I think the reactions of governments to Wikileaks are more revealing than the leaks themselves.

The hostility, the anger, the control freakery, the rhetoric... crazy! And yet no law has been broken.

These responses are from the elite of the "free" world? Really??

Mike

Remember the old knowledge is power.  Guess what, knowledge has slipped into the hands of the masses.

IT

Russ

I think if the public is kept informed of its own goverments actions, policies, attitudes, etc...  then what could possibly be gleaned from cables long after an event took place?

Democracy is poorly served when the people are kept ignorant.

The control freak, anger rhetoric is because it can be like a phone number found in a pocket, crumpled in the trash, and lipstick on a collar.

The stomping, screaming, vein popping, you-have-no-right-to-be-going-through-my-things reaction seeks to drown out the you-have-been-lying-cheating reaction.  

Revolution or hot air or kiss and make up? It is up to them.

Advice to folks,learned by this- quit writing everything down.

Did I find a dark, sinister, huge affair? No, I found basically in the leaks what I would call "high class gossip".

SG

Interesting comment about don't write down.  My son is working at a local company and that is an unwritten rule.  You can't use access to information to get something that isn't there. 

Or do we have to do like the bookies used to do, rice paper with a bucket of water nearby. 

IT

Russ

Hi Russ, I was disappointed by your title, especially in view of the cyberattacks yesterday on a variety of websites.  Rioting in Haiti; tension in Ivory Coast; students rioting in London.  There are a lot of angry people, and many leaders don't get it, doing the Marie Antoinette thing (and I know she was really much more knowledgable about what was happening in France, even if she couldn't convince her husband and his advisors about how serious the situation was getting--just playing off the incorrect image).  People who have been made to feel powerless are starting to flex their muscles, and I am unable to predict how this will develop over the next few years.  However, I suspect we are on the edge of some kind of revolution, and I am very interested in watching events play out.

Jim

I should have been more specific with my title.

I find it very interesting how those in power really don't get it, do they.  This isn't the good old 1950s where information and events took hours or days to spread.  Now a riot in Toronto is available instantly. 

Note the G20 summit, those televison stations with reporters tweeting, may not have gotten it right every time, but the information was timely and available to all.

These instant, can't think of the word, not mobs, but groups that can instantly form without apparant organization.

Yes Dorothy, we ain't in Kansas no more.

IT

Russ

Actually, as this says, respectable media have been working with wikileaks.

Visa & Mastercard beneficiaries of State Department lobbying effort.

Mark Arbib as US informant.

All of this that is going on just shows people that they live in a created world, that it isn't inherent and that we do have power and say, no matter what the Empire says or does.  Kind of like an Enlightenment injection :3

Today there was a rally in Sydney to support Julian Assange.

It seems there's something in the Australian psyche that our Julian typifies - a passionate belief in the freedom of speech and a certain personal recklessness.

I don't know the man, and my only understanding of his motives comes from the media, but I admit to becoming alarmed by the efforts of those in political power to shut him down. (including our own politicians in Oz - who since the fall of Singapore in WW2 have switched our allegiance from Britain to the USA).

At the very least, I'm beginning to see why I differ from most Canadians at Wondercafe, in that I don't believe in flagging anything as offensive. 

Whatever the devil looks like, I have to face him to defeat him.

Perhaps a passion for free speech is just my cultural heritage?

 Australia was initially set up as a penal colony by the British - and many of our early convicts and free settlers were irreverant of the British class system and had very little say in anything. 

The end result is that, even when our opinions are uninformed, we still believe in free speech.

As a result, I'm sure most Canadians would be appalled by our talk-back radio.

I know I often am.

But, appalling though it often is, it's reality and it informs me how much work is still needed to confront the fear that lays at it's core.

We live in a world that's changing rapidly - that in itself will present problems that we might not have solutions for at hand.

I am all for wikileaks, and revolution.  As it has been said, people shouldn't be afraid of their governments...governments should be afraid of their peole.  And I think in many places governments need reminding of that.

It really seems childish a lot of the complaints governments have aganst the leaks.  Kinda makes you wonder if they ever learned that childhood lesson of not saying anything if you don't have something nice to say.  Or thinking about whether you would say what you are saying to a person's face.

As-salaamu alaikum

-Omni

Watch for a move to charge Assange under the espionage act of 1917. In effect, it enables govrnment to imprison anyone for long periods for saying anything the government doesn't like. EECummings, the poet, was jailed for reading the first amendment aloud in public.

