Thats not my argument at all.

Post #336,785 by beepster 12/6/10 11:39:29 AM Reply	Thats not my argument at all. My argument is that all of this information is being guarded by the whim of one man, or a very small org, who have decided (currently) that state secrets are what they are after. Makes him a folk hero, until his >whim< changes. In the interim, he's placed a beacon on this org for any and all people who come across information that they should not have to send this information to him. That's an awful lot of faith being placed in one place...kind of makes him a bit of a religious figure, no? Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #336,787 by boxley 12/6/10 12:01:43 PM Reply	no, he is just a well known leaker leaker site http://cryptome.org/ story http://www.wnd.com/i...iew&pageId=236345 Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #336,789 by drook 12/6/10 12:44:35 PM Reply	Why do you trust him less than the government? After all, we know the government has repeatedly done things that it shouldn't have, that only came out because of leaks. -- Drew
Post #336,799 by beepster 12/6/10 3:52:48 PM Reply	Excuse me? Somehow my disagreement with his org and their motives makes me all lovey dovey with the government now? Again, he's done something that you >like< and that makes it ok...until he does something that you don't like...like decide its more profitable to sell credit card numbers to the russian mafia, or something...and one of those numbers happens to be yours. What he's succeeded in doing with his "valiant" effort, to date, is make his org a magnet for any information of this type (legally or illegally obtained), and then he gets to decide what to do with it. What has he done to earn any more trust than you would currently give the government? Leaked >their< information and not yours...thats what. (so far) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #336,820 by drook 12/6/10 7:45:10 PM Reply	Just this What has he done to earn any more trust than you would currently give the government? Well ... he redacted names rather than outing a covert operative to get at her husband. -- Drew
Post #336,842 by beepster 12/7/10 6:32:57 AM Reply	That you know of... think they redact what they sell? (allegedly, of course) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #336,844 by crazy 12/7/10 7:38:19 AM Reply	Theoreticals VS actuals C'mon Beep, you can do it. Multiple groups of people have actively been doing bad things for many years, and these bad things have been hidden amongst many innocuous things, and while some people feel while that information may have been entrusted to them, they also feel it is important enough for it to get out in the real world. They then send this information to Julian and company. Julian and company pick and choose what to send out, with Julian really being in charge. Large amounts of info come out, some of it very important, and the fact that people now know it can happen again make them a bit more circumspect in their future communication, and possibly even in their behaviour. VS Some day, this guy who's politics you don't agree with, might just, possibly, release a bit of info that you don't want out there. Maybe he already did. But rather than weigh the pros and cons of the releases, the real VS your personal pissed paranoid phanatasy (I had to get another p in there), you simply toss off "well, if you knew what I do (or to that effect, since no one else sees your point here)" you'd agree with me. And here's an incredibly unlikely scenario that might happen, ie: YOUR INFO, and then you'd see how right I am. Grade school dude. You can do better than that. Or maybe in this case you can't so you go out on the stupid limbs of the argument.
Post #336,852 by beepster 12/7/10 8:58:18 AM Reply	You are back to binary argument in that if I don't like what he's doing, I, by default, have to like what the government is doing. That is false. I don't like what either is doing...and I've given the reasons. You have NO IDEA what he is doing with the information he gathers other than what he wants you to know. Others in his org (per the WND article Box posted) believe he is, in addition to posting on his site, selling said info to highest bidders. And you make a hero of the man, even though you have no idea what information he has and what he is doing with it. You, too, seem to be putting a lot of "faith" in one man, or a small group. He seems to be the new religion that way. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #336,859 by crazy 12/7/10 10:13:20 AM Reply	It IS binary You support current action or you don't. Pretty binary. Sure, you can look to the bad possible future of empowering this individual. And based on that, you can decide not to support the current activity. But the direction, the "badness", is a judgement call. Maybe your badness is my goodness. No matter what, I've seen nothing that justifies shutting him up yet. Maybe I'll cross that threshold. It won't be based on what you say he might do though. I'd certainly like to see an outlet for what has come out, and he's the guy to do it. So I support him. Do you?
Post #336,874 by beepster 12/7/10 2:48:37 PM Reply	No, I don't and no its not. And his desired outcome..of more transparent government/enterprise, will actually go backwards as well...as they, directly resultant of his actions, take more and more of these things offline. as for part 2, I can dislike his actions and dislike the response its garnered from our government all at the same time....talented that way, I am. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #336,865 by drook 12/7/10 12:15:51 PM Reply	Ahh, we agree You have NO IDEA what he is doing with the information he gathers other than what he wants you to know. So we both prefer fuller disclosure from those with power. I'm glad you've come around to my side. -- Drew
Post #336,875 by beepster 12/7/10 2:50:49 PM Reply	Not quite. because I don't think we need to know everything all of the time. I simply think your support is based on his current choice of target. Unless, of course, you think that every single transaction conducted electronically needs to be fully and openly disclosed...inclusive of account numbers, address fields, etc? Is that your position? Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #336,880 by jake123 12/7/10 3:08:39 PM Reply	You're strawmanning a bit there, Beep They are redacting out things from the cables where they might pose a risk to the people in question. Functionally, that's equivalent to publishing purchasing records with those things redacted... which is done right now for the benefit of marketing groups.
