WikiLeaks largest classified military leak

[cobl04]

Originally Posted by coolian2

even in australia, you can't see where/how/why real journalism is being subverted?

I can, definitely, but my personal opinion is that journalists aren't "falling woefully behind" or anything of the like. Am I naive? Maybe. I just don't see it as bad as all that. I pick up The Age or The Australian (and we get the Herald Sun delivered every day of the week) and I think they're doing a pretty good job...

[Earnie Shavers]

Originally Posted by cobl04

Well I live in Australia... the only exposure I have to any form of American news (the actual broadcasting of it I mean, obviously I hear American news) is catching crap like TMZ or ET or something on one of our chat shows or whatever, or when some American broadcaster makes a funny mistake (like when some channel had a map of Australia showing the effects of the floods, and they had Tasmania labelled as Queensland).

So I wouldn't have a clue of the quality of US cable news.

So presuming you don't have cable then. Watching the difference between CNN, Fox, BBC and even Australian Sky News is... amazing.

[coolian2]

i like australian sky news. you can tell they really want to push an agenda but they don't know how to do it properly. it's cute.

[Earnie Shavers]

Originally Posted by cobl04

I can, definitely, but my personal opinion is that journalists aren't "falling woefully behind" or anything of the like. Am I naive? Maybe. I just don't see it as bad as all that. I pick up The Age or The Australian (and we get the Herald Sun delivered every day of the week) and I think they're doing a pretty good job...

There are still issues there. Far, far more of what you are reading in print is syndicated, both in national and international news. Far, far less people are reading print newspapers. There's less real investigative stuff. In a way, there's more reporting/less journalism. And if you go to their respective websites (not the Australian so much, but the Age, SMH, Herald Sun, News.com etc) it's not hard to notice where the focus is at, compared to where it should be. You literally need an event the size of this Japan earthquake to bump some story about a footballer, actor, model, whatever down to maybe just second place, at least for a day or two. Combine that with a serious drift in TV news and current affairs and you can see there's a serious problem.

I'm guessing you are probably too young to have noticed it change? The network news and the current affairs shows used to actually be very good. Not just a dump-an-anchor-in-the-middle-of-it way, which is about the extent of what they consider doing a good job now, but chasing and breaking stories, being highly informative, very very good. 60 Minutes used to be absolutely fantastic - Kerry Packer used to happily lose a mint on making sure 60 Minutes was world class. And it really was. You probably only get one or two stories a year now that are of the quality of what the average story every week was back in the day.

[cobl04]

I have noticed the change, you are right. Particularly with your more reporting/less journalism call. That's spot on. I used to watch 60 Minutes all the time.

What do you do, earnie, for a crumpet? Your posts regularly make me depressed, they're just always very good.

[Earnie Shavers]

I work in strategy for an evil multinational media-entertainment empire, household name. Specifically, I help them in convincing you to, essentially, drop your hard earned on Hollywood tripe. In London for the time being working on UK/Europe market, but usually Sydney, where its noticeably easier because Australians are generally just as stupid as Americans, so in a strategy sense, its pretty much just copy/paste.

[cobl04]

Awesome... it appears you're bloody good at what you do.

I used to think I was quite intelligent... long time since I was in the top 15 for my year in high school.

Maybe I need to stop drinking and start utilising brain cells to catch up!

[yolland]

Wall Street Journal, Sept. 1

WikiLeaks on Thursday confirmed reports that it has lost control of a cache of US diplomatic cables that it has been publishing in recent months, saying a security breach has led to the public disclosure of hundreds of thousands of the unredacted documents. The fracas has put WikiLeaks in the position of decrying what it called the "reckless" and "negligent" disclosure of information—something WikiLeaks' critics have long accused it of doing itself. WikiLeaks in recent days has faced criticism for publishing some of the cables without redacting the names of individuals, such as government informants, who theoretically could be jeopardized by publication of the information.

The website quickly sought to deflect blame for the leak of the leaked classified cables. It accused the U.K. newspaper the Guardian—which last year was WikiLeaks' partner in publishing some of the cables—of publishing in a book a password that unlocks an encrypted file containing the unredacted cables. In a statement Thursday, the Guardian said it "utterly rejects any suggestion that it is responsible for the release of the unedited cables." In its own news story about the situation, the Guardian said its book, published seven months ago, "contained a password, but no details of the location of the files…it was a meaningless piece of information to anyone except the person(s)" who knew where to find the files online.