I think there will be a revolution. But it will be a revolution of  the well placed taking over the whole government. You may even see mercenaries patrolling American cities.  (As the British had to use Hessians in the American Revolution because the regular army could not be trusted to fire on their fellow citizens.)

Omni

And that is probably the whole answer right there,.  They aren't ticked about the release, they are ticked that someone was stupid enough to call some nutball a nutball and have it come out.

IT

Russ

 http://news.scotsman.com/news/US-39set-to-charge-founder.6657328.jp

Above is a link to a story regarding th Espionage Act 1917 charge pending ... below is a snippet of the story ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Published Date: 11 December 2010

By Jeremy Pelofsky

 

 

A LAWYER for Wikileaks founder Julian Assange last night said prosecutors in the United States were preparing to indict her client for espionage.

• Demonstrators in Sydney, above, and Brisbane protested on behalf of Wikileaks and its founder, Julian Assange, who is being held in London Picture: Getty Images

The US justice department has been looking into a range of criminal charges, including violations of the 1917 espionage act, that could be filed in the Wiki-leaks case involving the release of hundreds of confidential and classified US diplomatic cables.

A justice department spokeswoman declined to comment on lawyer Jennifer Robinson's prediction of an indictment. 

 Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut thinks the new York Times ought to be  charged under the Espionage Act for publishing Assange's revelations.  This is unlikely because news organizations are protected under the First Amendment (free speech) provisions.  Likewise so is Wikileaks.  Such niceties have not however stopped the U.S. government from perpetrating denial of service attacks on Wikileaks sites or intimidating the likes of PayPal and Mastercard into dropping Wikileaks accounts.  (Can't you just see the good cop bad cop routine ... If you're going to keep those accounts boys I hope yall your accounts are in order because we're going to comb through your tax and financial records until we find something to beat you over the head with ...

Here is the link for the article talking about the hurdles for an Espionage Act charge ...

http://middletownpress.com/articles/2010/12/10/news/doc4d024883a149a725770342.txt

 This is the link to Wikipedia's outline on the Espionage Act.  After reading it I have to think that it can be used to "get" almost anyone the government doesn't like.  I wouldn't want to have to hide behind the First Amendment to defend myself ifthey were coming after me with this vague and draconian piece of legislation ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917

After reading it I have to think that the odds are good that the U.S. is getting ready to use the Espionage Act on Assange.  It'll be a sorry day for democracy and free speech but as the Wiki article illustrates there have been quite a few of those days already.

Some insight into just why Julian is doing what he is doing.

Thank you IW!  What an interesting article!  So in tune with the changes I would like to see in this world.!

Maybe his trial will answer the questions raised in the trial of the Pentagon Paper scandal...

But in the later trial of Mr. Ellsberg and Mr. Russo in Federal District Court, on charges of violating conspiracy, theft and espionage laws, other important issues were raised but not decided. One was whether the Espionage Act of 1917 prohibits publication of secret material, or whether it must be passed to an enemy to be a violation.

     NYTimes Obit for Anthony Russo, Aug 2008

Another interesting thing from those Pentagon Paper trials was that the men were acquitted not because of their "innocence" but because of the FBI's various skulduggery (I love that word).  One wonders if Assange can benefit from the same defense given the claims that the US Government has been attacking him on so many levels.

Another question, one that brings us back into the 22nd century, is this:  Was Assange not like a news publication, and therefore protected under the First Amendment? 

Assange did not "steal" these documents.  Like traditional media they were sent to him. "WikiLeaks first appeared on the scene in 2006. In early 2007, The Washington Post was reporting that it was modeled on Wikipedia and would allow widespread contributors to upload sensitive government documents. At first, its principal whistle-blowing target was China."

     Wikileaks and the Espionage Act

The fact that nothing was done earlier against Assange could play a role, as again, one of the legalities that provided the New York Times to win its Pentagon Papers case was that "the government had not met the heavy burden of proof required to stop publication of something in advance." [NYTimes Russo Obit]

If this ever goes to trial, and I have grave doubts it will, it will be a classic tale of governments battling democratic principals that have been evolving throughout the ages and how the law is forced to adapt to new technologies that grant The People a voice in that battle.  Traditionally democracy has always won out....

LB

The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men.
     Samuel Adams (1722–1803)

I guarantee that if they charge him, they will have every big shot lawyer lining up to defend him. The government will wish they had never started.

IT

Russ