Jump to content

Wikileaks and the Diplomatic Cables of Doom


Cap'n Refsmmat
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry Pangloss, but I don't personally feel any person interested in anything can be unbiased, yet still feel the press, media or any person maintains the right to report news. There is probably nobody, certainly on this forum, that is more biased toward Conservative, Constitutional principles than myself, but I'll maintain my desire everyone has the right to disagree. What your indirectly inferring is being disingenuous in reporting and I'd really like some reference points. It seems, Assange has EMBARASSED, both major US Parties and many people with some very different ideologies, suggesting a bias toward the States, which is very common in both Australian and European Media. Our own Federal actions, as well as media in general in the US certainly has NOT itself been objective toward his actions and if were me, I'd be a whole lot more aggressive toward the US, than I've noted from him....

 

I did intend to watch 60 minutes, knowing he was on tonight, but got tied up on the Egypt issue. For some reason the pre-markets are ignoring these events, which would be good news for me, while confusing on how and what to do in my own pre-market activities in the AM...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A significant portion of the first segment focused on Assange's view that the political impact of the information he holds factors into his decision on what to publish.

 

I think it's time to shelve the notion that Julian Assange just wants information to be free.

 

Well he certainly has no business publishing state secrets that have no political impact. If the people don't care they probably don't need to know. And people who thought that "Assange just wants information to be free" didn't get that from Assange -- he has made pretty clear what intentions he has and his actions confirm it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that anyone would leak anything that they shouldn't you're probably not going to see any military intel or anything like that

i don't think anyone would leak anything unless they felt that the people really needed to know about it

 

What was leaked that I need to know about?

 

Well he certainly has no business publishing state secrets that have no political impact. If the people don't care they probably don't need to know. And people who thought that "Assange just wants information to be free" didn't get that from Assange -- he has made pretty clear what intentions he has and his actions confirm it.

 

Or maybe he's just hiding his intentions behind a thin veneer of faux objectivity. And I do mean "thin". In that 60 Minutes interview, one moment he's talking about "staying within the law", focusing on how Wikileaks is not the organization that acquired the documents from the government. The next moment he's supporting Bradley Manning as a "prisoner of conscience", and declaring that the man did nothing wrong, even though he appears to have broken a very serious and important law.

 

You're welcome to think what you like. What I think is that he wants to see the world burn because it isn't doing what he believes is right. He is the king of 21st century antiestablishmentism, invested with the full power of the internet and the crazy, event-driven media machine.

 

Over the long haul, it may work it out that there was a valid and respectable place in history for Julian Assange and his ilk, because of the screwed-up way human beings always manage to stumble ass-backwards into the future. IMO it will depend mainly on how much damage he does versus how much benefit is gained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During the interview Assange was also asked about the threat to release all of the documents, unedited, if something were to happen to him. He denied that this was a threat, and then repeated it, acknowledging that imprisonment is one of the criteria that would lead to the release.

 

He also declined describing himself as a journalist, choosing instead the word "activist".

 

He also spent significant time talking about how he has told everyone that 110,000 civilians have died in Iraq. Note that what he's saying is that this is what we're supposed to believe, rather than other figures, such as lower ones reported by the US government, or much higher ones of 600,000, or a million+, reported by various other sources. This is indeed the action of an activist.

 

Everything this man does reeks of anti-establishment activism, not "freedom of information" or "responsible government". His definitions. His rules. His foreign policy preferences. His immigration preferences. His economic preferences.

 

Not yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pangloss; I really don't wish to make this a big issue or argue, however here is a short interview Steve Kroft gave, behind the scenes, about the interview. Kroft mentions that media had given a false image of the man, that he was brilliant and that he (Assange) WAS both a Journalist and PUBLISHER.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7300034n&tag=topnews

 

For anyone that wishes to view the actual interview, it can be seen on the same link offered above. It is in two parts offering a good review of what we have been discussing on this thread. Pangloss, while thanking you for giving me cause to listen to the entire interview, I do believe you are misunderstanding many things he said, standing by my post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.