WikiLeaks Will Unveil Major Bank Scandal 1018
Atmanman writes "When WikiLeaks announced it was releasing 251,287 US diplomatic cables, we all thought we knew what was meant by its earlier ominous words that, 'The coming months will see a new world, where global history is redefined.' It now appears the organization is sitting on a treasure trove of information so big that it has stopped taking submissions. Among data to be released are tens of thousands of documents from a major US banking firm and material from pharmaceutical companies, finance firms and energy companies."
Go, Julian, go! (Score:5, Insightful)
There we go wikileaks... (Score:5, Insightful)
So in short (Score:5, Insightful)
Will this silence all those people saying... (Score:3, Insightful)
That wikileaks is exclusively an an ant-US govornment organization and that they no longer do "real whistle-blowing"?
Re:There we go wikileaks... (Score:3, Insightful)
Read all about it! (Score:4, Insightful)
Life will go on unchanged. They will still get their buy-out.
Carry on.
Seriously (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Go, Julian, go! (Score:4, Insightful)
That ought to be good (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope this is about Goldman Sachs!
Messing with Government of USA is one thing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Will this silence all those people saying... (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow. (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope Assange is as well-protected as he seems to be. He may already have the US Gov't after him, but if it's banks and pharmaceutical companies too, things are only going to get worse.
I really hope some of this stuff makes people stop saying "We hate wikileaks" and start saying "hey thanks for letting us know we were all getting fucked."
The general public needs to be reminded that censorship isn't the answer. It seems to be the only thing they want nowadays.
-Taylor
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:5, Insightful)
I am engaging in flamebait, mod accordingly... (Score:2, Insightful)
And what exactly, pray tell, would you do once the corruption and tyranny gets exposed? What are you hoping for? The revolution to begin? Bringing down the 'fat cats' and bringing 'justice' to the 'oppressed'? Okay, fine, heard that all before.
What happens afterwards? Who does the clean-up? Who puts everything back in order? Or, would there be a New World Order? One based on your personal definitions of what is 'Just' and 'Un-Just'? One in which the Wrongs are Righted, the Righteous finally ascend to Their Proper Station, and we all live in a land of Kumbayah under a new benevolent rule?
I'll cut to the chase. Spare me your indignant moral outrage and nihilistic desire to watch the world burn. You're just as bad, corrupt, and potentially tyrannous as those you espouse to hate. The only difference between 'Them' and people like you is that you haven't gotten your turn to be in charge.
Re:Seriously (Score:3, Insightful)
Are we still going to ask them to stop doing what they are doing ?
However with big banks and big pharm involved, I am more concerned about the well being of the individuals who run wikileaks, then if only governments were involved.
Absolutely. Governments world wide are just pawns for these sociopaths, they really don't care if governments take the blame. But when you start going after them directly, expect to wind up dead or in prison.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Complaining that Wikileaks is anti-US is really an ad hominem argument. Just because they may be anti-US, doesn't mean what they have revealed it any less legitimate.
Re:Go, Julian, go! (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe its like the whole fry a frog theory. By releasing so much information all at once, we're likely to get more enraged and do something, but the steady release of information is likely to just warm us up to it and likely to get Wikileaks closed for good before it gets ot the more juicy stuff.
Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, that's why senior administration officials are calling for Assange's head. Because he made it all up.
It's really pathetic when people consider the truth to be political. I think it's far more likely that you're upset that your worldview has turned out to be a lie.
Re:Messing with Government of USA is one thing (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe. I mean, yes, they're probably rougher, but corporations are minuscule when it comes to the two things that matter: Money and Bureaucracy. If the top 10 officials at a bank just up and resign, well shit. It's going to tank and, while the company may not fail completely it will hemorrhage capital. If the top 10 government officials resign, there'd be some crazy press but we'd essentially be back to the status quo in a month (with a much less orange Congress). The US government may be under a huge deficit, but it still has an enormous revenue stream, in a way corporations simply can't match. Governments may do a lot of pandering, but as far as entities go, they can certainly outlast any other for-profit enterprises out there.
Re:Read all about it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Life will go on unchanged. They will still get their buy-out.
Exactly. After the obscenity that was the mortgage scandal, did anything change? Nope, and the greedy bastards responsible even got a shitload of free money from The Taxpayers...
Doing their job. (Score:5, Insightful)
But since the media is in bed with government and industry, this is what it takes.
