Prev
Next

There will be a winner and a loser in the Wikileaks saga

Sam Cleveland

by Sam Cleveland

16 Dec 05:50am

Must Reads

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it - this is a caption

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

180

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment - this is a caption

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

27

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest - this is a caption

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

3

Filed under: Information, Internet, Journalism, Julian Assange, Media, Wikileaks

47 comments

Julian Assange’s extradition to Sweden for alleged sex crimes is destined to become an ugly, inconsequential sideshow to history.

Indian protesters urge Julian Assange's release. Picture: AP

Wikileaks’ revelation that Saudi Arabia egged the US into attacking Iran over its nuclear ambitions? A footnote. Australian Senator Mark Arbib spying on his colleagues and countrymen for the US government? Grubby trivia, at best.

The real historical weight of the Wikileaks saga lies within the undiscovered country of its endgame.

The most intriguing conflict of the digital era is right now being played out between two diametrically opposed forces; what no-one’s much talking about is that there will be a winner and a loser.

On one side you’ve got governments and business interests that really like keeping secrets secret and have proved, time and again, they will do whatever’s necessary to maintain their status quo.

And in the blue corner, a loose collective of hackers, whistleblowers and new media types bearing (it would seem) the weight of popular support.

The identity of the victor will have a phenomenal, arguably irrevocable, impact on global society.

If government ‘wins’ and smothers Wikileaks (and its inevitable copycats, Openleaks should be up and running now) might we be looking at the last gasp of individual freedom against the military industrial power base?

Last gasp? Sounds a bit hand-wringingly melodramatic doesn’t it?

Not at all. Consider the damage already done to the global psyche by President Obama’s sputtering performance on the back of his hope-driven election.

Then factor the internet’s ‘brand’ as a supposed tool of democracy and how Wikileaks’ defeat there might resonate. If the jackboot of authority has a win this big and this public, would it spell bedtime for idealism?

Don’t tell me ‘the fight would go on’ if government legislated against the dissemination of ‘classified documents’. Even hackers are afraid of prison.

On the other hand, if Assange and his Wikissociates carry the day might we truly be living amid a brave new world order of accountability and egalitarianism?

We’d definitely have a better-informed populace, along with elected officials perhaps a little warier of those minor crimes that seem to tempt them so.

But maybe there’s a third option… a default win for the powers that be. Maybe Wikileaks will just wash up on apathetic middle ground, forgotten amid the rapid media cycle engendered by the internet, the very source of its potency. 

Remember BP’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico? When was that exactly? And wasn’t Haiti wiped out by a tornado or an alien invasion or something? The ETs looked like big prawns, didn’t they? I’m sure that was news for about 36 hours.

Whichever way the chips fall, may you live in interesting times.

Most commented

431Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
336Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
266Who murdered the Arts degree?
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
223The world puzzles over Australia's Prime Minister

47 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Peter Oataway says:

      05:55am | 16/12/10

      I get the feeling that it is more the bureaucrats, lobbyists and diplomats that are seeing their fairly comfortable job’s and expense accounts drying up in the future post public transparency that Wiki-leaks has bought attention too, who are the people that fear Wiki-Leaks most.

      Reply

    • TChong says:

      06:02am | 16/12/10

      Vested interests dont want the truth told.
      Lies and manipulation and convenience make the diplomatic (state and corporate ) world go round.
      Who woulda thunk it?

      Reply

    • Joan says:

      06:25am | 16/12/10

      Wikileaks hysteria will pass as all things do. There are still multi billion untold `secrets`, stolen kisses, etc in the world . If someone doesn’t like you, or there is money to be made,  it could be your secret that is netted, twittered around the world. If you are a politician or a celebrity the world will be very interested.

      Reply

    • TChong says:

      07:20am | 16/12/10

      “If you are a politician or a CELEBRITY…,” Joan , I was hoping we would be safe, but now you raise “celebrities”  I think you have us ( and many other Punchers ) more than just a little concerned.
      Our incredibly witty blogosphere names will be for nought, our past indescetions, as well as all the unsung good, will be laid bare before the over inquisitive populous.
      You Joan will be revealed as the true life model for Xena, and as you, and other Punchers have already guessed, my surname is Wayne, first name: Bruce.  You know the rest.

