WikiLeaks heralds the birth of Fellow Travellers 2.0

Jeremy says:

06:14am | 14/12/10

Ah, the old “we’re not as bad as they are, so we’re the good guys” routine.

There’s nothing wrong with holding our governments to account. Who knows - if they clean up their act, they might be MORE effective in battling the “bad guys”.

Paul Prentice says:

06:35am | 14/12/10

What a load of bull,Assange thinks nothing of the left of politics his words, the left are all fuzzy headed,he leans to right wing..it also seems most of the cables leaked so far are on left wing Governments such as US democrats &Gillards; Labour..we have a lot more to fear of the United Nations and its One World Government which is a communist organisation ,except it wants to rule the world not just a country like Russia or China…Exactly what was Rudd talking about when he mad reference to using force on China if it all goes wrong…If all what goes wrong..there one world Government and global warming scam…long Live Julian Assange..Mainstream media have been on the global warming gravy train ,they have a lot too loose .

watty says:

06:37am | 14/12/10

“there are countries and malevolent causes looking for useful idiots”.

And then there are countries being governed by “useful idiots” who either want to strip Julian of his passport or give him a laptop in his cell.

Johor says:

06:42am | 14/12/10

Perhaps you could tell us who the “political good guys in our world” are - in your estimation. Also are you quite sure that the USA is a democracy in all but name? On what evidence? Can you even point to any country that IS a democracy in all but name? I believe Winston Churchill once thought poorly of democracy but admitted that it was the best system available. And the late Morris West, prior to a federal election, wrote that Australia was only a democracy on polling day after which it reverted to being a bureaucracy. Assange had a good upbringing in QLD surrounded by greed and corruption at the highest level. He sees them as the articles of a creed that now governs the whole planet, bot in ‘democracies’ and non democracies alike. That creed has spawned lying, deceit, aggression, exploitation, and moribund planet ruining conservatism prosper. And the scales of justice have fallen to the ground. The Assange case currently pending is but one example, if Gitmo isn’t enough already. If he appears to be going for the USA most it is because it exposes itself to well, looms so large that it has to be targeted before the other targets become visible. We are living in a time when the chickens are beginning to come home to roost. The meek are about to inherit the earth at last. BTW, have you come across any comments/opinion made by esteemed religious leaders on Assange and Wikileaks?

TChong says:

07:45am | 14/12/10

“Fellow Travellers ” you reckon Chris ,? .
Ah yes, be afraid, very afraid.    Exposing the hypocracy , two faced double dealings of varios govts, not just   USA.
These Wikileaks put the light on what is common knowledge for anyone that takes even the remotest interest in diplomacy and politics - that all treaties, agreements and alliances are only for convenience , and that the partners all seem to revile the other countries and diplomats involved.
  A large dose of ( non fatal)  salmonella in the caviar at the next cocktail party would be a just reward for all the snivelling, lieing, backstabbing jerks , who have dplomatc immunity from honesty and integrity.

mikk says:

08:02am | 14/12/10

Awww Its so cute how the author thinks the west are “the good guys”.

Terry Hayles says:

08:13am | 14/12/10

While applauding Assange’s attempts to “keep the bastards honest”, there is no doubt that there are at least possible “downsides” to his release of sensitive documents. We need to ask ourselves “do we trust America enough to give them ‘carte blanche’ in their methods, tactics, cover-ups etc in fighting the War on Terror”? I dont believe that we can or should trust ANY government to that extent.
Having seen some of the “sins” revealed so far, I would much prefer to risk the “downsides” than to discontinue putting the American/Allied administration and military under scrutiny. If the world cannot question their activities and hold them to account for transgressions then democracy and free speech are dead.

Dan Nolan says:

08:15am | 14/12/10

Wow glad to see another uninformed piece from someone who hasn’t read the background on Assange.

He’s libertarian right, which means he’s anti-imperalism, not anti-capitalism. Perhaps if you had the intellectual paucity to understand the distinction you wouldn’t have written such utter piffle.

