Wikileaks

[Venetia]

While we live in a silly and war-ridden world it's bad for some things to be leaked.

I agree with this, as far as international relations are concerned ...

An American congressman saying an Afghani official is a buttnose could sour relations even worse than they already are ...

But if nothing's ever leaked, where does accountability begin?

If leadership knows its actions are actually under real scrutiny, and their re-election depends upon public opinion, wouldn't they shape up?

When you see a smear campaign on television against someone in/running for office, it's all partisan regurgitation of some "secret" that the campaigners "uncovered" ... Then spun to the public in whatever way they needed it to be spun.


How is that OK, but un-doctored info isn't?

 

[Ellie]

They would shape up perhaps in a country like Britain, where there are three main parties and even then a lot of independance actually gain seats (BNP, green, even independant councillers), but my understanding was America is either republican or democrat with nothing really inbetween, perhaps I'm wrong there. Are there actually occassions where R/D actually get overthrown by a 3rd party?

 

[Kingdom Ablaze]

WL is acting within accordance to Swedish law (where its main "base" is located). Few other countries can cite an actual law the site itself infringes.

they were hosted on several different sites in the us until the government shut them down. so ya they can quote our laws, i can agree with the rest of what you said though

 

[Ellie]

The Internet and real life don't mix all too well. The Internet always seems like a free place of candy and dreams but in reality any legalities can be whatever you want them to be.

HBChan is hosted in Sweden, whereas HBGames is hosted in America; we're the same site but legally what's what? HBGames is owned by an American and HBChan is owned by a Brit. o_O

 

[Incognitus]

http://bashandslash.com/index.php?optio ... &Itemid=78

^ Now Assange has crossed a line. :wink:

 

[Kingdom Ablaze]

lol he cheats a video game now your mad? rofl

 

[Venetia]

They would shape up perhaps in a country like Britain, where there are three main parties and even then a lot of independance actually gain seats (BNP, green, even independant councillers), but my understanding was America is either republican or democrat with nothing really inbetween, perhaps I'm wrong there. Are there actually occassions where R/D actually get overthrown by a 3rd party?

for congress/senate? occasionally. i think there're only 2 or 3 seated as of the latest election that are of independent parties.

for president? not in a very long time. actually the only ones i can think of were a part of the earliest vestiges of the republican party (when they were called whigs or federalists) ...
oh, except teddy roosevelt was progressive party. (which was a century ago now ;x)

when they become really popular, mostly all they do is steal a percentage of the votes from one party or the other, depending on affiliations.

anyway i always thought britain was mostly 2-party too, the conservatives and the labour parties?

 

[Ellie]

Britain is entirely 3 party with conservatives, labour, and liberal democrats sharing a reasonable share of parlie. Conservatives and Liberals currently form the coalition government.

On top of that there are also a lot of parties with a lot of seats. Mainly nationalists from Ireland or Wales, such as Sinn Fein, or Plaid Cymru, I think. But they do have some sway in there. Not as much, but they have a shot.

It's interesting you had whigs and federalists. We had Whigs and Tories, Tories became the Conservatives (hence Tory is a common insult for Con's) and Whigs became the Liberals.

But yeah, if the main parties don't look out, there is actually a chance other parties can get in.

The BNP (British Nationalist (Nazi) Party) actually got a large percentage of the vote but because we're first-past-the-post they didn't get any seats.

 

[Ellie]

We're actually having a vote next year to decide a new voting system, which I think is really cool -- as it shows democracy in action! Libdems want something that I can't remember, proportional representation I think, and tories have to vote for it as part of the coalition deal. But the actual public are deciding after the poll is drawn up.

 

[BlueScope]

http://bashandslash.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1182&Itemid=78

^ Now Assange has crossed a line. :wink:

Now if dusclosure and multiple rape didn't convince you he's a bad person - here we go with ultimate proof.
Bet he's using Event Engines, too, that bitch!


@mouse: I like the irony in voting for a new vote system... but yeah, what I don't see is how it shows democracy in action when it's just giving you the choice of two possible ways, as that's just deciding for the better, not deciding what it'll be...
Democracy is used pretty in-general these days. I know that Germany and Switzerland were special once because they were the only ones that had democracy as a fix part of their constitution, however in Germany the term isn't all that well applying. Switzerland however is criticized for letting the people decide too much, therefore slowing things down (as in voting if a bridge should be build, slowing the actual thing down by a year and eating money away in the process). Germany has a democracy that lets you vote between parties, but how much they actually care can be seen by the recent discussions about Stuttgart 21, a train station project running for a few years now... no idea if it's any popular outside Germany though. To keep this short: the bottom line is that while people didn't really want to have the train station built, the running government forces it through, as they're elected... not too democratic in my opinion.
So yeah, that being said, think about how much democracy you really got. I'm not familiar with the British government other than it has it's Upper and Lower House (and theoretically a monarch, but yeah...) so I can't really say anything regarding that... however it's hard for me to imagine that they have anything like a close-to-the-original-concept (not counting the male-only version :p ) democracy that actually works out.