    • Benrama says:

      06:35am | 16/12/10

      The thing about Wikileaks, rightly or wrongly, is that it constantly turns up information that frankly, is fairly easy to guess and not that mind blowing anyway. Saudi Arabia doesn’t like Iran. Yep got it. To truly break out of the 24 hour news cycle, the real mud needs to be flung. Not only was the moon landing a hoax, but was directed by a young Richard Dean Anderson whom used it as a stepping stone to what we all know was to be bigger and better things. Marlyn Munroe shot JFK and Elvis was behind 9/11. That’ll get the punters of their tractors.

      Reply

    • Adam Diver says:

      07:21am | 16/12/10

      I knew it was munroe, no-one believed me but all the evidence points that way. An anonymous sarcastic post on the internet is all I need for confirmation.

      You are right though wiki-leaks has only leaked low level classified stuff, I want top level leaks, what really happened at area 51 perhaps.

    • TrueOz says:

      07:36am | 16/12/10

      Sorry, but in the interest of keeping the facts straight;

      1. There is no actual moon anymore, just a bright light projected from outer space to create an illusion of a moon. The Kraft cheese factory mined the moon out of existence years ago.
      2. Elvis shot JFK and was responsible for the death of Marilyn Monroe - he gave her the drugs crushed up inside in a fried peanut butter and banana sandwich.
      3. Marilyn Monroe was partly responsible for 9/11. One of the towel head pilots was motivated by the fact that she would be made available to him as one of his 72 brides when he entered paradise.

      It’s so much better when the truth comes out!

    • Scarneck says:

      09:09am | 16/12/10

      I fully agree Benrama @ 06:35. George Orwell would probably refer to Julian Assange as Winston Smith. There is so much garbage on the internet today, Wikileaks is no different - fact or fiction? Who knows, who really cares? Politicians perhaps?  I do Remember when Harold Holt was taken by aliens back to planet ‘Claire’?

    • Richard says:

      10:17am | 16/12/10

      Dammit Ben!  You promised you wouldn’t you tell!

    • grumpy old man says:

      07:40am | 16/12/10

      It would be very easy to reduce the debate to a list of quotes, homilies and motherhood statements, “the price of peace is eternal vigilance”, “all power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"and so on. The real issue I suspect is not that wikileaks has actually told us anything that we don’t already suspect or intuitively know, but that we have been confronted with the proof that the people we elect do indeed have the same lead feet that the rest of us have, and having been confronted with this truth, we can no longer ignore it. We now have incontrovertible evidence that “Top Secret “can, and frequently does mean “oops, we stuffed up, don’t let people know “.
      The question really is, now we know, and we can no longer ignore the fact that we know, what do we do next? Greater openness by the worlds governments would be nice, and may help to avoid some of the disastrous and tragic events that have occurred in recent times ( Irag, Afghanistan, secret little wars elsewhere, GFC et al). Will this happen?  human nature being what it is, unlikely.
      What we cannot allow is for wikileaks to be used as a method for shutting down journalistic endevours to get to the truth. wikileaks is simply a form of new media, and there really isn’t any difference between wikileaks publishing a document and , say, the Times publishing it.

      Reply

    • DG says:

      08:00am | 16/12/10

      I’ve got to agree that there is a huge amount of apathy. You are telling the electorate that their politicians are dodgy, self-serving, hypocritical muppets. This isn’t surprising, it’s hardly news.

      What is going to change? Are politicians suddenly going to become honest? Not likely if they were want to be in government. Far more likely is that they will put less on paper. It can’t be proven if it’s not written down.

      Public servants will become more like the Sir Humphrey ideal, only point things in writing that can be found by other means and that are suitably vague as to be meaningless. One will need to find other means of sharing information - meeting face to face with people, rather than using phones that can be tapped or using pre-paid Mobile phones that are kept only for short periods.

      For some reason people believe that politicians are different to other people. They aren’t. They are just trying to do their jobs, get promotions and make the best living they can. Sure there are a few idealists, but they don’t get very far in the party machine.

