WikiLeaks

Member for

15 years 10 months

Posts: 237

I can't comment because I can't get this site it just states CONNECTION PROBLEMS ??? This seems to be very convenient. :confused::confused:
Profile picture for user 27vet

Member for

9 years 11 months

Posts: 2,657

The site was hacked, service denial. Anyway, from what I have heard so far, some of the leakages reflect the true situation, whereas diplomacy protocol dictates that diplomats use a kiss my @#ss approach when talking about other leaders.

Member for

9 years 8 months

Posts: 1,234

Apart from the fact the young nipper has sold out on the oath he swore to his birthplace nation. What I find very important is that we, as a civilised democracy chose and voted for these people based on what they say, if the opposite is done in real life then that's wrong on all levels. I expect Politicians to lie in their day-day interviews, it's page 1 of the job description along with avoid and misdirect.......but to lie on a manifesto is not on.
Profile picture for user nitromaniac

Member for

10 years

Posts: 129

In the Daily Telegraph yesterday disclosure of documents shows American Commanders pouring scorn on British efforts in Sangin Province in Helmand. The leaked cables express by US commanders the failure of British forces to maintain security around town. The comments have been said by the father of Capt Tony Philipson who died in securing Sangin as being insulting and inappropiate. He states that when the British went in during 2006 the Americans and Canadians had been there for some years and had been banned from going into the centre of Sangin because it was too dangerous. In his opinion they had never taken charge of the place.

Member for

10 years 1 month

Posts: 4,956

Fair enough point, but you'd need a source with access to the diplomatic cables of every nation on earth together with the inclination to leak them. How likely is that, do you think?
Entirely unlikely. But my point was to simply to imply that diplomatic double standards and intelligence gathering of both friend and foe is global and has been practised by every sovereign nation, to a greater or lesser effect, for centuries.
Profile picture for user Grey Area

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 10,160

Yes, you're quite right. But anything that helps to keep Our Masters honest is OK by me. :)

Member for

10 years 1 month

Posts: 4,956

Oh, yes, I couldn't disagree with that. But I fear it's a vain hope....:)
Profile picture for user EELightning

Member for

10 years 10 months

Posts: 2,631

In the Daily Telegraph yesterday disclosure of documents shows American Commanders pouring scorn on British efforts in Sangin Province in Helmand. The leaked cables express by US commanders the failure of British forces to maintain security around town. The comments have been said by the father of Capt Tony Philipson who died in securing Sangin as being insulting and inappropiate. He states that when the British went in during 2006 the Americans and Canadians had been there for some years and had been banned from going into the centre of Sangin because it was too dangerous. In his opinion they had never taken charge of the place.
My uncle spent 20+ years in the Royal Marines as a sniper, he's been in all over the place, The Falklands, Northern Ireland, GW2, Kosovo, Sierra Leone and Afghanistan to name but a few etc etc and retired from the British Armed Forces not so long a go, well about 6 years ago actually. And with him being an Irishman and currently living in Northern Ireland, he sometimes got a lot of sh*t because he served in the RM's, being called silly names such as, "murderer" and all that rubbish, really just petty stuff...Anyway, to us, i.e family, friends fellow country men/woman that appreciate what they do for a living and career, he's a hero through & through and one of the nicests chaps you could ever meet. (But you wouldn't want to cross him. No, no!)... ...And you get idiots like those Yanks (not all) that don't appreciate what the British Armed Forces have done and sacrificed for them and their little pathetic "empire". Well, I've got much to say about them and their arrogance but, I'd keep it simple for now: Envy is a nasty thing to have and I'd like to see them do any better than us, and of course, their own military, "professional" record isn't the greatest in history, is it!!! Now, can we NOW bring the British Armed Forces back home because it's now obvious that they're not appreciated! Makes me sick! Just my pennies worth!
Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

15 years

Posts: 9,636

How brave and noble is it to publish stolen documents from the U.S. when it's a very good guess that all the U.S. will do is ask him to stop? Especially with the current administration who would have only mildly protested if this had gone on during the Bush administration. But when you're in the hot seat, it's not as funny. If he want's to be brave let's see him publish stolen documents from Russia, Israel or even the UK. If you violate their secrets you might wake up dead.