Re:Next year (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Go, Julian, go! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:0, Insightful)
Oh my god. You are wrong on so many levels that I just don't know where to begin.
Re:Go, Julian, go! (Score:2, Insightful)
Assange is one of the bastards.
If he cared about justice, he'd order redaction of identities of innocent parties before releasing any information, and he'd keep his name out of it as well.
Revolution (Score:5, Insightful)
Democracy is still the best ideal that I believe we have. I am talking worldwide, not just in the US. What is the valid alternative? Alternatives that I often discuss with my friends are alternatives that establish different democratic hierarchies and especially voting restrictions. However, this ideal that I often propose to them is just not feasible for many reasons (mainly: Human non determination, Human misuse of resources, implicit discrimination and violation of human rights). What is our alternative? Where do we go from here? I'm sure many disagree, but it seems to many that most (notice not
For starters, WikiLeaks seems to be going there. Freedom is a must have. Transparency is essential. Not everywhere, as some things must be made secret, but the fear of being discovered -- much like is happening now -- can force people to "behave". This is a true revolution if it gets spread and if it really gets worldwide. We must use this to our well being, we must show people that Freedom is essential and that a Democracy without proper freedom and ethically correct behavior isn't good. That IS the next step -- a Free, Ethically Correct Democracy. Unfortunately, that is the exact ideal that we can't reach, because even losers vote -- and losers can't vote decently. Plus, even if we didn't allow losers to vote, who is to say they didn't stop being losers? Plus, who isn't to say that "non losers" can't be bought or vote wrongly? Who isn't to say that the politicians that "ethically correct people" elect change their position and become "evil"?
The World keeps going forward, but we're walking backwards -- and we don't seem to be willing to go forward...just check the possible comments and troll ratings I'll get instead of a logical and healthy debate.
um... YES. (Score:5, Insightful)
YES YES YES. YES. OH GOD YES. OH YEA. FUCK YEA. Please, release this data soon. I want this so bad. Hell, considering how incredibly evil the bank and corporate system in America is on a public level, I am terrified and excited and horny to find out how evil they have actually been being this entire time.
Not to be morbid, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Attacking the U.S. government was dangerous enough, but with the amount of collective money behind the banks, pharma and energy, I sure wouldn't want to be anyone associated with WikiLeaks right now. A ten-million dollar per head contract for these people would be chump change for the companies involved.
Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I can't wait to see how major financial, energy and pharma companies have been shafting the general public, because apart from "Big Tobacco" and the media cartels I can't think of any more deceitful and greedy corporate scumbags out there. My only concern, and a seriously major one at that, is that the timing, the middle of a major financial upheaval, is less than ideal. Potentially having another major bank, energy or phara company collapse right now isn't going to do *anybody* any favours, no matter what the anti-capitalists might say.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
American Exceptionalism is the sadly more and more common belief that America, by its very nature, can do no wrong. It is Manifest Destiny written on a global scale. When we kill, torture, rape and rob, it is okay because what we do is for the Highest Good, therefore, if we torture, it must be the right thing to do. When we spy on other countries and interfere in their internal affairs, it is for their own good. If we do it, it is right, just, good, and in fact, both necessary and Fated to Happen. We are God's chosen, his favorites, just look at the evidence: would he have made us the best, richest, most powerful nation on Earth if we weren't his special favorites? God Bless America, and no one else!
This is what a growing number of Americans seem to believe. Scream and yell all you want. We don't hear you because we don't have to listen. That is one of the perks of being powerful, you simply do not have to listen to or pay attention to most of your detractors because they are not living in the same world as you are.
Re:Wikileaks knows no bounds (Score:3, Insightful)
You are joking, right? Because if not, holy shit humanity sucks and all because of you.
You see, they are releasing data that shows banks have been fucking people over in more ways than the ways they have been doing it publicly. It is like unveiling evidence that shows a serial killer also happens to rape children, eat puppies while they are still alive and kicks kittens for fun, along with baby seal clubbing.
Banks own 60% of the property and wealth in the US. They have been publicly leveraging that massive wealth to drive up the prices of everything they own to sell off, like De'Beers does with diamonds except with shelter, and forcing people into homelessness. If that is their publicly known business model, aren't you curious to find out what they have been hiding?