      Reply

    • Gerard says:

      05:55pm | 16/12/10

      Okay, so the public already know the general content of these documents. But what about the reactions of governments? Take the Iran/Saudi Arabia leak. With solid evidence of their enemy’s position, Iran can now credibly denounce them, push for sanctions, demand UN censure etc. In another, hypothetical situation, military action or attacks on foreign interests could result. The upshot is that minor powers will be more reluctant to discuss international politics with stronger allies, eroding their ability to defend themselves. Meanwhile, military superpowers will be free to pursue their own agendas unencumbered by the concerns of their less powerful friends.

    • Ironside says:

      08:39am | 16/12/10

      This is an absurdly one sided article…Military Industrial Complex..in Australia? Come on. The Jackboot of Authority? That’s about half a pace from having me call Goodwins Law on the whole article right there.

      The sad fact is that the national interest is best served by keeping a lot of information secret just like your boss doesn’t tell you all the nitty gritty detail of the business, or you might tell a white lie to your spouse about something. Or hey maybe even pump the kids up on how great that Santa guy is. While the examples above are relatively benign there are some secrets which, if widely known would be devastating, how about the remote access communication details and launch codes for the US nuclear arsenal….does anyone doubt that should be secret? How about government evacuation plans in the event of a terrorist attack? What about a document that briefs the government on security problem which could be easy to fix, but if known would allow bikies to import more illegal drugs. Some of these may seem fantastic or ridiculous but the fact is we don’t know nor should we know about most of this stuff it is secret for a reason.

      We don’t even really need to know about the US opinions of Krudd or that Arbib was a US spy (which is actually the correct term. He was giving confidential government information to a foreign power, would we accept it just as readily if he was briefing china?) those a grubby little pieces of tabloid news that make the ignorant titter because the powerful have been caught out.

      Also one final point. Every single one of these diplomatic cables, the collateral murder video and pretty much all of wikileaks high profile stuff out of the US has been a result of 1 guy stealing the information and giving it to them. There is not a vast group of people out there constantly feeding this stuff, it is wikileaks drip feeding the information out to maximise their exposure. That’s fine its what media outlets do, but please accept that wikileaks is doing this to maximise the gain that they get from a finite resource. The US government has already changed the way it handles information to prevent this ever happening again. So while there may be individual leaks in the future it is unlikely that there will ever be another incident like this. For those wikileaks fans enjoy it while it lasts.

      For everyone else, remember there is a vast difference between stuff you are interested in, and information the release of which is in the public or national interest.

      Reply

    • JM says:

      09:06am | 16/12/10

      So who decides the national interest? That’s the central problem irrespective of the value or not of the information, whether from the current WikiLeaks dump or from future such dumps.

      Who decides what is “secret” and what isn’t? Why perpetuate a belief in open democracy when WikiLeaks has confirmed the belief of governments that the function of the citizen in a democracy is to shut up and take it from one’s “betters”?

    • Bob Croser says:

      09:38am | 16/12/10

      This will appear super-idealistic to some, if not most, people, but to follow one line of thought, “imagine” if we did have all greivances out in the open. If the Middle East problems were subject to serious, open discussions; the Muslim/ Christian divide was not one of mistrust and misguided “truths” and the differences between rich and poor nations could be reduced. These results can only be achieved by frank, open and honest discussion. Humans being what they are, this would seem to be impossible, but I feel it could be the only way to secure a future for the world.

    • Ironside says:

      09:58am | 16/12/10

      @JM the national interest is a difficult concept there are many things that are covered and each department needs to advise their ministers, who as elected representatives are responsible for determining the national interest. The wonderful thing about democracy is that the next time we have a change of government the incoming will review stuff and release it if it is in the national interest to do so. This is far from a perfect system but between changes of government FOI requests and other checks and balances it is the best system available.

      @Ben Croser your comment has nothing to do with freedom of information. Pretty much everything is out in the open in the middle east already a lot of the desires of the players are mutually exclusive for example, Iran wants to nuke Israel, while Israel doesn’t want to be nuked. Those are fundamentally different points of view and will never be able to be compromised, what does Israel do, say to Iran, oh ok you can nuke us but only a little bit?

