information - frank appraisals of world leaders, discussions of options, the possible benefit of this doesn't equal the negative consequences. And, yeah, where the heck is the security?
Originally Posted By fkurucz And know WikiLeaks has announced they are going to publish documents reagrding the banking industry and the fraud it commits. This could get very interesting.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>And know WikiLeaks has announced they are going to publish documents reagrding the banking industry and the fraud it commits.<< Sign me up. The interesting thing about the current thing is it seems much less embarrassing to the U.S. than other countries. Turns out other Arab nations want us to bomb Iran. And China's just as irritated with North Korea as the rest of us. It could turn out to be a good leak in the long run...unite us more with the Chinese on this issue while alienating the crazy people. I don't use that as an excuse for the leak. I still have really mixed feelings about it.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>And now WikiLeaks has announced they are going to publish documents reagrding the banking industry and the fraud it commits.<< Which they're waiting until next year to release. If they have these docs, then what are they waiting for? Get on with it! To paraphrase a clever comment I read recently ... I think they're blowing the whistle only because they like the sound.
Originally Posted By fkurucz ^^They won't even say which bank it is. Still, I'm looking forward to whatever they publish.
Originally Posted By ecdc <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/11/30/sweden.interpol.assange/index.html?hpt=P1&iref=NS1" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/...iref=NS1</a> >>Interpol, at the request of a Swedish court looking into alleged sex crimes from earlier this year, has put WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on its most-wanted listed.<< They should probably get on with releasing those bank documents.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones If those gossipy cables result in real consequences to foreign relations, perhaps the world is more like Jersey Shore than we think.
Originally Posted By Longhorn12 >the possible benefit of this doesn't equal the negative consequences.< I would disagree with this, because of Wikileaks the world now knows that. A.) China HATES Best Korea, and really wants a democratic unified Korea under southern rule. B.) Saudis do not like Iran or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad how does that not help us?
Originally Posted By DAR >>>Interpol, at the request of a Swedish court looking into alleged sex crimes from earlier this year, has put WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on its most-wanted listed.<< They should probably get on with releasing those bank documents.>> So in other words he's a trustworthy kind of guy.
Originally Posted By Mr X DAR, does your black and white worldview have any place for "trumped up charges"? Not saying they *are* trumped up, but if they were, would that matter to you? Or do you just assume the charges alone make him unworthy of trust? So, which is it, DAR?