Bilby says:

08:48am | 14/12/10

If by weakening you mean restricting their ability to act dishonestly then sure, but let us not throw out what makes us good to maintain power. Our system is both our strength and our weakness, but I haven’t seen a better one yet. The fact that citizens hold their governments to account is central to our way of life.

As there is obviously nothing illegal about Assange’s actions (otherwise they would have charged him for it) they have dragged up other charges of dubious merit (dubious due to the circumstances) and are expecting to stain his name and his credibility. The pathetic attempt at legitimising their attack is shameful. It is exactly this sort of deceit and subterfuge that sets people against their own governments. That, to clarify, is our strength.

Az says:

09:08am | 14/12/10

In painting Assange as some anti-US trouble maker, or “Fellow Traveler” I think you miss the point entirely Chris.

Inconveniently and in contrast to your argument,  Wikileaks is in a position where it can only publish what it receives.

If Wikileaks receives leaked cables from the Pakistani ISS or China and / or Russia’s equivalent of State Department then I would reasonably assume they would release them and in doing so completely invalidate your claim that they are “targeting” the US and the US alone.

Please also remember that in the case of the US State Dept cables, it was a member of the US Military that leaked the information to Wikileaks.

Wikileaks is not the message but the messenger.

TheRealDave says:

09:35am | 14/12/10

I see no reason to restrict the flow of information to the people as a basic right and means of accountability.

However, I do not support the theft of military classified documents that can and will risk the lives of our military personnel and civilian intelligence analysts/agents. I also abhor the publishing of re-cut and patently false information such as the complete load of dogs bollocks that was the ‘Collateral Murder’ video passed off as ‘factual’ by Wikileaks.

I have zero problem with publishing Diplomatic cables and other tidbits of insider gossip. Its all part and parcel of international diplomacy and an incite into some of the more petty and moronic minds of those we elect to lead us, and lets face it, is anyone actually surprised at some of the backroom gossip and catfights we’ve seen ‘released’ so far? You’d have to have led a pretty sheltered life to be even remotely shocked by anything released so far.

Assange should be nailed to the wall and crucified, and his other partners in crime who’ve had the sense not to go out and self publicize themselves and take a cut for themselves, that we know of, for publishing stolen military documents. I don’t care if you are offended but the general public does not ever need to know the ins and outs of military operations. Not until well after the fact when it is safe to do so. If its illegal actions and gross violations - fine, weed out the guilty and punish them. But for every day military operations - no, hell no. Idiots like Assange put our servicemen and women under greater risk because they release information that the opposition can use to better combat our troops. By releasing what may seem like mundane after action reports, contact reports, bombing assessments and others in the mountain of reports the modern military produces by the truckload on a daily basis - these idiots are handing over valuable stolen military information that shows them how their tactics are working against us, what works, what doesn’t, what our responses are, how long it takes to react in various areas, who works with us, why people work with us etc etc A whole wealth of information they would never ever have gotten a hold of that will allow them to fine tune their tactics and make better coordinated strikes against our servicemen and women. I know its hard for many of you to believe, but not everyone ‘on the other side’ is a ‘ragheaded wife beater banging his head to allah 5 times a day in a mud walled compund and growing poppy’s in his backyard’ or whatever view you have of those taking shots at us. They also have trained university educated intelligence analysts with 24/7 broadband connections to the world and a plethora of information at their finger tips. Why make it easier for them to kill our soldiers?

For this reason alone Assange and EVERYONE linked with Wikileaks should be hung by the balls.

