05-01-2011, 07:21 PM
But this case is also about some absolutely essential values.
During the first week of the so-called "Cable Street" leak from the site Wikileaks has received enormous amounts of information. Much of it was well known - or at least expected - in advance and that corruption flourishes in Moscow and Kabul that Gordon Brown had a mildly difficult time as British prime minister or the United States put pressure on Norway in the forefront of fighter decision.
Several of the documents very useful as background material because they are written so well by the obviously talented and well-informed diplomats. One example is a story about a wedding in Dagestan. Read, laugh and learn.
Still other wiki-reporting was entertaining in a somewhat dirty way - just look at the brutal and ruthless characteristics of people Nicholas Sarkozy ("tynnhudet" and "authoritarian"), Angela Merkel ("Teflon Merkel") and Hamid Karzai (" paranoid ").
Common to all the documents that have come out so far is that they were not intended to be read by you and me.
Embarrassing calls
There are many good reasons. Of course, the tone directly in the reports sent home to Washington, where leaders must make important decisions about U.S. foreign policy. And of course it can have serious consequences for the same foreign policy if that information becomes public. American diplomats can expect a wide range of embarrassing conversations in the future.
But this means that it is an evil that the information now made available?
To answer that question, it is important to emphasize that in no way Wikileaks has completed a release of the over 250,000 documents leaked from the U.S. authorities. Currently, only about 700 documents made public. All of them have been evaluated, either by Wikileaks or quality of the editorial that The New York Times or the Guardian, to see whether the news value is greater than the potential damage the documents can cause.
Names are censored. Documents are withheld. Currently it is difficult to see any content in the claims by U.S. authorities that life could be in danger because of these documents.
Values
Given the careful, responsible and controlled the publication date has been, it is disturbing to see how strong reactions to the leak has been from governments around the world. U.S. investigating whether Wikileaks-founder Julian Assange can be prosecuted for espionage. At the same powerful forces working to close the entire site, which they succeeded on several occasions in the past week.
The condemnation has been unanimous from those in power because the leakage obscure diplomacy. It's understandable. But this is also about values. We in the West preaches a lot of other countries about the need for transparency and freedom of expression. It becomes difficult to justify such claims when our leaders also reveals a strong hostility to what can be some of the most important thing that has happened in the name of freedom of speech in a very long time.
--------------------------------------------------------------
During the first week of the so-called "Cable Street" leak from the site Wikileaks has received enormous amounts of information. Much of it was well known - or at least expected - in advance and that corruption flourishes in Moscow and Kabul that Gordon Brown had a mildly difficult time as British prime minister or the United States put pressure on Norway in the forefront of fighter decision.
Several of the documents very useful as background material because they are written so well by the obviously talented and well-informed diplomats. One example is a story about a wedding in Dagestan. Read, laugh and learn.
Still other wiki-reporting was entertaining in a somewhat dirty way - just look at the brutal and ruthless characteristics of people Nicholas Sarkozy ("tynnhudet" and "authoritarian"), Angela Merkel ("Teflon Merkel") and Hamid Karzai (" paranoid ").
Common to all the documents that have come out so far is that they were not intended to be read by you and me.
Embarrassing calls
There are many good reasons. Of course, the tone directly in the reports sent home to Washington, where leaders must make important decisions about U.S. foreign policy. And of course it can have serious consequences for the same foreign policy if that information becomes public. American diplomats can expect a wide range of embarrassing conversations in the future.
But this means that it is an evil that the information now made available?
To answer that question, it is important to emphasize that in no way Wikileaks has completed a release of the over 250,000 documents leaked from the U.S. authorities. Currently, only about 700 documents made public. All of them have been evaluated, either by Wikileaks or quality of the editorial that The New York Times or the Guardian, to see whether the news value is greater than the potential damage the documents can cause.
Names are censored. Documents are withheld. Currently it is difficult to see any content in the claims by U.S. authorities that life could be in danger because of these documents.
Values
Given the careful, responsible and controlled the publication date has been, it is disturbing to see how strong reactions to the leak has been from governments around the world. U.S. investigating whether Wikileaks-founder Julian Assange can be prosecuted for espionage. At the same powerful forces working to close the entire site, which they succeeded on several occasions in the past week.
The condemnation has been unanimous from those in power because the leakage obscure diplomacy. It's understandable. But this is also about values. We in the West preaches a lot of other countries about the need for transparency and freedom of expression. It becomes difficult to justify such claims when our leaders also reveals a strong hostility to what can be some of the most important thing that has happened in the name of freedom of speech in a very long time.
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass