Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 1st Dec 2010 22:45 UTC
In the News And so the Wikileaks saga continues - with politics once again crossing with the technology side of things. After several DDoS attacks on Wikileaks' website, the organisation decided to move their website over to Amazon's cloud service yesterday. Today, Amazon kicked Wikileaks out of its cloud after being pressured by US Congress. Update: [Kroc] In a Q&A on the Guardian website, Julian Assange drops the bomb--Amazon failed the test: "Since 2007 we have been deliberately placing some of our servers in jurisdictions that we suspected suffered a free speech deficit inorder to separate rhetoric from reality. Amazon was one of these cases.". Stunning.
Permalink for comment 451960
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by Berend de Boer
by mrstep on Thu 2nd Dec 2010 13:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Berend de Boer"
Member since:

If his leaks were just exposing crimes or something 'evil', that would be great. When the leaks are things like 'this ambassador said blah blah blah about Prince Charles' type of stuff, it's really not about protecting us from the governments or crimes, it's just airing the private comments people are making. The Kazakh leaders have a lot of money / homes / parties? Well damn, so do the US leaders and the leaders of every other country! Who would have thought!? But did you need these leaks to figure out that politicians are majorly corrupt, influence peddling egomaniacs?

If the leaks were redacted to uncover the actual conspiracies (Saudis heavily pushing the US to attack Iran on their behalf - or as their oil-junkies, for example) and relevant issues (Kenyan corruption, etc.), I'd say he'd be more on-target. Airing *everything* and hiding behind 'because it's the truth' is lame, particularly when it creates an environment where the wheat is hidden by the chaff - the press is busy talking about Kazakh horses instead of Saudi puppeteering! A good journalist wouldn't do that - and the Pulitzer was supposed to be for journalism, not just re-publishing content.

Now the 'shooting civilians' video - while watching it, I kept thinking that I'd have shot too. Here are folks with AK-47s and some with a larger tube attacking troops or getting in position to - were they supposed to guess that some are reporters? You're taking a bit of a chance doing that, right? Now here comes a van to pick up some of the wounded, not a marked ambulance... etc. Way more gray than black/white 'murdering civilians and reporters'.

Reply Parent Score: 1