Robert S McCormick says:

09:56am | 14/12/10

I don’t like the USA. By that I mean I don’t like the bully-boy, torture-approving, “We’re always right”, “We can do what we want & you have no right to oppose us & if you do you are anti-American”, arrogant attitude of America’s politicians, If they can’t keep a lid on their nasty, gossipy little overseas representatives & what comes out of their mouths then that is a problem for the Government of the USA.
Having been to the US on a number of occasions over the years I have always found that Americans, with the exception of us apathetic, ‘She’ll be Right” Australians, are the friendliest, most helpful, decent & hospitable people an overseas traveller could hope to meet. Just as in Australia, Amercians don’t have a great deal of time for their politicians. They, just like us want to be liked & admired. Their politicans make that almost impossible.
In recorded history no private citizen in any country has created, or wants to, War. That is solely down to our politicians.If we got rid of them the world would be a safer & happier place.
We have a right to know what these people are leading us into. We have a right to know what they are saying about us & if what they are saying is wrong then we have a right to tell them so.
OK so most of the leaks have been coming from within the USA. That says a whole lots about their security.
Our politicians, including those parasites of parasites State politicians hide behind a wall of secrecy. Sometimes, though they are squandering our money, they call it “Commercial in Confidence”
We can bet Wikileaks & any other sites which open up will be doing their damndest to find out things about other countries, Ie. the UK,Russia,France,Germany & little old Australia, etc. whose security is better. They will reveal them in order to cause the greatest embarrassment to the politicians possible. These leaks have nothing to do with National Security. It has all to do with showing up politicians for what they really are. Eventually the massive corruption, for which politicians criticise, in particular Asian countries where it is open & used by all, will be revealed as every bit as deep & widespread within the West & by those self-same politicians.

Richard M says:

10:51am | 14/12/10

Those defending Assange should examine more closely what he himself has said.  He says, for example, that all Governments are inherently evil.  He is therefore an anarchist, a foolish and juvenile mindset which most believers quickly grow out of when they mature.  The problem is that Assange never has.  That should make him simply a puerile narcissist who is little more than a nuisance, if it wasn’t for the sickening complicity of the western media, whose total lack of any principles and sense of responsibility has once again been demonstrated.  The media’s acolytes seek to cover their odious naked self-interest by chanting simplistic slogans about the “right to know” and “freedom of speech”.  This simply demonstrates their inability to understand, or their lack of any interest in, the delicate balance of rights against other rights and responsibilities in our democracy or to distinguish between the public interest and simply what the public might be interested in.

MarkO says:

11:30am | 14/12/10

I used to be appalled by the possibility of all of us dying by complete ACCIDENT when one hypersensitive (and frightened) nuclear “bloc” got its wires crossed about the actions or rumoured actions of another frightened (and hypersensitive) nuclear “bloc”.

I had read information released (in the proper way) by the USA itself on how many close calls there had been. It was frightening. I was unable to read how many close calls the USSR had had, of course.but it wasn’t hard to believe there had been at least as many.

For several years in the 80’s I belonged to a small, harmless and ineffectual group that tried to warn more people about this.  Was I therefore a “fellow traveller”? 

As it turned out both “blocs” themselves made efforts to reduce the possibility of accidents. Were the leaders who negotiated SALT treaties also “fellow travellers”?

These days I am appalled by the possibility of many of us dying by complete accident - or even intentionally - when one hypersensitive, frightened country (lets say for, instance, Iran) gets its wires crossed about the actions, or rumoured actions, of another frightened, and hypersensitive country (lets say, Israel).

Am I still a “fellow traveller”?

Are the Arab, American, Russian and European government who feel similarly jittery also “fellow travellers”?

Is being concerned about the state of the world at all, and trying to do something about it, albeit only in the particular country when you have any voice, such a terrible thing?

Will says:

11:32am | 14/12/10

Well why not make Assange a useful idiot for “the good guys”. Sure, arrest him (if you find any charges on him, which you probably won’t), quarantine him, or whatever. But the guy has skills. Use him to hack into the Russians, Chinese, Iranians etc etc

sandra nelson says:

01:10pm | 14/12/10

Julian Assange is God .
He is a threat to America.
hence he is God.

sandra nelson says:

01:12pm | 14/12/10

Communists and Nazis are fellow travellers.

Liberals and Nationals are fellow travellers.