      As for the differences between the haves and the have nots in a nation state sense. The reasons that a lot of those countries are have nots has nothing to do with Western nations maintaining secrets due to their national interest and everything to do with the corrupt governments in power in those countries who often only remain in power due to humanitarian donations from western Non Government organisations and the UN.

    • Tombowler says:

      09:05am | 16/12/10

      The loser will be wikileaks….

      That ridiculous ‘revolution-in-the-(cyber)-air’ mood has already subsided with the retarded hackers being reminded rather abruptly that the U.S are much better at hacking than them despite what they have been lead to believe by b-grade budget movies.

      Wiki-leaks are, as @Ironside has correctly pointed out, behaving just like main-stream media in drip-feeding the leaks so as to maintain relevance.

      If they are so interested in transparency, why are they cutting deals with individual media companies, releasing encoded ‘insurance’ files and everything instead of just dropping that sh#t on the net and seeing what happens.

      Assange will be irrelevant in three months and he will look increasingly desperate as he tries to drop more and more salacious cables to grasp the flitting and fickle imagination of the public.

      Reply

    • Bobster says:

      10:42am | 16/12/10

      There seems to be an overwhelming sense of panic amongst the politicians.

      I just really hope they’re sitting on something really good - or at least have enough cables to keep drip feeding for several years and maintain the paranoia in the various governments.

      Maybe then they’ll stop saying they’re transparent and actually start being transparent.

    • MeAndYou says:

      09:19am | 16/12/10

      Why is the focus on just the two “big” (in the eyes of the media) releases by WikiLeaks?  What about the thousands that were made before that?  The ones that actually provided real evidence about some important issues?  The focus on the diplomatic cables of late is a waste, since it doesn’t actually tell us anything that weren’t already suspected.

      Reply

    • Ange says:

      10:37am | 16/12/10

      Sam - you say that the fight would die out because even hackers are afraid of prison. While the latter may be true, as if often the case with those who truly believe in fighting for a cause, they will go underground.  I think no matter what happens to Assange or what legislation they may put in place to try and curb these sorts of activities, there will always be those willing to lay it (and their lives???) on the line for their beliefs.

      Sure we’ve always had a basic mistrust of politicians and have always suspected there are all dodgy dealings behind closed doors but if the Assange jail fiasco has done anything it has alerted the general public to the fact that there are very powerful people in this game who will stop at nothing to protect their interests - usually monetary.  The way they have reacted to wikileaks and Assange has forced us to sit up an look a bit more closely at their activities. It may just be a few embarrassing cables at the moment but I can guarantee they’re now sweating on what else is likely to be leaked…hence to rush to stomp on Assange using whatever means possible.

      This is opening up cans of worms at an alarming rate and people are starting to sit up and take notice. I don’t think this issue will fade away quickly.

      Reply

    • Tombowler says:

      11:08am | 16/12/10

      Stop at nothing? He’s been tried for sexual misconduct (probably justifiably so)

      This isn’t the “bourne identity” if these secret “vested monetary interests” wanted to off him I’m sure he’d have died a bit before the release of the cables.

      It’s salacious gossip and Assange is merely the face; not the creator or the procurer of the documents. I don’t know why people can’t separate Assange and Wikileaks.

      Assange is on trial for sex-crimes; Wiki leaks continues it’s business.

    • Bobster says:

      02:49pm | 16/12/10

      Why does everyone on here fire up when it is suggested that Assange may be innocent (what about the victims?) but it’s perfectly alright to make unsubstantiated claims about his guilt?

    • Shama says:

      11:06am | 16/12/10

      “On one side you’ve got governments and business interests that really like keeping secrets secret and have proved, time and again, they will do whatever’s necessary to maintain their status quo.

      And in the blue corner, a loose collective of hackers, whistleblowers and new media types bearing (it would seem) the weight of popular support.”

      This has always been true throughout history.  The Internet is just a new, much much more effective medium through which it is done.  Its that old thing of how the dissemination of books were once revolutionary. All societies look for good governance and ways to achieve it, keeping the b*stards honest so to speak, which is why there is debate on wikileaks and what purpose it serves.

