Comments on: WikiLeaks, cyberwar and Julian Assange Tue, 31 Mar 2015 01:18:20 +0000 hourly 1 By: Casey Ranni Thu, 09 Oct 2014 14:20:17 +0000 Great website you have here but I was curious if you knew of any message boards that cover the same topics discussed in this article? I’d really love to be a part of online community where I can get feedback from other knowledgeable individuals that share the same interest. If you have any suggestions, please let me know. Thanks a lot!

By: coyotle Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:06:48 +0000 Nexien, you might want to read some more history. A good place to start would be “Wilson’s War” by Jim Powell. In my view Woodrow Wilson talked the talk but didn’t walk the walk. Still, we should heed the message and not the messenger.

By: Nexien Sun, 09 Jan 2011 17:05:52 +0000 Woodrow Wilson: 8 January 1918, Speech to joint session of congress:

Point 1 (0f 14)
“Open covenants of peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.”

Wikileaks’ regular exposing of government hypocrisy in the covert formation of covenants may finally drag diplomacy (where diplomats and officials explicitly exercise the art of lying for their country)into the open. If the covenants and relationships are not covert, then there is no embarrassment.

Lets try open covenants openly arrived at.


By: roncaling Mon, 27 Dec 2010 00:54:52 +0000 What DEMOCRACY do you mean?
The Irak democracy?
The Afgan democracy?
The Okinawa democracy with 50,000 american soldiers democracy?

By: SGK12 Sat, 25 Dec 2010 06:42:36 +0000 PFC Manning had no idea about the context in which this information was utilized, interpreted or employed. There is no way to estimate the extent to which he has set back diplomatic efforts and foreign relations. His behavior was truly outrageous!

He broke several laws. He and Assange have no appreciation whatever regarding sensitive information used to develop relationships. Simply put, it’s impossible to measure the damage. In fact, we will never know entirely the political harm, not to mention the likelihood that individual lives were ruined if not destroyed altogether. I’ll never understand how someone could be admired or applauded for such a heinous act.

He has released the names of enemy informants, people who are helping us to defeat an enemy and bring stability to a region. Think those people are going to stay alive? Think that anyone else is going to trust us to keep informants safe? What about information concerning a bribe our country paid to an Afghan warlord? Might look like a nasty scandal from the outside, of course, but these relationships prevent a LOT of bloodshed — until it becomes public knowledge and the whole cycle starts up again.

We give our military and diplomats some freedom to keep secrets. Without some level of secrecy, they simply cannot do their jobs. Assange, in his quest to bring governmental transparency (i.e., make himself famous), will forget that information can be a deadly and unpredictable weapon.

I realize these things are wasted on all you radical leftists. You all are so much smarter than the president, our military leaders and our diplomatic personnel.

By: Kevin44 Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:32:53 +0000 For all of you supporting Assange, I hope that someone publishes all your most secret secrets for all or the world to see including your friends, family and all future potential employers. That is what you are condoning here. That every detail about everyone should be public knowledge for everyone else. If you don’t see the slippery slope that you are on, let me point it out for you. If all information is public knowledge to be freely known by everyone, then all governments and large evil companies and just plain rich powerful people will also know everything about you and everyone else. Who do you really think will come out ahead in that game.

People, companies and governments (on behalf of their people) have a right to privacy. Unless there is a court order to the contrary, they each have a right to decide what they choose to be private and what they choose to reveal to others. Assange has no right to expose anything about anyone but himself. Now however that he is a public figure and under criminal investigation in Sweden for whatever and in the U.S. for espionage, he will be exposed as a complete hypocrite with all kinds of secrets that he wants to hide.

By: fantas37 Sun, 12 Dec 2010 22:10:41 +0000 When the world’s only superpower ranks 20th in freedom of the press (according to Reporters Without Borders, 2010), there is an extreme need for the likes of Julian Assange. Likewise there is a dire need for whistle blowers and their supporters when the US mainstream media is controlled by so few corporations (suggested reading: “The Media Monopoly” by Prof. Ben Bagdikian).

“We must also pay homage to the human rights activists, journalists, and bloggers who bravely defend the right to speak out,” Jean-Francois Julliard, Secretary General of Reporters Without Borders, said recently.

Words are deadly only when they incite direct physical injury, death and/or destruction. Thus I agree with Voltaire–“I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” said the 18th Century defender of civil and human rights.

The Internet may be our last bastion of justice in the world. And as a survivor of a government attack on me for publishing an alternative newspaper back in 1968 that left me with PTSD, I thank and salute all who are supporting the truth in the ongoing WikiLeaks expose.

And I would like to join the ranks of those who support Julian Assange who do NOT wish to remain anonymous. You may publish my real name and e-address. Tom Cahill, California,

By: theblackbird Sun, 12 Dec 2010 18:20:25 +0000 The breakaway group should moderate its criticism of Mr. Assange. Without his intelligence and courage, they would not have arrived at the place where they are and feel able to do the things they hope to do. They wouldn’t have joined him in the first place had they not been inspired by what he was doing, the hope it offered. Good that they have expressed their intent to be more transparent than they claim WikiLeaks has been, but why bash the orginal simply for wanting to do things differently. Just do it and count your blessings Mr. Assange allowed you in to begin with. Repay that trust with some respect, please. It’s unbecoming to berate him and smacks of ambition, of capitalizing on legitimate authority’s witch hunt for someone you apparently respected. It leads one to wonder why they waited until he was declared a wanted man before jumping ship.

By: Janeallen Sun, 12 Dec 2010 05:56:49 +0000 One exception among the politicians is Ron Paul.

Ron Paul said “Lying is not patriotic.”

It will be interesting to to see if there’s any influence on the official Tea Pary stance.

By: Butch_from_PA Sat, 11 Dec 2010 20:05:26 +0000 All this talk of people being killed for this leak of information surely is meant as sarcastic humor.

Australia is not a state of the Union.

No technology secrets were really divulged.

No individuals were listed on an elimination list.

The USA has and will continue to destroy sovereign nations at will.

One small Paul Revere like voice “The bullies are coming, the bullies are coming” is old news – just refreshingly different with the added tiny tidbits of digital evidence.

Again – imagine if WikiLeaks had been operating during the Cold War. So much death and destruction would have been avoided by public outcry of bad governing.