Wikileaks Mega Thread!

[The Archregimancy]

Mod edit: To keep these from breading, the threee threads on the current Wikileaks data dump have been merged.

Mod edit 2: Title corrected

Due to the diplomatic threat of the leaks the UK government is officially withdrawing the right of the free press buy issuing a D-notice to the guardian.

"We are currently under a mass distributed denial of service attack," it says on its Twitter feed.

It adds that several newspapers will go ahead and publish the documents released to them by Wikileaks even if the site goes down.

The US state department has said the release will put many lives at risk.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has said the US authorities are afraid of being held to account.

Wikileaks has said the release of classified messages sent by US embassies will be bigger than past releases on Afghanistan and Iraq.

The newspapers set to publish details of the US embassy cables include Spain's El Pais, France's Le Monde, Germany's Speigel, the UK's Guardian and the New York Times.
Continue reading the main story
Wikileaks

* Whistle-blowing website with a reputation for publishing sensitive material
* Run by Julian Assange, a secretive Australian with a background in computer network hacking
* Released 90,000 secret US records of US military incidents about the war in Afghanistan and 400,000 similar documents on Iraq
* Also posted video showing US helicopter killing 12 people - including two journalists - in Baghdad in 2007
* Other controversial postings include screenshots of the e-mail inbox and address book of US vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin

* What is Wikileaks?
* Profile: Julian Assange

The latest leak is expected to include documents covering US dealings and diplomats' confidential views of countries including Australia, Britain, Canada, Israel, Russia and Turkey.

"The material that we are about to release covers essentially every major issue in every country in the world," Mr Assange told reporters by video link on Sunday.

A journalist with Britain's Guardian newspaper said the files include an unflattering US assessment of UK PM David Cameron.

Simon Hoggart told the BBC: "There is going to be some embarrassment certainly for Gordon Brown but even more so for David Cameron who was not very highly regarded by the Obama administration or by the US ambassador here."

No-one has been charged with passing the diplomatic files to the website but suspicion has fallen on US Army private Bradley Manning, an intelligence analyst arrested in Iraq in June and charged over an earlier leak of classified US documents to Mr Assange's organisation.
'Illegally obtained'

The US government has written Mr Assange, urging him not release the documents.

The letter from the US state department's legal advisor Harold Koh said the release of classified state department documents was against US law and would put "countless" lives at risk.

Mr Assange is said to have asked which individuals would be put at risk by the leak and offered to negotiate over limited redactions.

In response, Mr Koh demanded that Wikileaks return official documents to the US government.

"We will not engage in a negotiation regarding the further release or dissemination of illegally obtained US government classified materials," he said in the letter.

Mr Koh's letter adds that the publication of the documents would endanger the lives of "countless" individuals - from journalists to human rights activists and bloggers - and put US military operations at risk.

Wikileaks earlier this week said that its next release of documents would be nearly seven times larger than the nearly 400,000 Pentagon documents relating to the Iraq war it published in October.

Wikileaks argues that the site's previous releases shed light on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They included allegations of torture by Iraqi forces and reports that suggested 15,000 additional civilian deaths in Iraq.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858637

As well as disbanding a key part of or civil liberties the US government is trying to block wiki-leaks. Which was going to publish document detailing on the personal lives of diplomats and National leaders as well as the US opinion of world governments.

So I ask the question, is security more welcome than civil liberty? Should we start wearing communist/fascist uniforms and praise our respective governments and their totalitarian regimes?

How can we say to NK that we are superior if we act like them?

EDIT: link

[Jakaragua]

DDoSing is such a butthurt-nerd-kicked-from-a-mmorpg-clan thing to do...

[Rokartian States]

Due to the diplomatic threat of the leaks the UK government is officially withdrawing the right of the free press buy issuing a D-notice to the guardian.

"We are currently under a mass distributed denial of service attack," it says on its Twitter feed.

It adds that several newspapers will go ahead and publish the documents released to them by Wikileaks even if the site goes down.

The US state department has said the release will put many lives at risk.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has said the US authorities are afraid of being held to account.

Wikileaks has said the release of classified messages sent by US embassies will be bigger than past releases on Afghanistan and Iraq.