We'll see... (Score:3, Insightful)
So far a lot of the stuff I've seen leaked hasn't been particularly shocking. A lot of it covers things people have already known or at least strongly suspected but for whatever reason hasn't gotten the attention it deserves. These leaks simply drag those details out into the light of day to be openly acknowledged and discussed. It seems to me like the media and government officials are making a bigger deal of this than the general public. On the other hand, I also believe that it's entirely possible to cross the line and start causing some real harm, even if it hasn't happened yet.
I don't have a particular good impression of Assange; I get the impression he has too big an ego for his own good. I also have questions about about bias. I think Wikileaks can provide a valuable service, but only if it operates as an equal opportunity offender. There's a real problem if members of the organization can't see beyond personal biases, if they show reluctance in releasing information damaging to their particular worldview, for example. Or worse, they decide they have it in for a particular entity, in this case, the United States. Of it may be a problem that the US isn't nearly as good at securing it's sensitive information as, let's say, China.
I'm placing bets on the bank in question being Bank of America. They're quite despicable, but then that's already well-known which again raises my point of Wikileaks releasing information that's generally common knowledge.
Re:Well kinda depends (Score:4, Insightful)
4) the US is the 800lb economic gorilla holding a major portion of the large banks of the world.
5) this is a huge leak from a few or single source in the banking industry and just happened to be in the US... much like the recent US intelligence leaks are most likely from a single source.
Re:So... (Score:1, Insightful)
The comments from Assange make it clear that WikiLeaks is not just acting as a repository, but rather clearly targeting organizations (governmental, commercial, etc.) That, to me, invalidates their claims of neutrality. These leaks are -targeted-, and by so doing WikiLeaks is by no means just a neutral party, but an active participant in the dialog. Under those terms, I think the site loses its moral position and possibly its legal defense, too.
A big part of the problem is "who decides who's worthy of embarrassment?"
Who watches the watchmen? (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's what concerns me. We have large numbers of anonymous individuals sending information off to some guy who they assume is some sort of hero or on a moral high ground. In actuality we don't know what Assange's intentions or internal agenda is. It would be trivial for Assange to filter information and only display leaks that would damage the country of his choice. Not just at a government level, but at a corporate / economic level. It is impossible to monitor Wikileak's integrity or transparency. Do you think if Mr. Whistleblower's documents regarding Country X are not posted that Mr. Whistleblower is going to go to the established media and complain about that?
Somehow Wikileaks has assumed a level of authority and trust that it has not earned nor that is remotely justified via its internal policies and structure. I have read numerous articles about Assange, and how he wants to be in control of everything and basically tells his "volunteers" to f*** off if they question him or disagree with what he does. He holds all the keys to the kingdom.
Quotes of Assange's like this, from the interview linked in this story, concern me further:
All I can say is it’s clear there were unethical practices, but it’s too early to suggest there’s criminality. We have to be careful about applying criminal labels to people until we’re very sure.
Who is Assange to judge and / or label corporations or individuals? Isn't his role in life to throw static files on a server so other people can download them? Shouldn't the information speak for itself and be analyzed be individuals that know far more than him and his organization? I don't think Assange is the unwilling, unwitting sacrificial lamb that has been thrust into this horrible role. There seems to be an ego to stoke, or at least that is my opinion.
Finally, one last personal nitpick. What the hell does "wiki" have to do with anything? I think he threw that term in there to gain additional trust and ride the coattails of Wikipedia. There is nothing "wiki" about wikileaks in any way whatsoever.
I disagree (Score:5, Insightful)
Wikileaks isn't anti-US at all.
Sure, most of the stuff released there puts the US in a bad light. But you know what? Wikileaks didn't actually do any of those things. They just let the world know about it. You think we'd be a better nation if nobody knew about any of this stuff?
Not me my friend.
I'm glad the untouchable people who harm the country I love just might get called to task for the things they've done. The end result will be a stronger (and hopefully more accountable) America.
Re:Wikileaks knows no bounds (Score:3, Insightful)
What people need to learn is that wikileaks is not the enemy of the United States, it is the enemy of humanity.
That remark is so far over the top, so ludicrous, and so simple-minded that one can only wonder who could possibly make it and why.
Re:No Russian or Chinese revelations (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:good, mess with the corporations (Score:5, Insightful)
It's similar to what the US Republicans did with Obama. They hate the guy so much that even when he was offering them exactly what they wanted in terms of legislation, they were compelled to reject it simply because he had suggested it and he was the enemy, to be opposed at all costs.
When you oppose someone or something that strongly the human mind is capable of amazing cognitive dissonance; no matter how illogical the reasoning or how hypocritical your position, you can find a way to explain how all of your problems are somehow their fault and that nothing you've done could have in any way contributed to it.
