Comments on: Why WikiLeaks is worth defending, despite all of its flaws

By: Galt's Gultch

Galt's Gultch — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 20:03:48 +0000

WikiLeaks was a government sponsored program with the sole intent on embarrassing America. In order for it to be worth defending it would have to be an equal opportunity info dumper. The fact that there was barely anything about Russia, China, N. Korea, or the rest of the cabal currently trying to undermine America, shows its true colors. So to me I it is propaganda BS…..

By: Gabriel R

Gabriel R — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:41:47 +0000

youd still be in Vietnam

By: Gabriel R

Gabriel R — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:38:59 +0000

Excuse me, there are NO rape allegations… the allegations are that he had consensual sex but didnt use a condom. That is the truth

By: Mathew Ingram

Mathew Ingram — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 12:45:45 +0000

Thanks, Lyndy. Appreciate the comment.

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 05:28:17 +0000

It’s unfortunate that this article and many of the comments so far continue to refer to “rape charges” against Assange. As far as I know Sweden claims to want him for questioning. He hasn’t yet been charged with anything; if he had the extradition would not be so controversial.

This article refers to “rape allegations” at the top but then uses “rape charges” in the link to the Guardian article which only says “sex assault allegations’.

Don’t think I’m diminishing the seriousness of rape. Quite the opposite. It’s because it’s a serious offence that it’s especially important not to prejudge: allegations are different from being charged, and being charged is different from being found guilty, at least in democratic judiciaries. And finally, rape is not relevant to the ethics of leaking documents.

So thanks for separating the fundamental political issues Wikileaks from the personal attacks on Julian Assange. But if you have to get personal, at least stick to what is factual and relevant.

By: boy

boy — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 03:41:37 +0000

It is an Iranian proverbs:” you Couldn’t hid the moon under baskets.”
That two women should be honor to be with Julian Assange.
People need to put pressure on the two fraud women.

By: Kabe

Kabe — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 02:59:39 +0000

When WikiLeaks does releases of Russia secrets and oppression and similarly for secretive dictator led countries then it will be meaningful. Otherwise it is just a bash America effort.

By: ff

ff — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 02:57:34 +0000

No, wikileaks is dependent on what people perceive as their political enemies, that’s why its disclosures are so unilateral – i.e. against the US. It’s solely agitprop

We can see that in your own article: who reads your mention of the leaks of Mitt Romney has the impression that the presidential candidate is somehow guilty until he proves otherwise, a reversion of any democratic principle. Whether Romney wants to disclose his tax or not, he answers to the electorate, but does not grant having his right to privacy violated – nor being treated as a criminal (to be more precise, you mention “that’s no smoking gun”, why? you know he’s guilty of something, just we don’t know).

Just for the record, I’m not even American – I’m just concerned that whenever WL will become a STASI of sorts, prohibiting undesirable people to have their right to privacy – as in Romney’s example above.

By: swissfondue

swissfondue — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 00:50:30 +0000

Don’t you think it’s a little odd that, in ten years of war, the “Collateral Murder” video is one of only a handful of unauthorised videos we have ever seen? Contrast this with the Vietnam war in which independent news organisations brought the reality of that war into our homes every night on TV. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars are the first time we have witnessed a near total news blackout orchestrated by government and the corporate media.

26 US soldiers killed themselves last month alone – doesn’t that tell you something about what’s going on over there that we can’t see?

It’s an Orwellian dream.

By: JohnnyPool

JohnnyPool — Sun, 26 Aug 2012 22:03:45 +0000

“Most of the recent attention around WikiLeaks has been focused on the legal issues surrounding its controversial founder, Julian Assange. ”
Thank you markleiser.phd.law for that reply. Much of the media’s attention is focused on other legal issues. But my focus has been on what was published on Wiki leaks and his 60 Minutes interview. Himself and the CBS reporter said that he was a journalist. Not true IMHO. A real journalist knows responsibility for what is published and the affect of it. The article above cites The Washington Post. Those were journalists. Mr. Assange is not. He seemed arrogant about what was reported and didn’t say anything about checking the facts, background or who would be hurt by what he did. This attitude was again displayed when he was on the balcony acting like a little whiny victim.
And thank you ONU.
“Missing from this coverage is the discussion on the unbalanced nature of disclosures…..”
The anti-western trait of that site suggests an agenda. Again, Not Journalism.