The newspapers set to publish details of the US embassy cables include Spain's El Pais, France's Le Monde, Germany's Speigel, the UK's Guardian and the New York Times.
Continue reading the main story
Wikileaks

* Whistle-blowing website with a reputation for publishing sensitive material
* Run by Julian Assange, a secretive Australian with a background in computer network hacking
* Released 90,000 secret US records of US military incidents about the war in Afghanistan and 400,000 similar documents on Iraq
* Also posted video showing US helicopter killing 12 people - including two journalists - in Baghdad in 2007
* Other controversial postings include screenshots of the e-mail inbox and address book of US vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin

* What is Wikileaks?
* Profile: Julian Assange

The latest leak is expected to include documents covering US dealings and diplomats' confidential views of countries including Australia, Britain, Canada, Israel, Russia and Turkey.

"The material that we are about to release covers essentially every major issue in every country in the world," Mr Assange told reporters by video link on Sunday.

A journalist with Britain's Guardian newspaper said the files include an unflattering US assessment of UK PM David Cameron.

Simon Hoggart told the BBC: "There is going to be some embarrassment certainly for Gordon Brown but even more so for David Cameron who was not very highly regarded by the Obama administration or by the US ambassador here."

No-one has been charged with passing the diplomatic files to the website but suspicion has fallen on US Army private Bradley Manning, an intelligence analyst arrested in Iraq in June and charged over an earlier leak of classified US documents to Mr Assange's organisation.
'Illegally obtained'

The US government has written Mr Assange, urging him not release the documents.

The letter from the US state department's legal advisor Harold Koh said the release of classified state department documents was against US law and would put "countless" lives at risk.

Mr Assange is said to have asked which individuals would be put at risk by the leak and offered to negotiate over limited redactions.

In response, Mr Koh demanded that Wikileaks return official documents to the US government.

"We will not engage in a negotiation regarding the further release or dissemination of illegally obtained US government classified materials," he said in the letter.

Mr Koh's letter adds that the publication of the documents would endanger the lives of "countless" individuals - from journalists to human rights activists and bloggers - and put US military operations at risk.

Wikileaks earlier this week said that its next release of documents would be nearly seven times larger than the nearly 400,000 Pentagon documents relating to the Iraq war it published in October.

Wikileaks argues that the site's previous releases shed light on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They included allegations of torture by Iraqi forces and reports that suggested 15,000 additional civilian deaths in Iraq.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858637

As well as disbanding a key part of or civil liberties the US government is trying to block wiki-leaks. Which was going to publish document detailing on the personal lives of diplomats and National leaders as well as the US opinion of world governments.

So I ask the question, is security more welcome than civil liberty, should we start wearing communist/fascist uniforms and praise our respective governments and their totalitarian regimes?

How can we say to NK that we are superior if we act like them?

I don't think doing such a thing places us on the same level as North Korea.

[Brewdomia]

Instead of sending a letter, they should have sent a Predator Drone.

[North Suran]

Being transparent for the sake of being transparent is idiotic.

[Innsmothe]

Instead of sending a letter, they should have sent a Predator Drone.

That would spark a war, since the guy is under international protection.

National sovereignty and all that.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Being transparent for the sake of being transparent is idiotic.

Is it any more idiotic than being secretive for the sake of being secretive?

[Umbagar]

Is there actually any evidence that the government is behind the DOS attack on wikileaks? It could just be a bunch of right wing hackers.

[Innsmothe]

Being transparent for the sake of being transparent is idiotic.

Not really, it would make politic less confusing for us peasants.

[Innsmothe]

Is there actually any evidence that the government is behind the DOS attack on wikileaks? It could just be a bunch of right wing hackers.

The Government has more to lose.

And hackers tend to be more Anarcho-liberal or mentally disturbed.

[Czardas]

The letter from the US state department's legal advisor Harold Koh said the release of classified state department documents was against US law and would put "countless" lives at risk.

Mr Assange is said to have asked which individuals would be put at risk by the leak and offered to negotiate over limited redactions.

In response, Mr Koh demanded that Wikileaks return official documents to the US government.

What is said: "The documents can't be released for national security reasons."

What is meant: "We did something bad and this will be really embarrassing to us."

Shouldn't surprise anyone familiar with, say, Yes Minister though.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

Instead of sending a letter, they should have sent a Predator Drone.

That would spark a war, since the guy is under international protection.