Re:Bring it. (Score:3, Insightful)
"comes out before wikileaks is no more"
I think we can all safely assume that Mr. Assange has a dead man's switch of some sort and the mass of stuff he collected will be sent to the BBC and NYTimes if he somehow "disappears"
so they have an anti-us agenda. (Score:5, Insightful)
i dont remember any divine communique, any natural law, any galactic decree that says being 'anti-us' is something bad ? apparently, noone but americans got the memo.
its ok being anti-china, its ok being anti-iran, its ok being anti-whatever, but, somehow, 'anti american' is a no-no eh ?
what amazing level of self-centeredness.
world doesnt revolve around u.s., note that.
in addition, it was the wall street which scammed ENTIRE planet, in a fraud that was unparalleled in history. so much that they sold water vapor to governments, banks, major global corporations, and poisoned the credit supply of the world SO bad that, there is no end to it in sight. because noone can tell poisoned assets from valid ones.
of course its going to be about a u.s. bank. geez.
AND,
wikileaks puts out ALL kinds of shit. its you americans' fault that you ALWAYS check it when there is something involving u.s., and see the front page about u.s. then go about bullshitting how they are anti-us. here, for your convenience, the link to where wikileaks indexes the shit it spurts out. i dont see 'us, us, us' written all over it. it wouldnt be a problem even if it was.
http://mirror.infoboj.eu/ [infoboj.eu]
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't do foreign policy without secret cables flying around. You can't fight wars without intelligence.
You can't have government accountability with state secrets. I'd rather have the government accountability.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Furthermore, the majority of the communications are the legitimate, legal business of the U.S. governments pursuit of peaceful relations. Releasing these documents threatens alliances and negotiations, in the same way that blabbing all your friends' secrets hurts your relationships. People won't talk with our diplomats if they can't do so confidentially. How, exactly, does undermining the legitimate, peaceful diplomacy of the U.S. and other western powers make the world a better place?
And consider that the release of these communications could ruin a lot of careers- not because of unethical activity, just because someone doing their job said something privately that shouldn't be said publicly.
If Wikileaks wants to expose corruption and abuse of power, great. Why release everything else? There's a role for confidentiality. Would you want Wikileaks releasing your personal and business emails, financial information, and medical records just because someone, somewhere, might find evidence that you've been up to no good?
your post (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:1, Insightful)
Yet America is still one of the few countries willing to honestly face its past and try to redress things it's done wrong. If you think America is overly nationalistic what do you think about China? Russia?
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not just the US government with Cablegate. It's the Arab governments with their venomous anti-Iran private statements which come out looking the most like two-faced hypocrites.
Re:So... (Score:2, Insightful)
No. It is the belief that the US is better than other countries. Not perfect, just better.
The rest of your rant is based on misinformation, so I will refrain from countering it point by point.
Re:Who watches the watchmen? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is impossible to monitor Wikileak's integrity or transparency. Do you think if Mr. Whistleblower's documents regarding Country X are not posted that Mr. Whistleblower is going to go to the established media and complain about that?
If it's bad for Wikileaks to operate without transparency, it's also bad for the US government and corporations to operate without transparency. Wikileaks is a partial solution to the latter problem. The former problem is quite easily solved. If you have information that Wikileaks won't publish, there's no shortage of ways of getting data on the internet anonymously.
Who is Assange to judge and / or label corporations or individuals?
He's a man with a conscience. It's the responsibility of all men with consciences to use them. That means calling out those who do wrong.
Now I'd agree that Assange is on an ego-trip, but who in international politics is not?
Ought to be interesting (Score:4, Insightful)
This should pose as a wakeup call to everyone - you clearly cannot trust governments, banks, pharamceutical companies or really anyone else. Everyone must be assumed to be untrustworthy until proven otherwise.
And the proof is often 50 years after they are dead. So the message is Trust Nobody.
The second thing is that if the government, banks and other corporations are evil and corrupt maybe we should do something about it? Boycotts are pointless but bombs, arson and executions might get somewhere. The idea would be that if you cannot trust the people with the power and money then they need to be eliminated. Maybe we can find some trustworthy people - or maybe things just need to be restructured in such a fashion so that nobody is required to be trusted any longer.
