Um, I Think It's Time for a Thread on WikiLeaks

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (2703 of them)

Interesting:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/Analysts-Find-Little-New-in-WikiLeaks-Afghan-Docs-4457

― gato busca pleitos (Eazy), Monday, July 26, 2010 5:12 PM (6 hours ago)

the too-cool crypto-conservative "we already suspected most of this stuff already, jeez wikileaks thanks for WASTING MY TIME" coming from a lot of people is...well, not surprising, but sad

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 03:50 (nine years ago) link

how dare they! gg said that it was important

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 03:54 (nine years ago) link

ilx's leading conservative weighs in

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 03:57 (nine years ago) link

kevin is right -- just because we "know" that civilian killings etc happen afghanistan doesn't mean that details of actual events of such things going on aren't important

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 03:57 (nine years ago) link

Man, fucking Mother Jones, so fucking Conservative.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/07/wikileaks-afghan-documents-and-me-source

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 03:58 (nine years ago) link

i don't think it's crypto-conservative... just needlessly cynical

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 03:58 (nine years ago) link

hey k3v, got any other patronizing dictionary definitions to throw my way?

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 03:59 (nine years ago) link

i mean that mother jones post boils down to "some murders are more boring than others"

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:00 (nine years ago) link

also i think that what wikileaks does is important, regardless if every single one of their releases doesn't shake the country to its core

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:01 (nine years ago) link

MJ:

I'll keep running through to see if there's anything else of importance. But most of this information is tactical nuts and bolts, devoid of context, and largely useless for a war narrative; what would be far more valuable than this stuff is the strategic/political data: military info that's TOP SECRET or above, which I haven't seen yet; or stuff from the State Department or provincial reconstruction teams (PRTs).

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:01 (nine years ago) link

often the significance of the act may trump what's actually being leaked

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:02 (nine years ago) link

"this is not important, because tons of military personnel have seen it already"

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:03 (nine years ago) link

I didn't say wikileaks doesn't do important things, just don't think there's much value in calling people cynical crypto-conservatives for disagreeing with you over the value of a particular leak, esp when as far as i can tell k3v doesn't have any particular personal experience in gauging the value of military leaks and deciding whether they are important or not. presumably he read a dude who told him they were important and now i'm ILX's biggest conservative because i'm more skeptical than he is.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:03 (nine years ago) link

like i said, i don't agree that it's conservatism -- it might be conservative in the literal, non-political sense of the term, but i don't think ppl for the atlantic or mother jones are, you know, placating the GOP or something

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:05 (nine years ago) link

tbh goofball i haven't even read any analysis of this, just read the NYT articles about an hour ago xp

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:08 (nine years ago) link

of course the IMPACT will be minimal, America is still debating Inception

kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:08 (nine years ago) link

so are you

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:09 (nine years ago) link

xp k3v, suggestion for future: when you don't know shit about something don't call people conservatives because they disagree with your one hour old opinion, k?

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:09 (nine years ago) link

esp when as far as i can tell k3v doesn't have any particular personal experience in gauging the value of military leaks and deciding whether they are important or not.

― Mordy, Tuesday, July 27, 2010 12:03 AM (4 minutes ago)

you're using a different metric for "importance" than i am, you realize.

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:10 (nine years ago) link

or 'value', rather

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:11 (nine years ago) link

right, i'm using the gauge of whether they bring to light new information we didn't already have, spark discourse that wouldn't exist without them, or have a more undefinable impact -- since we have no idea about the second two yet, we can only evaluate the first, and since i'm not an expert (nor have the time to read all of the leaks myself), i have to rely on heuristics. generally reading analysis from a few different places. you apparently go with whether believing their valuable makes you feel good or not.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:13 (nine years ago) link

they're*

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:13 (nine years ago) link

If a poll is taken within the next week and shows a huge spike in war unpopularity, or something else quantifiable that can possibly be traced back to this leak, I might be willing to say that the leak was important, even without any huge new revelations. My hesitance would be how shitty most polling is and how little they generally can tell us, but that's pretty much the only way you could say that these leaks were somehow "important." Trying to saying so without having that is just making shit up.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:16 (nine years ago) link

xp k3v, suggestion for future: when you don't know shit about something don't call people conservatives because they disagree with your one hour old opinion, k?