National sovereignty and all that.

Just ensure his voice is always dubbed over in interviews as well as blocking the release of documents

[Innsmothe]

That would spark a war, since the guy is under international protection.

National sovereignty and all that.

Just ensure his voice is always dubbed over in interviews as well as blocking the release of documents

Do you not support freedom of the press? Or would you rather have a government run news service like Iran or China?

[Glen-Rhodes]

Being transparent for the sake of being transparent is idiotic.

Is it any more idiotic than being secretive for the sake of being secretive?

I think there's a bit more to the secrecy of diplomatic cables than just the cool feeling people get when they can stamp 'Confidential' on something...

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

Do you not support freedom of the press? Or would you rather have a government run news service like Iran or China?

I'll remember to add smilies to ensure you spot less than serious posts. It's not like the UK are adverse to such moves in the past though

[North Suran]

Being transparent for the sake of being transparent is idiotic.

Is it any more idiotic than being secretive for the sake of being secretive?

Keeping documents concerning international relations and private individuals secret isn't being secretive for the sake of being secretive. It's employing common sense.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Is it any more idiotic than being secretive for the sake of being secretive?

I think there's a bit more to the secrecy of diplomatic cables than just the cool feeling people get when they can stamp 'Confidential' on something...

I think there's also a bit more to the secrecy than 'protecting lives'. I think protecting asses plays a big part too.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Is it any more idiotic than being secretive for the sake of being secretive?

Keeping documents concerning international relations and private individuals secret isn't being secretive for the sake of being secretive. It's employing common sense.

That depends why it's done.

[Glen-Rhodes]

I think there's also a bit more to the secrecy than 'protecting lives'. I think protecting asses plays a big part too.

Definitely. But is that really a bad thing? If these diplomatic cables contain frank assessments of foreign leaders and diplomats, I would rather they not be released to the public and erode relationships and whatnot.

[Rokartian States]

I think there's a bit more to the secrecy of diplomatic cables than just the cool feeling people get when they can stamp 'Confidential' on something...

I think there's also a bit more to the secrecy than 'protecting lives'. I think protecting asses plays a big part too.

But I doubt that's the entire reason. I'm not really sure we can judge whether or not it's a good idea to keep this information hidden until we see what it is first, which, of course, defeats the purpose of keeping it hidden.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

I think there's also a bit more to the secrecy than 'protecting lives'. I think protecting asses plays a big part too.

Definitely. But is that really a bad thing? If these diplomatic cables contain frank assessments of foreign leaders and diplomats, I would rather they not be released to the public and erode relationships and whatnot.

Why would frank assessments of foreign leaders and diplomats erode relationships? (assuming those frank assessments were accurate)?

[Kobeanare]

I think there's a bit more to the secrecy of diplomatic cables than just the cool feeling people get when they can stamp 'Confidential' on something...

I think there's also a bit more to the secrecy than 'protecting lives'. I think protecting asses plays a big part too.

"The Official Secrets Act isn't for protecting secrets, it's for protecting officials."

[Lunatic Goofballs]

I think there's also a bit more to the secrecy than 'protecting lives'. I think protecting asses plays a big part too.

But I doubt that's the entire reason. I'm not really sure we can judge whether or not it's a good idea to keep this information hidden until we see what it is first, which, of course, defeats the purpose of keeping it hidden.

Well, unfortunately, there nobody else to watchdog the government except the people.

[Meryuma]

Is there actually any evidence that the government is behind the DOS attack on wikileaks? It could just be a bunch of right wing hackers.

The Government has more to lose.

And hackers tend to be more Anarcho-liberal or mentally disturbed.

Why would anarcho-liberals oppose leaking government documents?

[North Suran]

Definitely. But is that really a bad thing? If these diplomatic cables contain frank assessments of foreign leaders and diplomats, I would rather they not be released to the public and erode relationships and whatnot.

Why would frank assessments of foreign leaders and diplomats erode relationships? (assuming those frank assessments were accurate)?

Hypothetical example:

Say you really didn't like a colleague at your work. You consider him to be irrational and incompetent. If you call them up on it in public, all you're going to do is initiate a shouting match, which ruins your working relationship with them and solves nothing. Instead, you file a report which contains your accusations.

Same applies to international diplomacy.