And yeah, Nationalist doesn't mean Nazi... and extreme parties are naturally getting larger attendance than "regular" parties, as they'll have 100% of their followers voting, while the non-voting cuts of the population almost exclusively would've voted for one of the regulars. So, just because the BNP got 10% (made-up number) of the votes doesn't mean that 10% of the population want them in charge.

 

[Ellie]

@mouse: I like the irony in voting for a new vote system... but yeah, what I don't see is how it shows democracy in action when it's just giving you the choice of two possible ways, as that's just deciding for the better, not deciding what it'll be...

Indeed.

The hope is that a better voting system will get brought in, which will lead to changes in politicians attitudes to maintain their position.

The same happened with all the other reforms we've had - the reform act of 1832 added middle class votes, so politicians changed their attitudes, which ultimately led to the 1867 reform act which added working class votes, and so on - an upwards spiral to true democracy.

 

[BlueScope]

Yeah, there can definately be an improvement, and personally I agree that it's a good thing... thinking about it, everyone would have to think it's a good thing really... XD

The biggest problem I see with current installations of democracy is short-term focus, though... when people are only elected for a so long period, naturally they won't be working on stuff that takes effect after their legislature period (unless Obama, but who'd want health care anyway... pff) <- introducing my green parentheses of sarcasm
So yeah, since long-term is something the public would care about more than politicians would, chances are pretty slim there will actually be something improving on that matter, as there's only politician's suggestions. If they'd actually figure out a smart way to handle it, then that'd be an outstanding thing to happen... and would probably be taken as an example for other democratic systems... well, we shall see.


Wait... wasn't this a diferent discussion a page ago...? :huh:

 

[Kingdom Ablaze]

so wiki leaks guys...not Britain :P btw he got arrested :D
God i hate this guy

 

[Ellie]

4chan ddosed paypal, then brought mastercard down for a day, and now are planning an attack on Twitter, all because all three censored or stopped funds or whatever relating to wikileaks.

 

[Venetia]

so wiki leaks guys...not Britain :P btw he got arrested :D
God i hate this guy

an international manhunt and extradition hearing for a man who is wanted for questioning in sweden regarding 2 counts of possibly falsified alleged sexual assault.

uh huh.


p.s. american leaders: if you've trying to find something (for weeks) to charge a man in & from another country with, just b/c you don't like him, ... not seeing the problem with that?

christ

 

[Venetia]

once i was groped on a train by a guy who sounded like he was from northern europe. i'll bet that if i go to the police about it, they'll be scouring the globe for him. no stone unturned.

 

[mawk]

4chan ddosed paypal, then brought mastercard down for a day, and now are planning an attack on Twitter, all because all three censored or stopped funds or whatever relating to wikileaks.

thepiratebay is just asking people to withdraw their money from Paypal and close their accounts, which I think is a much more coherent form of protest, although I don't think it'll cause quite the "run on the bank" effect they're hoping for.

at least, compared to a site that's known for attacking other sites for little to no reason suddenly attacking sites with a reason.

 

[Ellie]

They had to stop it - the gov ordered it. They can hardly not do what the US gov says, they're a US company (paypal).

 

[mawk]

still, people are going to get up in arms about it because we all have this silly preconception that the internet is the wild west and we are all Clint Eastwood. they might as well vent that in a less stupid way than ddosing enormous companies with the means and the motivation to track them down.

4chan's skidded by so far by benefit of mainly attacking entertainment sites that no one gives a shit about or individual people without the same understanding of the internet as them. what do they expect to happen, now that the strangers they're being cocks to have guns of their own? it's not like they've been subtle about it.

 

[Venetia]

They had to stop it - the gov ordered it. They can hardly not do what the US gov says, they're a US company (paypal).

the govm't didn't order it; they don't have the power to (directly). they can't just walk in and tell a business who it has to exclude, especially not w/o a warrant ...

they can freeze funds during criminal investigations after charges have been filed,

and the govm't can seize funds after a judge has given a criminal sentence ordering that they may,

or the IRS can seize portions of funds after a different kind of hearing to recoup unpaid taxes,

but no charges have been filed yet.

to the best of my knowledge, amazon in particular cited that WL violated their own 'terms of service' and did it of their own accord.

i have no doubt that they were probably pressured to do so, though.

businesses generally kowtow to legal/political/social pressure. it's just easier to abide by suggestions from law enforcement or investigation commissions than to fight them.
(not saying i blame them, i'd tell WL to fuck off too if the feds were pissy about it)