― Mordy, Tuesday, July 27, 2010 12:09 AM (1 minute ago)

yes, the fact that i haven't served in the military or have had my thoughts on intelligence leaks previously published disqualifies my opinion that disclosing this information is a good thing, regardless of its impact. and i hardly need your view on this to think you're a conservative

xp yeah there's the thing - you wouldn't know it but there's this crazy thing called principle, mine says uncovering secret shit that governments and militaries do is awesome, whether the info is interesting or mundane, whether it 'has an impact' or not

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:22 (nine years ago) link

Ah yes, the uncovering secret shit is good principle. I believe Kant wrote about that in his Critique of Practical Reason.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:24 (nine years ago) link

If a poll is taken within the next week and shows a huge spike in war unpopularity, or something else quantifiable that can possibly be traced back to this leak, I might be willing to say that the leak was important, even without any huge new revelations. My hesitance would be how shitty most polling is and how little they generally can tell us, but that's pretty much the only way you could say that these leaks were somehow "important." Trying to saying so without having that is just making shit up.

― Mordy, Tuesday, July 27, 2010 12:16 AM (7 minutes ago)

i mean this paragraph just makes me want to vomit. that shit is laaaaaaaame wikileaks, you shouldn't have even published this, fuckin attention whores. way to distract me from more important issues such as what crazy comment rush limbaugh made and what color john mccain's poop was today

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:30 (nine years ago) link

Quotation marks of random shit you wrote, how fun!

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:32 (nine years ago) link

Free availability of information & transparency of government seem bedrock values of any democracy worth the name & that hardly seems like a controversial thing to assert in my opinion - what immediate measurable good is done by these values seems rather beside the point

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:37 (nine years ago) link

otm

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:37 (nine years ago) link

Ah yes, the uncovering secret shit is good principle. I believe Kant wrote about that in his Critique of Practical Reason.

― Mordy, Tuesday, July 27, 2010 12:24 AM (13 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

this is kind of an important value in a liberal democracy isnt it? im on the fence about the intrinsic 'worth' of the information contained in the memos but its hard to argue that their publication is anything but a net good

max, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:39 (nine years ago) link

^yes (to aero & max)

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:40 (nine years ago) link

First of all, free availability of information & transparency of government are wonderful things to aspire to, but no government has ever practiced it fully, and no political philosopher has ever argued that a State can practice it fully and remain a State. But even putting that aside, k3v has now conflated my argument ("Let's wait and see if these leaks are truly valuable") which this other argument ("Wikileaks is wasting my time"). I already wrote that Wikileaks is a fine thing, even if this isn't the most useful leak. But in k3v's world everybody's political positions have to be the most thoughtlessly knee-jerk opinion on any given issue. There is no space for nuance or consideration, just blindly supporting anything that sounds good to you. It's insane and a total poisoning of any kind of intellectual life. Let's not think about issues on their own, just accept some vague, half-formulated "position," trumpet our own moral superiority, and condemn anyone who might disagree on any point as a crypto-conservative, or just simply a conservative.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:40 (nine years ago) link

someone register me a better nemesis than this cargo shorts goof

terry squad (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:41 (nine years ago) link

Like, if we want to talk about the value of a totally free information society, by all means let's have it. But k3v isn't actually interested in any kind of discussion of substance. He just comes up with a talking point and defends it to the death. Maybe we shouldn't be celebrating that.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:42 (nine years ago) link

k3v, I think you'll get a new nemesis when you start writing coherently. I certainly won't have any issue with you at that point.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:42 (nine years ago) link

He also doesn't argue at all. At the end of every conversation is boils down to some personal reference. He calls me out by my full name, asks me about my personal habits, mentions my WDYLL photo. This is seriously what ILX is gonna defend?