      You also forget that there is a vast majority in the middle ekeing out a living, unable to take on the status quo but suffering from it.  At various points in history, they reach a tipping point and this is one.  I think disillusionment with the things way are runs high everywhere. Which by the way also includes scepticism with new media types, hackers and the like.  One of the things with wikileaks is that by and large people both understand its importance and at the same time are hardly likely to go around holding a little red book. The digital age is fairly non-partisan.  Wikileaks for e.g was responsible for climategate and diplomacygate and the left and right have had vastly differing reastions to both indicating the general redundancy of both sides of politics.

      Reply

    • Aintperfect says:

      11:48am | 16/12/10

      Wow. Leaking US State secrets!
      Talk about picking a low hanging apple. I’d like to see Assange and his supporters do some real investigative journalism, and produce a critique of the Russian or Chinese governments, from inside those two countries.
      If that doesn’t sort out such cowards, perhaps earn your credibility over in Zimbabwe, South Africa or a Middle Eastern Country. Perhaps go and de-rail the peace process in Sudan.
      Give me a break. Assange sounds like a spoilt tosser stealing from his own rich family. His supporter(s) come accross as naive dogs that have never seen any real action.
      Looking forward to reading despatches from Siberia.

      Reply

    • Shama says:

      01:14pm | 16/12/10

      I suppose you are unaware that Wikileaks won an Amnesty award for reporting on Kenya.

      I suppose you are also aware of the irony that the West holds itself out as free and lectures the rest of the world. How is the extreme reaction to Assange (he is wanted for questioning, there are no charges yet) different from the show trials in China? Or is it that the West only wants a more sophisticated way to the same outcome?

    • DJ says:

      11:54am | 16/12/10

      You ALL have the wrong idea and information!!!!!! Who funds WikiLeaks?? Have any of you even looked into it, or are you dumb enough to buy the ‘official’ version of the leaks? The leaks are being chosen selectively to support an agenda. The ‘Open Society Foundation’ is the main financial supporter of WL, and they were founded by George Soros and Cass Sunstein. Check that out! Get a grip on this situation will you! You have all been conned…..

      Reply

    • marley says:

      12:05pm | 16/12/10

      “The most intriguing conflict of the digital era is right now being played out between two diametrically opposed forces; what no-one’s much talking about is that there will be a winner and a loser.”

      Actually, you’ve picked the wrong combatants for your war of the internet.  On the one hand, there’s wikileaks and its ilk, hackers, whistleblowers, new media, whatever you want to call them, but the freebooters of the internet will do - and on the other hand, not the “jackbooted western democracies” but rather the secretive, authoritarian and oppressive regimes of countries of China, Cuba, Iran, Syria and the like. 

      Those are the genuine enemies of the free flow of information.  Forget access to secret documents:  in those countries, you can’t even always get access to public ones.  And while you worry that in a future world western hackers might face imprisonment for disseminating secret information, you need to bear in mind that, in the China of today they would simply be shot.

      All governments, like corporations, have their secrets;  yet, thanks to freedom of information acts, whistleblower activities and the like, not to mention regular elections with handing over of power to different parties, we know quite a bit about the workings of western governments.  We know nothing about the internal decision making of some of the more opaque authoritarian regimes of the world. 

      Whether wikileaks wins or loses this battle, it will have no impact on a rather large part of the world.  So to categorize it as the last stand for freedom is hyperbole.

      Wikileaks as it has emerged over the last week or so is almost entirely a western phenomenon;  there are no global implications for you

      Reply

    • Tripper Smurf says:

      08:02pm | 16/12/10

      The problem with your argument is that you forget that wikileaks didnt hack for this information.  I was provided to them by a low ranking by connected US army staffer who passed it onto Wikileaks.  It is the sheer scope and the audacity with which the information is being released that is raising the ire of the US government.

      This is no different to any other leak that occurs in any free political system.  It brings accountability to our politicans and helps keep the fourth estate politically healthly.  Any attack on that, especially in America sets a dangerous legal preceedent for the future of journalists, wether they be in new or old media.