Post #336,881 by beepster 12/7/10 3:22:43 PM Reply	Threat made is that entire trove, not redacted, is in the open but well encrypted...to be released if something bad happens. Thats the open threat of blackmail (self-defense, whatever) . As for the remainder, while still accusation at this point (not from gov't, but others) is that info has been sold. Was that redacted? Will you ever know? And how does he know what info in those cables actually poses a risk? He may not be redacting everything that needs to be... So while I may grant you that the full blown "no secrets, any time, anywhere" position is a strawman..it isn't that much of a stretch. The only difference right now is his choice of target...and it is HIS choice. Not yours. And he could change his mind at any time. But in the interim...if anyone gets hold of info, by any means, J A is now the first place it gets copied to...right? Lots of press...he's a great guy, he is liberating the masses from government/corporate oppression etc....and then he gets to decide if he publishes in the open (redacted or not) or sold to the highest bidder (which you will likely never know happened...just like the big bad government) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #336,884 by jake123 12/7/10 3:44:35 PM Reply	Is that any different from what's happening now? At least he's only doing it with money willingly given to him. Personally, I think that "unredacted versions of released documents" wouldn't be much of a threat. I'm more inclined to think that there's stuff in there that would cause utter revulsion by the vast majority of the world's population; revulsion so strong that it would force most of the rest of the west to stop working with the US on anything until the criminals involved had been brought to justice. Look at the statement by Nigeria that they wish to arrest Cheney for his part in the bribery scandal there. That's not just born of a desire to arrest Cheney, but also of a desire to delegitimate Interpol and/or the US. The case against Cheney is far more solid than the case against Assange. Will Interpol act to issue a warrant? If not, they are working on behalf of the powerful, not on behalf of justice. If they do, will the US agree to extradite him to face trial? If not, their actions against Assange and wikileaks are exposed as deep hypocrisy on behalf of the well-heeled and powerful rather than any actual conception of justice. It's a brilliant piece of asymmetrical legal/information warfare on the part of Nigeria. Sure, he could be selling stuff. You know, in all honesty, you should be a lot more concerned about Israel than wikileaks. So far there've been a fair number of cases of Israeli espionage against the US, and who knows what was done with that info. So far, everything you say about wikileaks possibly selling the info is simply accusations leveled by the interested rather than having any actual proof or even supporting evidence. Does it not concern you in the slightest that the propaganda push against wikileaks is on so strong? It sure wasn't due to the state department cables... it was due to the announcement about the bank documents that are coming up. Now I know you work in that industry, but has it not occurred to you that there might be things in there that would cause even you to rethink how that business functions?
Post #336,885 by boxley 12/7/10 4:04:19 PM Reply	a lot of info is for sale Im sure he would be happy to sell to interested parties. Im also sure that wikileaks was not the only sharepoint as cable traffic is on el manour in lebanon that is not redacted, denying that wikileaks is the source of that traffic and is not part of any published dump so far. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #336,886 by beepster 12/7/10 5:18:15 PM Reply	Lest I continue to have to repeat myself... I don't have to like either the government OR J.A...do I think there is legitimate double standards being used by the US Government. Absofreakinlutely. Same stuff, different day. So does this mean I have to love wikileaks? Don't think so. For reasons listed already ad nauseum. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #336,979 by crazy 12/9/10 3:44:54 AM Reply	legitimate double standards oxymoron
Post #337,008 by beepster 12/9/10 3:16:13 PM Reply	change legitimate to real then...if it suits you Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #337,017 by crazy 12/9/10 6:38:33 PM Reply	An acceptable response We live in the real world after all.
Post #336,882 by drook 12/7/10 3:26:25 PM Reply	BeeP uses a strawman ... news at 11 In an ivory tower people get to play with theoretical constructs and form opinions based on premises pushed to their logical extremes. "... every single transaction ... fully and openly ... inclusive of [everything]" Here in the real world, we get to observe actions -- the real actions actually taken, not hypotheticals -- as well as stated intent. And we get to compare the two to see if the actions match the stated intent. I've heard Assange's stated intent, and so far his actions match up with it. I can't say that for many government entities. -- Drew
Post #336,883 by beepster 12/7/10 3:27:44 PM Reply	Yep, you've heard the PR...and it sits well with you. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.

Welcome to IWETHEY!