This is probably another under-30/over-30 sort of battle, but this time there might actually be enough motivation to cause a worldwide revolt against anyone with more than a couple of nickles to rub together. The current US President has presented one possible dividing line between good and evil - $250,000 - but there may a more realistic one that is much, much lower. Sadly for Mr. Obama, it would appear that he is clearly in the evil camp with earnings well above $250,000.
So? Are you ready for the revolution? Are you prepared to dedicate your life (or what is left of it) to eliminating oppression in the world by untrustworthy government and corporations? It sounds like Mr. Assange is clearly going down that road.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not a discussion of China or Russia. Why bring them into this? Would it even help at all if I said all militant nationalism is disgusting? I doubt it. Like a child screaming, "But Charly did it!" when caught in wrongdoing, you seek to deflect blame by calling attention to the failings of others.
How is America willing to honestly face its past? In what way, exactly, have we been honest, brave, forthright, and fair in facing our past of criminal genocide against entire native populations? Has anyone gotten forty acres and a mule? What have we redressed? I mean, you can come up with at least one example, right?
Now, please don't get me wrong. I love this country and I love my fellow citizens, and I think we have been a great nation, and can be again. But I am not a sad enabler of my beloved's worst habits and traits. I am a true patriot, willing to go out on a limb and point out the cold, hard, and ugly facts, for the benefit of my country. A false friend will tell you only what you want to hear. Someone who really cares about you will tell you the truth, even if it hurts.
Re:So... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
The comments from Assange make it clear that WikiLeaks is not just acting as a repository, but rather clearly targeting organizations (governmental, commercial, etc.)
This makes no sense. Assange is targeting "organizations"? Governments and commercial organizations? Of course he has leaked some information about organizations. So what?
Or are you alleging that Assange is running some kind of targeted intelligence gathering operation? That he is actually out there, hacking the banks personally, or has recruited others to do so on his behalf? It seems a bit far-fetched; it's more likely that he is just leaking stuff that people send him, in which case the "targeting" is out of his hands.
Or are or you alleging that Assange is just a front for some intelligence organization? Hmm: Pakistani General accuses Wikileaks of being part of CIA/Mossad psyops [farsnews.com]. Maybe. John Young of Cryptome also accused Wikileaks of being a CIA front. And some Chinese officials have apparently said the same. But if it is a CIA front, does that mean that opposing Wikileaks is unpatriotic?
See how deep the rabbit hole goes....
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Does the average individual in America today have more power to control his destiny than his counterparts in other first world nations? To me, it seems the average individual in America is struggling just to get by, has no health care, is poorly educated compared to the rest of the world, has fewer real functional rights, and less opportunity to succeed.
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:There we go wikileaks... (Score:4, Insightful)
Agreed. I didn't find the leaks all the surprising.
I want to know the dirt on the banks and to a lesser extent big pharma.
I know they are ripping me off 6 ways from Sunday, but the details should sure be interesting. I have a feeling there is going to be some really angry people soon, and they won't be directed at Wikileaks... (which might be the whole point really now...)
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Really? Have reparations for violations of treaties with the Native nations gone through while I wasn't looking? Have we removed the official monuments to the pro-slavery terrorist organization, the "Confederacy", which once enjoyed support in the South -- and which a shocking number of contemporary Americans still support? Have we compensated the Americans of Japanese heritage who were rounded up into concentration camps during WWII?
Yes, you'll find America museum exhibits that tell you how bad those things were and expressing sorrow. You'll also find Japanese museum exhibits that tell you how bad Japanese imperialism was, and I'm sure you'll find similar exhibits in other nations. So on what basis do you make your claim? It sounds like more American "exceptionalism".
Americans nationalism sucks. Chinese nationalism sucks. Russian nationalism sucks.
I dont get what you are saying. (Score:3, Insightful)
and youre saying 'assange is doing shameles self promotion'.
what the fuck are you on ? and some witless fool modded it interesting ? why ? because some idiot thinks that world governments betraying their countries' founding ideals, kidnapping, torturing people and then threatening ALLIES about it, is not important?
a major bank fraud, of the global scale, extinguishing so many homes and bankrupting families like the wall street scam, is not important ?
just what is your angle ? are you just another right wing nutjob ? you cant handle that some guy does THIS much against your government ? or jealous ?
or, are you a witless moron that cant understand that if he hadnt put himself in the spotlight, he would be already dead by a roadside and noone would know it ?
Oh good. Let's shoot the messenger. (Score:5, Insightful)
In the final analysis, Assange only reports what is. If the politicians of the world can't handle that, the problem is with the politicians , not Mr. Assange.