      Ultimatley dont shoot the journalist for reporting on the information that he is provided.  Look at the processes that led to the leak itself and tighten it up.

    • wally the worker says:

      01:24pm | 16/12/10

      “Julian Assange’s extradition to Sweden for alleged sex crimes is destined to become an ugly, inconsequential sideshow to history.”

      Hang on, is that wishfull thinking, if so, no need to read the rest of this piece. I think he’s still in the UK.

      Reply

    • Dinkim Davo says:

      01:32pm | 16/12/10

      The sexual assault/rape did not even occur, it’s all a conspiracy. The United States government has paid these women to accuse Julian of these actions and now he’s getting charged with this nonsense.

      Shame on the Australian government, and especially Julia Gillard and her comments about the situation.

      To Julia “Do everything in your power to bring this man back home to Australia, you clown! As we would for other great Australians!”

      Reply

    • AdamC says:

      02:08pm | 16/12/10

      ‘Dinkum’ Davo, a couple of things:

      1. If you want to have your silly comspiracy theories, I would prefer it if they didn’t involve accusing women who may well be victims of sexual assault of lying with no basis whatever.

      2. Last time I looked, there isn’t a great deal Australia can do to bring Julian Assange back ‘home’ to Australia. It isn’t as if we are allowed to break laws overseas with impunity. Remember the Bali 9?

    • acotrel says:

      03:15am | 17/12/10

      The US should come out into the open, instead of using the Swedes!

    • Tripper Smurf says:

      11:21am | 17/12/10

      There are some very interesting facts about these women that arent being reported widely in the Western media.  Given the facts surrounding the timing of the reporting of this alleged crime (after a farewell party), the manner in which it was done, (they went to the police station together) and the alleged boasting to others that preceeded the accusations that these women undertook, the case itself is highly questionable.

      Coupled with the fact that the case has been dropped and retaken up a few times by the Swedish authorities and that Assange stayed available for questioning some time after the alleged event, makes it all very suspicious.

    • Maid Marion says:

      02:48pm | 16/12/10

      Assange is now the most inconvenient truthful man in the world and as his arrows have pierced too many black hearts and he’s paying the price.  A modern Robin Hood who deserves the Noble Peace Prize

      Reply

    • marley says:

      06:27pm | 16/12/10

      Yep - right along with Henry Kissinger, Menachim Begin, Kofi Annan and Barack Obama.  All fluff.  No results.

    • The Badger says:

      03:23pm | 16/12/10

      assange needs a good dose of waterboarding therapy.
      He should then be strapped with a suicide vest and sent back inside his server bunker.
      This isn’t a video game.

      Reply

    • Tripper Smurf says:

      07:50pm | 16/12/10

      Do you advocate this for all journalists who receive leaked materials and then publish them?  Especially when said material has been redacted and there has been admissions from US government officals saying no lives were put at risk by them?

      So much for democratic rights.

    • Dan says:

      08:51pm | 16/12/10

      Apparently, since you support torture and murder, you do think it is a video game. Or you could just be a morally bankrupt armchair warrior who is no different to anyone who supports terrorism or any other atrocity.

    • The Badger says:

      09:47pm | 16/12/10

      assange a journalist?
      in your dreams.

      He puts Australian and American lives at risk.
      He is a terrorist and should be treated as such.

    • Jerry says:

      04:30am | 17/12/10

      Terrorist based on???

    • The Badger says:

      09:47am | 17/12/10

      Jerry
      Why planet earth of course!

      Why? where are you based?

    • Tripper Smurf says:

      11:09am | 17/12/10

      Officals of the Pentagon are on record to US Sentate hearings as saying that the release of information by Wikileaks has not put one person in danger.  The head of the NATO mission in Afghanistan is on record as saying that they cannot find a single person that needs to be protected as a result of the Wikileaks exposures.

      Assange on the other hand is a journalist.  He has won the Amnesty International Media Award in 2008 for work done in Africa.  The same people who are denigrating and attacking him now, were praising him just two years ago.