Member for

10 years 1 month

Posts: 4,956

You need to draw a distinction between diplomatic confidentiality and secrecy. They are very different.
Profile picture for user kiwimac

Member for

8 years 11 months

Posts: 6

Part of the problem is that the Newspapers are not doing their jobs, they seem content to parrot the government line and as for investigative journalism, well, that seems to have died. Wikileaks is only effective because the days of truly independent, investigate journalism have gone.
Profile picture for user richw_82

Member for

9 years 11 months

Posts: 1,664

How many of you checked what you were signing? You won't have signed the act itself, merely a certificate to say that you've read, understood, and agree to abide by the terms laid down in a particular part of it. In terms of whistleblowing, you have to question whether the thousands of e-mails full of snide remarks from government ministers and the like (which is all that seems to have come to light so far) was as bad as those laptops going missing, or personal data, or the other ****-ups that happen on a regular basis.
Profile picture for user Grey Area

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 10,160

How many of you checked what you were signing? You won't have signed the act itself, merely a certificate to say that you've read, understood, and agree to abide by the terms laid down in a particular part of it.
It depends on the level of security clearance that your job demands. I'm sure you'll understand why I'm going to say no more than that.
Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

15 years

Posts: 9,636

Part of the problem is that the Newspapers are not doing their jobs, they seem content to parrot the government line and as for investigative journalism, well, that seems to have died. Wikileaks is only effective because the days of truly independent, investigate journalism have gone.
I might believe that if he went after some country other than the US.... NZ have any secrets?
Profile picture for user richw_82

Member for

9 years 11 months

Posts: 1,664

It depends on the level of security clearance that your job demands.
Whatever, 007. :rolleyes:
Profile picture for user kiwimac

Member for

8 years 11 months

Posts: 6

I might believe that if he went after some country other than the US.... NZ have any secrets?
Well, I COULD tell you but then I'd have to kill you. Just don't ask me about the killer sheep!
Profile picture for user Grey Area

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 10,160

Whatever, 007. :rolleyes:
No need to be silly. Even the most seemingly mundane government jobs can demand an unexpectedly high level of security clearance, depending on location and context. And I would have thought that the need to be circumspect about such matters was self-evident.
I might believe that if he went after some country other than the US....
That might just have something to do with this material having been leaked by a US serviceman, who would hardly be likely to have access to a like quantity of similar material from other countries. Sometimes paranoia is just paranoia......

Member for

10 years 1 month

Posts: 4,956

Picking up J Boyle's theme - even though it was US serviceman who supplied the original material, Assange did not HAVE to publish anything.......
Profile picture for user richw_82

Member for

9 years 11 months

Posts: 1,664

Security clearance is something completely different to the Offical Secrets Act. The Official Secrets Act applies to everybody in the UK anyway; its law. What you sign is basically a statement that says you will abide by it. Most places will have you sign a slightly different statement on leaving. As for "saying no more" the Act isn't restricted. You are allowed to talk about the Act itself. So long as you don't disclose what you were doing, or where you were to be required to sign the statement, everything's fine. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/6/contents There's the Act for anybody that wants to read it. Note there's nowhere on there that you sign.What you will have signed if you work around the MOD is something like this: http://www.ccfadmin.co.uk/documents/Form%20134.pdf Which are handed out in sheafs to cadets, recruits and anybody else that might require it. Security clearances? Have some light reading. http://www.securityvetting.org.uk/ If ever you fill in one of their forms, its like a passport form on steroids. What was the name of your Dad's pet dog, dates of birth of grandparents.. :rolleyes: None of the above is restricted (its not even sensitive enough to be unclassified.) and is available in the public domain. Hope this goes some way to clearing up confusion. Ric

Member for

10 years 1 month

Posts: 4,956

I most certainly signed nothing as a cadet in the late 50s, but did sign a document in the mid 60s, bearing no relation to what you have reproduced here.