Re:This is just getting shameless (Score:2, Insightful)
This is about shameless self promotion and nothing more.
Absolute Bullshit. Self-promotion to what end? You even say yourself he will eventually be killed (or "stopped"). So you are saying he is self-promoting to eventually be the target of a murder?
Re:good, mess with the corporations (Score:2, Insightful)
the government is not the enemy, corporations are. the greatest enemy capitalism has ever known, in fact, is not communism, but corporatism, in all of economic history, the big players have always warped the markplace in their direction. yet so many fools believe this phony narrative of the government and poor people being the enemy of capitalism, and large corporations heroes, or at worst, harmless victims on the sidelines, of evil government regulations (that are written by those same corporations)
so hopefully, a reveal of how corporations are your real enemy, not your government, might open some foolish eyes, for once, i hope
So you admit that perhaps the biggest tool these corporations have in controlling the markets, is government. The bigger and more complex the government, the more likely large corporations can do nasty things to the market via Washington. Big government is not the answer to big corps.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Flamebait? This is a great example of what I mean. Even suggesting that we are less than the best nation that is now, was, and ever could be is met with outright hostility and suppression.
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
American Exceptionalism is the sadly more and more common belief that America, by its very nature, can do no wrong.
No. It is the belief that the US is better than other countries. Not perfect, just better.
I fail to see a meaningful distinction between your definition and the OPs.
Mainly because such a belief inevitably leads to exactly the same consequences - ruthless arrogance.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
No. It is the belief that the US is better than other countries. Not perfect, just better.
The problem is that 'better' is a function of behaviour.
'We can do bad things because we're good people' is not a coherent argument, because you're only good people to the extent that you don't do bad things.
Re:This is just getting shameless (Score:1, Insightful)
DarkOx, you obviously don't read enough.
1. WikiLeaks can survive without him. If he is attacked/killed/kidnapped, the volunteers will have renewed strength and moral conviction to continue the cause.
2. the insurance file that was released months ago has all this information already in it, encrypted of course, so if anything happens to him/the org the encryption key will be released and the flood of information would be released.
3. What is your great theory of the endgame that Assange is after? So he can sell books in a year? You're delusional at best.
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:5, Insightful)
The Chinese government has always worked closely with CHinese corporations to perform espionage. The government gives the corporations data on their foreign competition, the corporations give the government spies cover.
The Russian government has always worked closely with Russian corporations to perform espionage. The government gives the corporations data on their foreign competition, the corporations give the government spies cover.
The German government has always worked closely with German corporations to perform espionage. The government gives the corporations data on their foreign competition, the corporations give the government spies cover.
shall i continue, or is the point made? Every country behaves like a schizophrenic child to each other. why are you so shocked by that?
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
What a distorted view of American history.
The U.S. rose to power because people of European decent used superior military technology to commit genocide against the natives of land that was both highly fertile and well-forested. (Wood was the oil of the time. [miller-mccune.com]) After forming their own nation, those people continued to use slavery and theft to power their economy's expansion up until they were well industrialized. (Via, it ought to be noted, numerous patent violations [wikipedia.org].)
While the powers of Europe tore each other up in the Napoleonic Wars, the Crimean War, WWI, and WWII, Americans kept stealing land from Indians (and later, from Hawaiians, Filipinos, and other people with fewer guns) and exploiting people of African ancestry and building a strong industrial base. American experienced booms after WWI and WWII by exporting goods to war-ravaged Europe; as the British Empire declined, the U.S. was set to step into the vacuum for a few decades. (I suspect, though, that in the histories a thousand years from now, the U.S. will be a footnote to the British Empire the way Constantinople is a footnote to Rome.) The U.S. then dissipated itself on the "Cold War", running up enormous debt in a dick-size competition with the U.S.S.R.
Don't get me wrong: I'm a fan of the all-American idea of constitutional representative democracy, and proud that the bootprints on Luna are American. And we are the country that taught the world to rock-and-roll, thank you very much. But this "American exceptionalism" nonsense is an ahistorical, anti-intelelctual embarrassment.
Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita [wikipedia.org]
Get it right.
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah, so the fact that the other children are doing it makes it okay? I see. Yes, please stop. You have made your point crystal clear.