      The issue is that under the US Espionage Act (which most American commentators are saying Assange could be charged under), is that its designed for American citizens (which Assange is not) and that it has deference to US first Amendement rights, especially with regards to the publication of information to media outlets. 

      If you do not like the fact that democracy has free speech, and that these leaks will occur from time to time as a result, then by all means enquire about emigrating to a nation where such freedoms are not exercised, so that you may live in the knowledge that the government is doing everything right.

    • Dan says:

      12:06pm | 17/12/10

      Badger, if you think he’s a terrorist, you need to do some serious research. On planet earth and in reality (not your dreams), the term terrorist has a specific meaning, and he ain’t one at all. As for putting Australian/American lives at risk, your evidence is? Anyway, he’s not the one advocating murder and torture, so you/re more of a terrorist than he could ever be!

    • Bob Croser says:

      05:29am | 17/12/10

      Ironside, you maintain that the world’s problems are not due to freedon of information and are thus set in concrete and can’t be solved by more openness and trust. I can only say it sure as hell is not working at the moment!But then again, when families within Australia fall out and don’t communicate, what hope is there for the world community!

      Reply

    • Michael says:

      09:41am | 17/12/10

      I think what the Governments around the world has now forgotten is that “THEY WORK FOR US” and they have to be accountable in every way, after all we are the people who elect them. If freedom of information fails, you can say goodbye to the Internet as we know it . The first things that the governments around the world will do is censor the Internet. We cannot let this happen and this situation that is being played out is THE most important part of the history of mankind. we are either going to forge forward as mankind or (if governments have thier way) we will be forever slaves to the worlds banks and governments.

      Reply

    • Armchair Philosopher says:

      12:41pm | 29/12/10

      At last an article that actually addresses the core of this whole Wikileaks/ Assange affair.
      The time has come for the next evolution in governance.
      Up until the advent of the internet(with it’s ability to pass vast amounts of information both ways), representitive democracy, when applied correctly, was the most effecient and open form of large system governance available.

      Unfortunately, in it’s working out, bad habits of secrecy, lies and favoured treatment for particular groups and individuals has crept in due to the nature of the individuals administering the systems.
      The misinformed belief carryover from feudal times of many politians, bureaucrats and the population at large, that the citizen is a chattel of the state (monarch),contributes to this misconduct.

      With the internet and it’s capacity to keep us informed of the most detailed of information, and the ability to give immediate feedback, we now have the wherewithall to evolve our governance systems into Direct Democracy.

      The question that must be asked of those that seek power is, will you allow this to happen peaceably. We have the examples of the French revolution and the evolution of parliament in Britain to educate us.Will they let the power evolve back to us like the British did(albeit with some kicking and screaming) or will it be the proverbial Guillotene?
      Julian Assange’s courageous campaign to open up the lines of government and business communication to outside scrutiny and thus improve their behaviour, or at least gum up their security systems to reduce their effectivness, should be loudly applauded.It is a PEACEFUL response to the need for change As we can see from the coordinated attack on him and Wikileaks by various governments,business and judiciaries, shuting down websites, freezing funds, slandering, threatening and imprisoning him without charge, this strategy must be working.

      Perhaps in all this Julian Assange’s willingness to be the lightining rod for these attacks is his most informative action. I personally have been shocked by the widespread and rabid response to what is basically a publisher releasing leaked material, something that mainsteam media also does from time to time.

      Remember your place public officials, you are accountable to US

      Reply

    • Johnetta says:

      12:49pm | 17/10/11

      Thank you so much for this airctle, it saved me time!

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 28 May 12 12:01AM

#markwebber just wasted petrol faster than everyone else in monaco #f1

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 27 May 12 10:49PM

In my sports column on The Punch tomorrow: why Eurovision was easily the best game on the weekend. Mummy bloggers, you'll like this one!

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 27 May 12 10:12PM

The Logies could learn a lot from Eurovision #lamethings#sbseurovision

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 27 May 12 10:03PM

RT @ellehardytweets: Already despondent about the next fifty one weeks. #sbseurovision

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

by David Penberthy

180

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

by Paul Toohey

27

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

by Angela Mollard

3

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed