Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Wikileaks - It's time to open the archives

What do people think about the argument that wikileaks can be self-defeating.

I.e. it's ethos is to encourage culture of disclosure through offering leakers anonymity but that this might also discourage any culture of disclosure amongst its targets.

It's certainly going to make them ramp up internal security. TBH, I don't blame Wikileaks for all the US data they've put online. If anyone is to "blame" its the Bush administration and they're complete inability to grasp that computer security is important. In my opinion, this is the unreported story of the entire episode.
 
One count of rape, one of sexual coercion, two of 'sexual molestation'

I'm sorry, but none of that would neccesarily bar getting out on bail (at least in the US). I realize that Britain is different, but nothing I've read in the newspapers there would tell me that he wouldn't get out on bail, compared to other similar cases.
 
It's Swedens odd rape laws. Sex by 'Suprise' or something because it was unprotected.... I'll try find the article.
 
I'm sorry, but none of that would neccesarily bar getting out on bail (at least in the US). I realize that Britain is different, but nothing I've read in the newspapers there would tell me that he wouldn't get out on bail, compared to other similar cases.

Judge's reasons: lack of connection/ties to this country, nomadic lifestyle, no evidence of his entry into UK.
 
But he is someone who frequently 'sneaks' in and out of countries and makes his whereabouts rather mysterious. So it's not really surprising he has been refused bail.
 
What do people think about the argument that wikileaks can be self-defeating.

I.e. it's ethos is to encourage culture of disclosure through offering leakers anonymity but that this might also discourage any culture of disclosure amongst its targets.

It's utterly devoid of merit. When has not forcing governments and corporations to do something they don't want to do ever encouraged them to do it?
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11937110

One of the charges is that he had unprotected sex with a woman, identified only as Miss A, when she insisted he use a condom.

Another is that he had unprotected sex with another woman, Miss W, while she was asleep

Five people, including journalist John Pilger, film director Ken Loach and Jemima Khan, the sister of Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith, stood up in court offering to put up sureties....


Judge Riddle...said he feared he "may be at risk from unstable persons".
 
If he was a flight risk he wouldn't have gone to the station voluntarily.

The best thing WL could do now is to appoint another person in charge.
 
If he was a flight risk he wouldn't have gone to the station voluntarily.

The best thing WL could do now is to appoint another person in charge.

Assange never was "in charge" he's said so on a number of interviews. He said that wikileaks needed a face, as to detract from the speculation of who was behind it, which would have got in the way of the content of what they release. (those who don't want us to see what's in the cables, would have made sure that it was far more important to discuss that, rather than the content)
 
It's utterly devoid of merit. When has not forcing governments and corporations to do something they don't want to do ever encouraged them to do it?

There is an argument that leaking diplomatic cables on such a wholesale scale critically damages the reputation of the diplomatic service involved thereby acting as a disincentive to those who might be encouraged to pass on valuable information.

It's one thing to disclose individual facts and stories, it's quite another to utterly dicredit a country's wider intelligence system.

Having said that, there is a sense of inevitability to wikileaks. But that doesn't mean we should embrace it as the start of some kind of halycon era of transparency and openness because that's really not the destination we're hurtling towards.

This kind of thing engenders paranoia, discourages communication and ramps up secrecy.
 
There is an argument that leaking diplomatic cables on such a wholesale scale critically damages the reputation of the diplomatic service involved thereby acting as a disincentive to those who might be encouraged to pass on valuable information.
It's not a very good argument tho, is it?
It's one thing to disclose individual facts and stories, it's quite another to utterly dicredit a country's wider intelligence system.
Which wikileaks hasn't done
 
Back
Top Bottom