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:44 (nine years ago) link

kevin is the assange of ilx

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:44 (nine years ago) link

leaking the classified contents of wdyll photos

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:45 (nine years ago) link

He's really just a thoughtless dick tbh.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:45 (nine years ago) link

It's insane and a total poisoning of any kind of intellectual life.

for a guy attempting to present a reasoned argument, this sort of hyperbole seems, to put it mildly, counterproductive

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:47 (nine years ago) link

well at least its a more interesting beef than whiney v. deej

max, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:47 (nine years ago) link

that said k3v takin shit personal with appearance-related stuff is NAGL & you know it - you're perfectly capable of making your case without being uncool, and given that your case is righteous, I can't see why you'd shoot it in the foot

unless you're drunk, often when I get in "fuck you you fascist" political argts on ile it means I have got into the wine again

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:49 (nine years ago) link

well at least its a more interesting beef than whiney v. deej

to be fair, my cat vs. the arm of the couch is a more interesting beef than whiney vs. deej

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:49 (nine years ago) link

First of all, free availability of information & transparency of government are wonderful things to aspire to, but no government has ever practiced it fully,

but to take it back on topic, how can you in good conscience present such a specious and, yes, conservative argument? "wonderful things to aspire to, but no government has ever practiced it fully" isn't even on topic - the whole point of the various checks & balances in place is to move, push, nudge or force the elected & taxpayer-supported government toward as close to the ideal as possible. that means that every violation of the principles in question -- whether they're "important" or not (but as a governed citizen, I'll be the damn judge of that, and my [or anybody's] "yes it matters" cancels out any and every "naw, never mind") -- should be brought to light as quickly & and publicly as possible. Any case against the value of transparency will need to be made with something better than "well, nobody's perfect": which is a fair summary of what you say in the sentence above. Your sentence concludes

nd no political philosopher has ever argued that a State can practice it fully and remain a State.

which isn't germane to the case, I don't think; this seems like the classic appeal-to-authority, i.e., fallacious reasoning.

The rest of your case is a personal attack, in the process of decrying personal attacks: I don't need to point out the contradiction there.

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 04:56 (nine years ago) link

I need to go to sleep and not be arguing here but: Presumably we both agree that certain kinds of information should be kept secret from the public (such as information that WikiLeaks currently has and is sitting on because it will put people's lives at risk) and that certain kinds of information should be released (that which will result in meaningful change and helps people's actual lives and does other good quality of life stuff in the world). If you believe in both those categories, then you inevitably have to believe that something can be neither, or a little of both, or any other permutation. And thinking people generally sit down and think about: Was this good? Instead of just broadly applying the principle and coming out with a conclusion without the rest of that discussion. I wasn't just making personal attacks for no reason -- and I certainly wasn't attacking him PERSONALLY. I was attacking the kind of argument he is relying upon; one where we deduct any kind of analysis because it might undermine something we consider a principle. It's the triumph of ideology over thought. And btw, didn't even Morbz write that this leak thing might not be worth anything? If a tree falls in the woods and nobody hears it, does it make a sound? If something is leaked and it has no affect in the world, is it a good thing just because you personally got a release of a warm-feeling chemical into your brain? I guess it was good for you, but let's not over read the value.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 05:02 (nine years ago) link

(And let's not run around calling people crypto-conservatives because they decided to analyze the material themselves and not just rely on their gut to tell them if it's good or not.)

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 05:03 (nine years ago) link

People were comparing these leaks to the Pentagon Papers! If the only good they do is they fulfill a personal principle, I think some articles explaining why they weren't that important are in order! I don't think someone trying to put them into a real perspective is somehow furthering the evil conservative agenda.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 05:06 (nine years ago) link

So Julian Assange, hot or not?

I vote hot. What a guy.

mittens, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 05:12 (nine years ago) link

If something leaked and it does not impact the world, yes, it's a good thing, because it perpetuates the free flow of information, which, as I say, is an essential component of a democracy. I'm perfectly open to the idea that democracy is too flawed & perilous a thing to be dragged out for too long, or that its principles are in need of overhaul, but that's because I have Marxist ghosts in my closet, and I suspect that the result of such an overhaul is a state with more power than you really want a state to have. but if the actual principles in play are to be adhered to, then yes, absolutely, the leaking of suppressed information that has no value whatsoever is in itself a good thing, a strike in favor of democracy itself. the system benefits, and it principles are affirmed, when suppressed information is made public.

the only information that I will concede any state organization has the right to keep secret from the public is information that might directly put soldiers in the field in harm's way. troop movements. battlefield positions. how the war was being conducted eight years ago - four years ago - last year? I get to know all that if I want, as long as somebody's willing to publish it.

xpost this is not a personal principle. it is a bedrock principle of our democracy.

gross rainbow of haerosmith (underrated aerosmith albums I have loved), Tuesday, 27 July 2010 05:14 (nine years ago) link

Ok, one more thing I have to say on this topic tonite: When you're a kid, at some point of your life, assuming you're in a situation where you're learning either the ten commandments, or generally ethical imperatives, you might have a question. It says do not kill, but what about if someone is trying to kill you first? Or someone is threatening someone else's life? And then you begin to learn that even the most important ethical decisions have nuance, and situations can shift no matter what the underlying principle is. So hopefully when you're an adult, and you see a WikiLeaks story, you've learnt that things in life are more complicated than, "yay, this sounds like some principle I have," and maybe you think, "I want to learn the details so I can decide whether it is a good thing, a bad thing, or a neutral thing." I have much more respect for the second person than the first.

Mordy, Tuesday, 27 July 2010 05:15 (nine years ago) link

at least smeared shit washes off. some pissed up bad guest of mine once poured honey into my television.

calzino, Saturday, 13 April 2019 12:21 (six months ago) link

Tonight over 70 parliamentarians stand with victims of sexual violence, and are calling on both the Home Secretary and the shadow Home Sec to urge them both to be champions of action to ensure Julian Assange faces Swedish authorities and is extradited there if they so request: pic.twitter.com/uaJMM984Cc

— stellacreasy (@stellacreasy) April 12, 2019

signed by john woodcock, somewhat undermining its message

... and the crowd said DESELECT THEM (||||||||), Saturday, 13 April 2019 12:30 (six months ago) link

yes.. even CHUK didn't want to taint their brand with that slimeball.

calzino, Saturday, 13 April 2019 12:31 (six months ago) link

abbott’s response

British government should grant extradition of Julian Assange if authorities reopen rape allegations, Diane Abbott says in letter to colleagues. pic.twitter.com/2qY1Yctrt7

— Ashley Cowburn (@ashcowburn) April 13, 2019

... and the crowd said DESELECT THEM (||||||||), Saturday, 13 April 2019 15:11 (six months ago) link

Wikileaks started out with a noble purpose of complete openness, but in the last few years Julian Assange sold out to Russian interests and betrayed the trust of innocent whistleblowers such as Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden (though Snowden still seems to be operating under the delusion that Assange actually gives a damn about him). Manning needs to be released as soon as possible, now that Assange is in custody. Also, I used to defend Wikileaks but when I was expressing my support for Manning I found a whole host of transphobic tankies who didn't give a shit about her. Fuck Julian Assange and fuck Wikileaks; transfer whatever useful is left of the project to a secondary source and destroy the whole site.

The Colour of Spring (deethelurker), Saturday, 13 April 2019 17:19 (six months ago) link

I have a young boss who has turned out to be an Assange cultist and is convinced there's been a "dead drop" of "explosive information" that's been released post-arrest, including "proof that white genocide is real." Might be time to go job hunting.

Simon H., Saturday, 13 April 2019 17:23 (six months ago) link

huge if true

arli$$ and bible black (bizarro gazzara), Saturday, 13 April 2019 18:07 (six months ago) link

Not sure what I thought about wikileaks at the time but have ended up thinking it's a bit too good to be true: the hacking and leaking of State A's secrets is just too good a technique for States B and C not to buy in/take over, surely? So it would just end up being used as a tool by one state against another rather than being some objective watchdog/truth-teller.

Never changed username before (cardamon), Saturday, 13 April 2019 23:14 (six months ago) link

Wikileaks massive file release. A quick scan shows newsworthy files on Microsoft, Steve Jobs, Guantanamo, US torture briefings, Vatican bank, and much more. https://t.co/x6D79rh6hE

— Dr Naomi Wolf (@naomirwolf) April 14, 2019

... (Eazy), Sunday, 14 April 2019 17:20 (six months ago) link

lol BIlderberg meeting reports 1956-1980

d'ILM for Murder (Hadrian VIII), Sunday, 14 April 2019 17:27 (six months ago) link

surely this is....everything?

d'ILM for Murder (Hadrian VIII), Sunday, 14 April 2019 17:31 (six months ago) link

Note: https://t.co/q9lDUo7sSn is not a release, insurance dump, or response to Assange’s arrest. It is the page where published documents are available for bulk download so that people can create mirrors, access publications offline, or use the raw data. It has existed for years.

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 13, 2019

JoeStork, Sunday, 14 April 2019 17:31 (six months ago) link

sad trombone

i am reading the scientology docs anyway

d'ILM for Murder (Hadrian VIII), Sunday, 14 April 2019 17:38 (six months ago) link

Mueller Report: Julian Assange Smeared Seth Rich to Cover for Russians

Julian Assange not only knew that a murdered Democratic National Committee staffer wasn’t his source for thousands of hacked party emails, he was in active contact with his real sources in Russia’s GRU months after Seth Rich’s death. At the same time he was publicly working to shift blame onto the slain staffer “to obscure the source of the materials he was releasing,” Special Counsel Robert Mueller asserts in his final report on Russia’s role in the 2016 presidential election.

“After the U.S. intelligence community publicly announced its assessment that Russia was behind the hacking operation, Assange continued to deny that the Clinton materials released by WikiLeaks had come from Russian hacking,” the report reads. “According to media reports, Assange told a U.S. congressman that the DNC hack was an ‘inside job,’ and purported to have ‘physical proof’ that Russians did not give materials to Assange.”

...

With Assange behind it, the Seth Rich hoax moved into the almost-mainstream, spawning a quickly-retracted report on Fox News, and a series of “investigations” by Assange ally Sean Hannity. It also wreaked havoc in the lives of Rich’s surviving family, particularly his anguished parents who later begged perpetrators of the charade “to give us peace, and to give law enforcement the time and space to do the investigation they need to solve our son's murder.”

Even as he was ruthlessly framing Rich to protect himself, the GRU, or both, Assange was privately communicating with his real sources to arrange the transfer of the second election leak, material the GRU stole from John Podesta’s Gmail account.

shared unit of analysis (unperson), Friday, 19 April 2019 18:18 (six months ago) link

Fuck. This. Guy.

☮ (peace, man), Friday, 19 April 2019 18:25 (six months ago) link

Came here to post exactly that

El Tomboto, Friday, 19 April 2019 20:14 (six months ago) link

yup

k3vin k., Friday, 19 April 2019 22:33 (six months ago) link

whistleblowers are still very necessary and they shouldn't be punished, but this guy: fuck him.

StanM, Saturday, 20 April 2019 07:04 (six months ago) link

50 weeks in chokey

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48118908

Ned Caligari (Tom D.), Wednesday, 1 May 2019 11:18 (five months ago) link

three weeks pass...

Sy Hersh: “Today Assange. Tomorrow, perhaps, The New York Times and other media that published so much of the important news and information Assange provided.”

— Jeffrey St. Clair (@JSCCounterPunch) May 24, 2019

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Friday, 24 May 2019 03:51 (five months ago) link

two weeks pass...

myeah. he may be a cnut but free press and whistleblowing should still be possible too

StanM, Thursday, 13 June 2019 11:50 (four months ago) link

I already said that. anyway.

StanM, Thursday, 13 June 2019 11:50 (four months ago) link

Sorely tempted to say ah fuck it in this case.

calzino, Thursday, 13 June 2019 11:55 (four months ago) link

Nah, it's important he goes to Sweden. Rape needs to be punished.

Frederik B, Thursday, 13 June 2019 13:00 (four months ago) link

Lol he'll get punished alright

Bash Street Kids: Endgame (Bananaman Begins), Thursday, 13 June 2019 15:31 (four months ago) link

one month passes...

According to several sources Mike Pompeo told Ecuador's El Universo newspaper that Assange will definitely be extradited to the US: for instance,
https://www.liberation.fr/planete/2019/07/21/mike-pompeo-affirme-que-julian-assange-sera-extrade-vers-les-etats-unis_1741282

However, when looking for what he said (not that I speak Spanish or anything, but go to the El Universo site, type "Pompeo Assange" and then click Buscar = search, right?
finds this article: https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2019/07/20/nota/7434186/mike-pompeo-secretario-estado-eeuu-llego-guayaquil-reunirse-lenin
that only has one paragraph mentioning Assange and it's only something like "he will have to defend his actions before a court"

?

StanM, Sunday, 21 July 2019 17:40 (three months ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.