...Some of the newly released cables reportedly contained the names of confidential informants. This prompted new criticism of WikiLeaks, which has come under fire in the past for publishing the names of classified informants, including those in a cache of secret US military documents about the war in Afghaninstan. Officials from human-rights groups wrote to Mr. Assange last year expressing concern that the unredacted material could put the informants' lives at risk.

...WikiLeaks' publications have won attention and notoriety for Mr. Assange. But the document-leaking organization he founded also has splintered, with several key members leaving after clashes with Mr. Assange. Mr. Assange has found trouble on other fronts. He is currently under house arrest in the UK fighting extradition to Sweden, where authorities want to question him over allegations that he raped one woman and molested another during a visit to Stockholm last summer.

[financeguy]

Jesse Ventura "When You Read Some Of These Documents You Could Substitute The Word Nazi" - YouTube

[Vlad n U 2]

"Freedom Watch".

[cobl04]

So Ecuador has granted Assange asylum. Here's hoping the UK and US don't decide "well fuck protocol, this guy embarrassed us and he rapes women" and pull something shifty.

[AchtungBono]

Originally Posted by cobl04

So Ecuador has granted Assange asylum. Here's hoping the UK and US don't decide "well fuck protocol, this guy embarrassed us and he rapes women" and pull something shifty.

That's EXACTLY what they should do.....otherwise this sets a very dangerous precedent and any foreign national who commits a crime can go into any embassy and ask for asylumn without facing justice.

Assange is a COWARD - if he's innocent like he says he is then let him have his day in court and prove his innocence. This act clearly proves that he's guilty.

I sincerely hope the British forces are storming the embassy as we speak....or are at least on the way.

GO SCOTLAND YARD!!

[PhilsFan]

All this proves is that he does not think he can get a fair trial. And he is probably right.

[cobl04]

Originally Posted by AchtungBono

That's EXACTLY what they should do.....otherwise this sets a very dangerous precedent and any foreign national who commits a crime can go into any embassy and ask for asylumn without facing justice.

Assange is a COWARD - if he's innocent like he says he is then let him have his day in court and prove his innocence. This act clearly proves that he's guilty.

I sincerely hope the British forces are storming the embassy as we speak....or are at least on the way.

GO SCOTLAND YARD!!

This isn't about the alleged sexual offences. If he's proven guilty of those then fine, I'll back down. But it all seems a little too convenient for me. Peef is right.

Seeking asylum proves he's guilty? Of what? Absolute garbage.

[digitize]

I don't know, it's hard for me to not be suspicious of Assange.

[AchtungBono]

Originally Posted by cobl04

This isn't about the alleged sexual offences. If he's proven guilty of those then fine, I'll back down. But it all seems a little too convenient for me. Peef is right.

Seeking asylum proves he's guilty? Of what? Absolute garbage.

Obviously he has something to hide if he's too cowardly to face trial. I'm only talking about the alleged sexual offences - don't even get me started on the Bradley Manning case - for which I believe Assange should face the same firing squad as Manning.....or at least he should spend the rest of his useless life in jail.

In any case, Ecuador can do what they want - but there's no way the British will let him just walk out of the embassy into the fresh air.

[PhilsFan]

Originally Posted by AchtungBono

Obviously he has something to hide if he's too cowardly to face trial. I'm only talking about the alleged sexual offences - don't even get me started on the Bradley Manning case - for which I believe Assange should face the same firing squad as Manning.....or at least he should spend the rest of his useless life in jail.

In any case, Ecuador can do what they want - but there's no way the British will let him just walk out of the embassy into the fresh air.

Not obviously. Did you even read our posts?

[AchtungBono]

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

Not obviously. Did you even read our posts?

Hello Philsfan,
Yes I did. You said that he probably thinks he won't get a fair trial - but he's not giving the Swedes the chance to prove him wrong - he just high-tailed it into the embassy of another country (I wonder why he chose Ecuador) and asked for asylumn like he was being persecuted for nothing.....that's wrong.

Do you disagree with the fact that he should face these charges and defend himself against them?

[BVS]

All court systems are infallible...

[PhilsFan]

Originally Posted by AchtungBono

Hello Philsfan,
Yes I did. You said that he probably thinks he won't get a fair trial - but he's not giving the Swedes the chance to prove him wrong - he just high-tailed it into the embassy of another country (I wonder why he chose Ecuador) and asked for asylumn like he was being persecuted for nothing.....that's wrong.

Do you disagree with the fact that he should face these charges and defend himself against them?

He had seen their evidence. He has been interrogated. He is running because he thinks it's a kangaroo court, not because he's guilty.

That's my take. Do you agree that it's possible?