The controversy of Wikileaks has many facets and many areas are being explored because of his work. The pros and cons, as well as the ideas of Freedom of Speech and Information must be explored to determine if it is something that should be promoted and encouraged or heavily censured.

Freedom of Speech and Information - what it does Overview:

All regimes have policies and procedures in place to protect various parts of a society, and some are kept secret because the information they contain can be harmful to societal groups they are designed to protect. Some secrets are kept because they allow a small group of a society to unjustly control a large part of that society.

The information, if known, could be used to change unjust policies and procedures to a large or a small group within the society, or to put various groups in that society in immediate danger. Freedom of Speech, by its design is used to allow all members of a society, to have all of the information necessary to make informed decisions in guiding the decisions of the policy makers that run the society. This is done by public opinion. Without the ability to know all of the facts in a situation, it is impossible for the masses in a Democratic Society to make informed choices in their leadership and make possible policy changes. It is also impossible for the Global community to step in and attempt to protect large sections of a population that are being harmed by unjust policies unless they know about it. This is the main concept of why Freedom of Speech and Information is so important in shaping the local and Global communities the world has evolved into.

The societies of Somalia, Mogadishu, Iraq and Afghanistan to name a few, all had policies and procedures in place to protect their population designed by a much smaller subset of that population. They may not have been a Democratic Society, but they were trying to protect a subset of that society. The thing is, did the leak of these policies and information to the Global Community justify the changes that it caused? (it is true that changes were needed to protect much larger the local and global population of these countries) The only way to know if the changes being made are just is by the free flow of Freedom of Speech and Information being kept open so that people can make an informed decision if their leaders are doing the right thing.

WikiLeaks Pros:

1. It allows the Global Community to determine if what is being done in a harmful situation in a different country is the correct action to take through public opinion.
2. It allows the population in conflict, a way to have knowledge of what is happening in different geographical areas of that country and take either a pro or con stance on what is happening and determine if it is just.


WikiLeaks Cons:

1. Leaking secret information has the tendency to put the troops and politicians that are following through on implementing these policies and procedures in danger of damage to life and limb as well as credibility in public opinion, which will have a tendency to change policies and procedures.

Why Freedom of Speech and Information is Important to exposing Cults:

A Cult is just a smaller version of a rogue regime that is unjustly acting in a dangerous manner to many people being governed by just a few. The information of what is happening has to be made available, or change to the policies and procedures causing problems will not take place. Julian Assange and Wikileaks was doing this on a macro scale and did attempt to protect the troops he was reporting about by the use of redaction of certain parts. If a cult is operating in an area where policies and procedures of the society they are from are protecting it, this needs to be changed. The only way to do this is through Freedom of Speech and Information and should be protected at all costs.

'Julian Assange loses appeal against extradition'

[www.guardian.co.uk]



'Who's afraid of Julian Assange of WikiLeaks? Everyone'
Interesting comment on why the story has been dropped from mainstream news reporting, from the Times of India, economic section:

[economictimes.indiatimes.com]


[www.swedenversusassange.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/06/2011 06:14PM by Stoic.

Quite frankly I am sick to death of hearing about Julian Assange.

If what he did in Swendon is a crime on the books, he needs to go back to Swedon to face his accusers.

I know most people believe this is just smoke and mirrors, but if the woman in question honestly felt violated, then she has every right to use the law to ensure the person accused is either found guilty or is released.

There is a much bigger picture to look at, Wikileaks should never been allowed to operate on the web to begin with. Yes people have a right to know what is going on in the world, but there are also things that should not be made known to us until we are rady to hear it.

Passing conversations between world leaders, and military information is wrong. It could result in innocent people being killed. Feeding the world information on your own countries affiars are the works of traiters who need to be dealt with. What's good for the Rosenbegs is good for every other low life, who would betray their country for some greater Global community good.

By running such a site Julian Assange needs to take responsibility of what is posted on that site. But first things first, he needs to be a man own up to the fact that he broke a law by having unprotected sex, which could have put that woman at harm, he is known to be promiscious, and he could have given her HIV.

I am all for him facing up to that crime, but the world, should not use that has a way to get him for any other crime he may or may not have commited. Just getting egging on their faces is no reaosn for world leaders to seek to punish him. But a case needsto be made if his wikileaks did jepodise any military actions that are going on around the world.

Well, Lord Haw Haw, we now know which side of that mythical line you have positioned yourself.

You do know Haw Haw's eventual fate, I take it? And what motivated him in the fir$t place?
Can't have any military actions jeopardised at all, whoever is instigating them--way too bad for busine$$.

Not just $$$$. My brother and sister are both serving in the military.

I am sure all military families do not want the whereabouts of soldiers disclosed, which could get them killed.

Or top secret information.

Are you saying someone who commits a crime,should not be punished. Neither of us where in that bedroom, if he did what that swedish girl said,and its law he needs to be punished.

I am sorry,that guy is not a hero,and should not be treated as such.

I do however respect your opinion, i just disagree.

He has yet to be arrested, let alone questioned and convicted for the crime for which you are already relishing his punishment.
Says more about you than about him.

The European Arrest Warrant under which he is being threatened with deportation to a state with a very poor record on extraordinary rendition is very dodgy law that most thinking UK citizens see as a betrayal of their citizenship and of their human rights.

Maybe you should mug up on the specific case and the particular legal fudges that he has fallen foul of--as well as on Lord Haw Haw's nefarious doings.

Just a starter in case you're interested...

[en.wikipedia.org]

The information leaked by Wikileaks is old, and is not about revealing military positions! that is merely propaganda.
Military intelligence people, who are objective, have admitted its old news to anyone in that field.

What it mainly reveals are official lies being told by governments and specific politicians to the citizens of various countries.

The world needs more Wikileaks.
Wikileaks has published cult manuals as well.

Anyone who speaks out against abuses of power is going to be targeted, smeared, framed and hunted down.
People can get paid off to be part of a frame-up, happens everyday.

But in the context of cults, which is the subject of this forum, Wikileaks and other internet orgs like Wikileaks are absolutely essential.
Otherwise these large cults can use their money taken from cult members, to block all criticism of the cults on the internet.

QUOTE..."Wikileaks should never been allowed to operate on the web to begin with. Yes people have a right to know what is going on in the world, but there are also things that should not be made known to us until we are rady to hear it."

That is a very disturbing quote from above, but those who hold the cards, and tell official lies to the public believe exactly that.
Large cults also believe the exact same thing.

They both believe that the peons/peasants don't deserve to know the truth and facts, so they have to be spoon-fed lies and propaganda.
or Necessary Illusions.


Contrary, its the People who are the ones who need open access to information, and the powers-that-be should have to fight for every 'secret'.
Not the other way around.
Power corrupts.

If the People don't fight hard for internet freedom, the brief openness we have seen with the internet, in regards to cults, will vanish.
Seems that some people want to live in a new-fascist state, or a state where cults determine who can say what about them.

Cults are in effect a 'war of information'.
As information, false info, lies, is used to indoctrinate people.
Wikileaks is in the center of that.

Stoic:-- Julian admitted to breaking the Swedish law,by not informing her he was not using a condom.

I am choosing to sympathise with the poor swedish girl who did not get a chance to say no.

You choose to side with the criminal who has admitted his guilt.

No need to insult me because my compassion is for the victim.That is your choice also.

I will not bother with your link, Wikipedia is not the most reliable site. I tend to question the validity of a posters POV. When they rely on wikipedia as their source.

Have a good day.