Re:So... (Score:2, Insightful)
Ah, holy fuck your logic makes my eyes bleed. We're better than everyone else and that means we should meddle but the fact that we are using coercive violence to meddle is wrong, yet not wrong enough to mean that we are less than the best, and we should still be meddling, only not so violently? Really? Fucking really, that is your argument? We're the best except when we're coercive, evil and violent?
Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)
You present a false dichotomy, terror kills very few people, it is you who spreads fear.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Who said we can do no right? That is ludicrous, no one said it. Perhaps you missed the part where I said I am an American, and that I love our country, that I am a patriot, and that we as a nation can be truly great once more?
God damn all knee jerk defensive excuses. America, please, fucking sit down, shut up, and take a little constructive criticism without being a whining baby about it. Face up to your imperfections like an adult. Learn to say "I'm sorry" and "I'll do better next time."
You know who latches on to the idea that America is the greatest nation? Tiny little frightened people with no self esteem. People who do things, people who are secure, people who know what and who they are DO NOT NEED to feel that their country is the bestest everest.
I mean, seriously, who gives a fuck if it is or isn't the best country ever? How does that impact you? If it is a suck-ass country, does that make you a suck-ass person? If it is an awesome country, does that mean you are awesome? How immature, who bases their self esteem on what they think of their country?
Re:I disagree (Score:4, Insightful)
you are mistaken. Wikileaks could easily filter information to further any agenda it sees fit. Assange has shown that he is NOT impartial and strongly opposes many of the Us governments policies. Which is part of the concern many people here have with them currently.
By taking sides you introduce the oppurtunity for your opponents to label you as having an agenda. And frankly they might be right. Look up some of my old posts, I had concerns about this months ago. Long before the media started spouting off about W-L.
I dont know if W-L is a problem, but Assange has hurt their credibility.
I almost take it as an insult: do you think I'm so stupid that I cannot decide by myself what opinion should I have, based on the authentic documents? Point to me to another set of authentic documents and I'll be happy to read them (as happy as I'm reading those posted by the Wikileaks).
(also, do you take me of so stupid to accept your "You are mistaken" sentence without any appeal to my own judgement?)
Re:So... (Score:3, Insightful)
A) No one was promised 40 acres and a mule by anyone in the government, so you got that most basic point wrong
B) The US has redress a great many wrongs. From womens rights, freeing people, to the Japanese American internment camps.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
You've really stopped thinking.
He is simply saying the the US should lead other countries to make them better, but don't do it with violent actions.
His logic is fine. Your reaction is overblown and stupid. You're not stupid please stop acting that way.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Then it is useless to continue this discussion. If you can't see a difference between "can do no wrong" and "not perfect", then we have no common ground upon which communications could profit.
Mainly because such a belief inevitably leads to exactly the same consequences - ruthless arrogance.
Yes, it is clear that there is no common ground, nay, not even a common language, with which we can converse.
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:2, Insightful)
Wait wait wait.
The U.S. is pursuing two wars of aggression. Al Qaeda and its sympathizers are commiting violent acts of terrorism. North Korea has fired on a South Korean village. But it's WikiLeaks that's trying to create a climate of fear, buy...publishing information that governments and their sociopathic offspring, large corporations, don't want you to have.
Dude. Take your meds.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you count reservations as a reparation, you and I have nothing to discuss. Good day sir.
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Then it is useless to continue this discussion. If you can't see a difference between "can do no wrong" and "not perfect", then we have no common ground upon which communications could profit.
Oh I see a semantic difference, I just don't see one in practice. When one believes that their actions and the outcomes thereof are always "better" than what anyone else could have done then one would have to actually be perfect in order to avoid the trap of abusing that authority for self interest or even just laziness.
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:1, Insightful)
Does that mean that this kind of mob justice that wikileaks is spreading is okay now ? How long until they do this to actual, live people ? And sure, the first person to get hurt will probably have "Bush" for a last name, but what about the second ? And the third ?
I find it most hypocritical that this relatively pro-privacy site is pushing wikileaks just because it's interesting. It can't be hard to see that wikileaks respects no law, respects no privacy, provides no recourse and no protections. How many people already got hurt ? And how long until they go after some unpopular "du jour" person ?
Also, juridically, all evidence released by wikileaks is null and void in court. You can only use legally obtained documents in court. Suppose some asshole in the FBI sends a document of a pending investigation to wikileaks and they publish it. Then, as a result of this, the FBI is forced to shut down the investigation, and let the person walk. And if the documents do specify that you got ripped off by your bank (example), you go to court, and your case gets thrown out because of wikileaks ? (and before you act all surprised about this rule, wikileaks is an organisation you essentially know nothing about, so there's no telling what they changed and/or falsified in the published documents, or if they simply got fed these documents from people who don't mean well, and falsified them beforehand).
This is going to blow up, and people will get hurt. And not because evil people in black helicopters do evil stuff, but because reality is going start to attach consequences to this absurd form of thievery.
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:2, Insightful)
How many people already got hurt ?
I'll flip it around for you. Is there *any* evidence that the data wikileaks has released has caused folks to be hurt? And no, embarrassing governments doesn't count.
For all intents and purposes, wikileaks is filling the role of a news organization. People give them data, and they publish it. The folks that do the actual leaking might break laws doing so, but so far I have yet to see Wikileaks do anything actually illegal. Hugely embarrassing? Absolutely. Against the law? Which one would that be?
There's a reason Interpol has a warrant out of Assange on charges of sexual assault...
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:3, Insightful)
Go read all the comments on this. There are very few reasonable people trying to have a discussion. you everyone else either falls into the three camps. the guberment is evil, USA is ebil, or julain was wrong.
The government is made of people if the people are being schizophrenic on the topic why would the governments be any different?
I have never once said it was okay, not once in any of my comments. however just trying to point out that every government does this and has done this for as long as governments have existed seems to go over all the heads here. The USA is actually one of the most stable countries in the world(I would put Canada, Australia and one or two others ahead). Why is that? Because we don't kill each other because our government does something stupid. we simply use lawyers to push them out. We know presidents won't be around for more than 8 years. that represents slow change. If you want change in other governments you have to kill people, or live with a government that is non functional.
Where is that any better?
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:3, Insightful)
So you're claiming that releasing data on currently in-progress military operations does not cost lives ? Are you daft ?
I see data on currently in-progress military operations daily on the news and internet. Are you claiming that all data on currently in-progress military operations costs lives or just this data? Why?
Laws that wikileaks definitely breaks : * espionage * privacy laws * breaking and entering * trading in illegal goods * violating trust placed in them
Just a couple of things I want to say. What 'breaking and entering' did wikileaks do? The information may have been given to them by someone who did that, but wikileaks didn't do it. If they are trading in illegal goods doesn't that make every news organization that repeated the info liable as well? What law is 'violating trust placed in them' and what trust was placed with them to begin with?
I'm not arguing one way or another that what they are doing is right or wrong, I'm just saying if they are definitely breaking these laws as you say why aren't they being charged with that?
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:3, Insightful)
Ummmm....
Do you really think that in the name of 'friendship' with the US, european nations ought to just let US firms create and then abuse monopoly status in european markets?
That the EU ought to say "Oh, they're American, let's no subject them to the same laws as we subject EU companies"?
1. Learn better grammar, your post was painful to read
2. Grow up
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
News flash for the uninformed people of other countries, the only people calling this anti-American are either politically affiliated or are such a small minority that it doesn't even represent 1% of the US population.
Most concerned American citizens want to know more about what their government is doing and saying because we are sick of politicians subverting our rights for corporate gains and their own gains.
Re:Anti-US Government, Maybe (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the real solution is to impose term limits and do away with appointed bureaucrats.
When the asshats refuse, then what?
There is no inherent loss of freedom because we don’t know what H. Clinton said to the Ambassador from Ecuador
Lets start with a short history of American foreign policy. America's allies during and since WWII: Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos, José Napoleon Duarte Fuentes, Anastasio Somoza, Manuel Antonio Noriega Moreno, Salvador Isabelino del Sagrado Corazon de Jesus Allende Gossens and Augusto Pinochet, Ngo Dình Diem, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi. If you are willing, cut and paste these American allies into Google and see just how unsavory they are. You talk about the loss of freedom, I talk about the loss of life. But lets not forget Iraq and Afghanistan.
That however is not the subject of this debate.
Then I guess Stalin, Hitler, and Mao are not up for debate either. There are few countries on this planet that have not met with a violent overthrow of its government, America is one of them. I would like it to stay that way, however, when a coup d'état does occur, it's not by the populace, it's by a hidden till the last minute cabal. Usually the rich, the banks, disgruntled military or police, organized religion and/or organized crime; and who gets hurt?
How much of what's happening in this country now, is by design? By who's authority? To what end?
There are people saying that this planet is overpopulated. Who lives? Who dies? By what criteria?
A generation which ignores history has no past — and no future. - RAH