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.
Thread beginning with comment 451863
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Berend de Boer
by Berend de Boer on Thu 2nd Dec 2010 00:41 UTC
Berend de Boer
Member since:
2005-10-19

Julian Assange doesn’t care that people get killed due to his actions:

“1,300 people were eventually killed, and 350,000 were displaced. That was a result of our leak,” says Assange. It’s a chilling statistic, but then he states: “On the other hand, the Kenyan people had a right to that information and 40,000 children a year die of malaria in Kenya.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/01/julian-assange-wikileak...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Berend de Boer
by Soulbender on Thu 2nd Dec 2010 00:57 in reply to "Comment by Berend de Boer"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Julian Assange doesn’t care that people get killed due to his actions


Uh, he exposed massive corruption in Kenya. How many people have gotten killed over exactly the same kind of reports made by traditional media over the years? More than 1300, I can tell you that.

Reply Parent Score: 8

Berend de Boer Member since:
2005-10-19

If the traditional media is already doing their job, then what did Julian add?

Next, backup your statements that traditional media is killing 1300 people with its reports.

And last, who cares, 1300 people? Only Kenyans. All sacrificed in the name of the truth as your intentions whitewash your methods.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Berend de Boer
by sultanqasim on Thu 2nd Dec 2010 01:03 in reply to "Comment by Berend de Boer"
sultanqasim Member since:
2006-10-28

So you say that people shouldn't be informed about corruption because there may be clashes between the corrupt and those who want to end the corruption? You support preventing justice to uphold short term corrupt stability? How about the indirect loss of life caused by poverty deepened by the corruption?

You skipped an important bit at the end of your quotation:

" 'On the other hand, the Kenyan people had a right to that information and 40,000 children a year die of malaria in Kenya. And many more die of money being pulled out of Kenya, and as a result of the Kenyan shilling being debased.'

It's the kind of moral conundrum that would unnerve most people, that made some wonder last week what the potential ramifications of the latest leak might be, but it is a subject on which Assange himself is absolutely clear: 'You have to start with the truth. The truth is the only way that we can get anywhere. Because any decision-making that is based upon lies or ignorance can't lead to a good conclusion.' "

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/01/julian-assange-wikileak...

Reply Parent Score: 9

Berend de Boer Member since:
2005-10-19

Let's start leaking your medical records sultanqasim, your private emails, your private photos, all of it. Because we have to start with the truth.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: Comment by Berend de Boer
by Almafeta on Thu 2nd Dec 2010 02:10 in reply to "Comment by Berend de Boer"
Almafeta Member since:
2007-02-22

Julian Assange doesn’t care that people get killed due to his actions


Why are you placing the blame on the operator of a place where the files got put up for access, and not on (say) the military recruiter who couldn't tell a self-important "hacker" from someone who could be trusted with the information, or the military network administrator who did not require diplomatic levels of security clearance to access the shares with that level of documentation?

If a government decides some information is secret, it is the onus of the government to keep it secret, and the right of the public to use any information when it becomes public. (Right might not be strong enough; obligation might be more fitting, for once it has been proven that information has been kept from the citizenry, it is the duty of the public to find out what this information was and what it implies their government is doing in secret.) Similarly, if the government relies on secrecy to protect the lives of people, their deaths are on the government's hands if secrecy is lost, because the government was the one who promised them secrecy and protection.

Reply Parent Score: 4

mrstep Member since:
2009-07-18

The government is trying to keep it secret and is certainly interested in finding who is leaking the information. Assange is helping to get this information published, so how could he not bear some of the responsibility if it's illegal? It's the concept of someone leaking your medical records and him publishing them because they're true - yes, they're the truth, but that doesn't automatically it needs to be published. What the hell is that? He knows what he's doing.

Along those lines, some of the information leaked is interesting, but bits like Yemen covering for US air strikes are more likely to cause civilian deaths (as a result of terror groups getting safer havens as various governments will now fear allowing US action if they think that won't stay covered up - and correctly, given the leaks), in which case not only is he not exposing some coverup/corruption, but is exposing other things that will directly lead to less security for civilians around the world.

Thanks, Julian. Again, Pulitzer? Exposing Russian government / mafia ties (corruption) seems to be one thing, making it easier for terror groups to find safe havens is quite a bit more dubious. And that's the truth too.

Reply Parent Score: 1

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Assange is right though. The kenyan people had the right to know, and Assange and everybody on Earth had the the duty to let them know.

When crimes are committed against humanity there is no such thing as not being involved. WW2 taught us that. Whenever and however we find that crimes have been committed this information MUST be shared. It is our duty as humans.

Reply Parent Score: 7

Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

I can agree with you there.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Berend de Boer
by fran on Thu 2nd Dec 2010 10:48 in reply to "Comment by Berend de Boer"
fran Member since:
2010-08-06

So I guess you would support this saying.
"Rather live on your knees than die on your feet"

You mentioned Kenya.
Here in africa we struggle with despotic governments that hold their people to ransom and suppress any regime change violently.
The sort of "if we cant have it nobody will"

Democracy is sort of joke here. Just like in America.
Personality cults, vested interests and secret societies.

Reply Parent Score: 4