Julian Assange Is God

john says:

01:56pm | 14/12/10

Chris Gardiner, to take excerpts from your story:

“WikiLeaks sees the birth of the Fellow Traveller 2.0. The enemy is once again the US, its allies, and their systems of democracy and economics.”&  further more “peace organisations working to prevent nuclear war.”

Perhaps Traveller 3.0 will see those behind boutiquey hospital ward sized iron,bamboo & oil curtain states step in to avert a potential “local” nuclear calamity inside or outside their curtains. IMHO ‘weakening’ the west is counter-productive, whilst those boutique states office holders hiding behind those curtains gain leverage to strengthen their existence at the cost of their own citizens. This seems to me whats occurring at the moment. Secrets are so 1960’s Get Smart, James bond drama.

We all know the real military secret is the X-37B shuttle and curious as to what it can do. Maybe the military is feeding us old news and playing coy.

Elphaha says:

02:02pm | 14/12/10

Whilst the releasing of infor such as KRudd being a diva-esque fool is funny (though not necessarily a revelation), my concern with Wikileaks and Wikileaks supporters is that they can’t tell me where the line should be drawn.

Is it ok if Assange and his mates reveal top secret military info that puts Aussie soldiers deployed OS in serious danger, even resulting in their deaths?  Is that collateral damage acceptable if it means exposing the truth?  Or is it our governments fault for having them over there in the first place?  They’re people just doing their job. 

The governments hiding secrets would probably have agreed to a certain amount of collateral damage - I fail to see what makes Assange any better than them.

Philip Trouchet says:

03:11pm | 14/12/10

“What a load of “BUNKUM” pure USA establishment propaganda from the Land of Free Speech !
What’s the saying I may not approve of your politics"etc” but do approve of your right to express your opinon !!

Kevin Rennie says:

03:22pm | 14/12/10

Chris

Are you sure you couldn’t make the issue or the name calling more simplistic? Good guys and bad guys? How about some real analysis. How about a useful contribution in place of insults like “useful idiots”.

We don’t need an invitation onto the “Superhighway”. The information gatekeepers don’t rule anymore.

Adz says:

01:14pm | 15/12/10

Guilty before proven innocent. Lets change the rules to the game for convenience/cover-up sake. I have not been inconvenienced by this, and didn’t care to know about Assange until our Government wanted his blood anyway it could arrange it. Something smelled funny how Julia was quick to bag him over something that had no legal classification. If not tried as guilty , how can our PM make an assumption that he is already? Is she a lawyer or prosecutor, and if she was, would know ......he should be innocent until proven guilty of crime. It’s different this time?
He is a human , and deserves proper process, this seems a bit dodgy regarding pinning him for something, when in my opinion I think a big majority of people don’t really mind what he has done. I don’t think its what he has done though, I think it’s what he ‘‘may’‘’ get his hands on in the future they are worried about, not so much what’s out there now. As the Gov dirty laundry needs to be secret, and has already been decided that ‘‘this is in our best interests as a nation to not know.’’ I don’t elect a PM to decide what I want to know, we deserve the truth. Is this truth from Assange? I dunno,but if the reaction wasn’t so knee jolting from Governments, I would almost think Assange is just annoying, and probably wouldn’t have any respect for him. But the smell of fish is a bit too strong. As for the issue with it creating increased danger for service men and women, well that’s the job they have undertaken. It’s dangerous and people don’t tend to like being pushed around, so in sense….... they started the bullying, and it’s not like we are protecting our land here, it’s what’s on the land over there that’s interesting to the organisers of the war, so they are protecting theirs, but I guess it makes them a terror_st then….. says us. The war initiation was said to protect our freedoms, but it’s that exact thing they don’t want in this case.Tic for tat isn’t very mature or helpful in reaching a positive result. People fighting have elected to be a war supporters and unfortunately there’s real consequences to that , like death. But it’s ok to kill others ........ only if they have been labelled as Terror_sts’’ But who is really terrorising here? Lets get everyone afraid of terror so we shot before we look deeper to ask questions of why act in this manner. Need a common enemy don’t we? I think it’s ourselves…...