THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A DEBATE OVER THE RIGHT OR WRONG OF THE LEAKS. There are many threads about that.

I want to discuss what people here think the results will be with regards to how governments behave and how the Internet will be regulated.

With their secrets vulnerable, will governments will be more open and honest or will they keep the secrets even tighter?

Will governments be less likely to work with each other because the trust factor has been lowered?

What will the future of the Internet be now? Has the freedom of the Internet been compromised? The Internet is regulated by goverments. If a parent allows a child too much freedom and the child abuses it (in the eyes of the parent) then the parent will restrict that freedom. Is that what we are starting to experience? Just recently many download sites have been shut down and now the US and other governments are trying to shut down Wikileaks. As someone in another thread said, the genie is out of the bottle.

Do some believe that nothing will change? That this will blow over and soon it will be business as usual? Me, I don't think the powers that be will let this opportunity for greater control slip by.

The Internet will end up regulated sooner or later. Too much crime. Too much libel. Too much bullying. Too many lies and now the government document leaks.

I'd imagine "they" are well in truly in damage control now.

They just compromise the information by leaking what "they" want leaked.

Under performing or suspected double agents in areas where the bad guys are closing in on people who matter will be leaked.

Ex prime minsters just waiting for the chance to knife their successors will be embarrassed.

After the dust settles this could be quite a useful tool.

Less transparency in diplomatic communications is the only result that can be 100% predicted.

Attempts at increased regulations of the Internet were underway long before Wikileaks and is a trend that will continue. Possibly Wikileaks can be used as a bat by those who favour increased regulation, but overall I don't think it will have a great deal of impact on that issue.

I've also considered Scead's angle, the planting of doctored information is an old trick in the book and it is not unlikely that some of the info now being released does contain some red herrings.

There's a lot of talk about the damage caused by Wikileaks to the US. I would say that in some respects, some pieces of information released work in the opposite way.

Less transparency in diplomatic communications is the only result that can be 100% predicted.

...

There's a lot of talk about the damage caused by Wikileaks to the US. I would say that in some respects, some pieces of information released work in the opposite way.

More secrecy in non-transparent diplomatic communication.

And who said that the intention is to cause damage to the USA? a open society is the goal. some might argue wikileaks is done in a true American spirit for the love of freedom.

Less transparency in diplomatic communications is the only result that can be 100% predicted.

...

There's a lot of talk about the damage caused by Wikileaks to the US. I would say that in some respects, some pieces of information released work in the opposite way.

More secrecy in non-transparent diplomatic communication.

And who said that the intention is to cause damage to the USA? a open society is the goal. some might argue wikileaks is done in a true American spirit for the love of freedom.

Or the true Japanese spirit of Tokyo Rose.

Skip ahead to the 5min mark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNNFVjBVEtQ

Skip ahead to the 5min mark

Other than showing that Ron Paul is just clueless on the issue, the video doesn't answer the thread topic about what will the results be. So without pasting another Ron Paul video, what do YOU think the results of these latest leaks will be?

Skip ahead to the 5min mark

Other than showing that Ron Paul is just clueless on the issue, the video doesn't answer the thread topic about what will the results be. So without pasting another Ron Paul video, what do YOU think the results of these latest leaks will be?

Yes you are entitled to your opinion but to say RP is clueless shows how little you know of his views & how consistent they are even in this issue of wikileaks.

Not surprisingly my opinion of your topic is the same as his......That hopefully the results will be as positive & obvious as Daniel Ellsberg's release of the "Pentagon Papers.

Anytime any media source can shine light on lies being perpetuated by a government that is supposedly a government by the people for the people I am all for it.

Of course many will now chime in about how some folks will be placed at risk by the release of information...yet these same folks who cry foul will stand up for collateral damages that have resulted in thousands of deaths elsewhere when it suits their purposes.

Less transparency in diplomatic communications is the only result that can be 100% predicted.

...

There's a lot of talk about the damage caused by Wikileaks to the US. I would say that in some respects, some pieces of information released work in the opposite way.

More secrecy in non-transparent diplomatic communication.

And who said that the intention is to cause damage to the USA? a open society is the goal. some might argue wikileaks is done in a true American spirit for the love of freedom.

Or the true Japanese spirit of Tokyo Rose.

The spirit of Axis Sally and Hanoi Hannah.

Skip ahead to the 5min mark

Other than showing that Ron Paul is just clueless on the issue, the video doesn't answer the thread topic about what will the results be. So without pasting another Ron Paul video, what do YOU think the results of these latest leaks will be?

Yes you are entitled to your opinion but to say RP is clueless shows how little you know of his views & how consistent they are even in this issue of wikileaks.

Not surprisingly my opinion of your topic is the same as his......That hopefully the results will be as positive & obvious as Daniel Ellsberg's release of the "Pentagon Papers.

Anytime any media source can shine light on lies being perpetuated by a government that is supposedly a government by the people for the people I am all for it.

Of course many will now chime in about how some folks will be placed at risk by the release of information...yet these same folks who cry foul will stand up for collateral damages that have resulted in thousands of deaths elsewhere when it suits their purposes.

I don't see where the video you posted addresses the topic of this thread. Did RP say what he think the future of international relations will be? Or the future of the freedom of the Internet? In what way will the world change - of at all - due to these leaks?

I've nothing against Ron Paul. But if this were an American forum I would swear up and down that you were paid by his campaign to post his videos on forums around the country.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange poised to be Labor's David Hicks

AUSTRALIA faces potentially the greatest political fallout of any non-American nation from the WikiLeaks controversy.

Not only must the Gillard government contend with the embarrassing contents of the leaked cables, which have already diminished the standing of Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd, but it also faces an acute political dilemma if WikiLeaks' Australian founder Julian Assange is eventually extradited to the US.

Mr Assange's Australian passport means that Canberra cannot be divorced from his long-term fate, both legally and politically.

The federal government is already in the unusual position of having to provide full diplomatic assistance to the arrested Mr Assange at the same time as it has slammed his actions in releasing thousands of classified documents on his website.

Imagine how much more difficult this will become if - as many suspect - Mr Assange ends up in the US facing espionage-related charges.

Lawyers for Mr Assange fear that this is the ultimate motive behind his arrest on a Swedish extradition warrant in relation to alleged sex offences.

If he is extradited to Sweden, they believe that the Americans will request his extradition to the US.

Yet Washington is struggling to identify precisely what case it could bring against Mr Assange.

US Attorney-General Eric Holder is examining whether Mr Assange could be charged with a crime under the 1917 Espionage Act which prohibits the transmission of defence-related documents.

But this 1917 act was never designed for a case such as this and there has been no espionage-related prosecution in US history that remotely resembles the WikiLeaks case.

The absence of a clear-cut legal case against Mr Assange means that any attempt to prosecute him will reek of a political agenda.

More

I don't see where the video you posted addresses the topic of this thread. Did RP say what he think the future of international relations will be? Or the future of the freedom of the Internet? In what way will the world change - of at all - due to these leaks?

I've nothing against Ron Paul. But if this were an American forum I would swear up and down that you were paid by his campaign to post his videos on forums around the country.

This is why you will soon be alone with 2 or 3 others in this forum where you can circle jerk each other.

You ask a question.....

I want to discuss what people here think the results will be with regards to how governments behave

Someone answers it...me in this case saying....

"Anytime any media source can shine light on lies being perpetuated by a government that is supposedly a government by the people for the people I am all for it".....

But it is just not good enough for you if it is not exactly the dogma you would like to hear or steer the topic exactly towards.

So you revert to infantile remarks like the one you just spewed about campaigning.Yes I posted a video that I thought was appropriate to the topic...So what?

I will not make the mistake again of thinking you actually want a discussion....Enjoy your sandbox

The best is yet to come.

WikiLeaks: new diplomatic cables contain UFO details, Julian Assange says

New leaked diplomatic cables set to be published by Wikileaks will contain fresh details on UFOs, according to the website's founder Julian Assange.

The 39 year-old Australian, who is wanted by Interpol over a charge of rape and sexual assault in Sweden, said there were some references to extraterrestrial life in yet-to-be-published confidential files obtained from the American government.

He did not disclose what information was contained in the diplomatic memos obtained by the whistleblowing website. It also remains unclear when they will be published.

Mr Assange said his website, under considerable strain in recent days over its "Cablegate" series of leaks, received emails from “weirdos” claiming to have seen UFOs.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8180528/Wikileaks-new-diplomatic-cables-contain-UFO-details-says-Julian-Assange.html

I don't see where the video you posted addresses the topic of this thread. Did RP say what he think the future of international relations will be? Or the future of the freedom of the Internet? In what way will the world change - of at all - due to these leaks?

I've nothing against Ron Paul. But if this were an American forum I would swear up and down that you were paid by his campaign to post his videos on forums around the country.

This is why you will soon be alone with 2 or 3 others in this forum where you can circle jerk each other.

You ask a question.....

I want to discuss what people here think the results will be with regards to how governments behave

Someone answers it...me in this case saying....

"Anytime any media source can shine light on lies being perpetuated by a government that is supposedly a government by the people for the people I am all for it".....

But it is just not good enough for you if it is not exactly the dogma you would like to hear or steer the topic exactly towards.

So you revert to infantile remarks like the one you just spewed about campaigning.Yes I posted a video that I thought was appropriate to the topic...So what?

I will not make the mistake again of thinking you actually want a discussion....Enjoy your sandbox

flying, cut the insults. OTB has been more civil lately, don't try to change it back.

Someone saying that they are all for an action does not address what changes will happen due to the actions.

I didn't start this thread so people could post whether they thought the leaks were good or bad. There are many threads like that already on TV. I was trying to take the discussion in a different direction. This should be a more civil topic because it isn't about what is right or wrong, but about our opinions about how the future might look due to these leaks. I hope you can understand that and contribute to this particular discussion.

As previously commented - this may well give politicians an excuse to try to place the Internet under tighter censorship.

Regrettably, things like child pornography, seduction of underage kids through chat rooms and so on, have not inspired politicians to do anything.

But now that their opinions of their fellow crooks is out in the open, they are almost all expressing outrage and puffing away that "We must do something".

Kevin Rudd, on the other hand, who has seen insulting opinions of his character published in the media, considers that the whole furore is best ignored, and will soon be forgotten.

So well done to KR, ignore the other politicians but don't expect that they will soon go away.

The OP has been specific in his post about what governments will do and how it will affect the internet. Please stay on topic.

The forum rules still apply.

I had two stunner's (out of three) for wives in the States. One was even in the Miss America contest. They were very expensive.

My last significant other in the States was a stunner. She was 18 and I was 50. She was very expensive but I was used to it.

New car, clothes, house, expenses and vacations nothing I didn't pay for the three previous wives. There was always men sniffing around them too.

Stunner's are available in Thailand on every level. Starfish are available too. I have found more stunner's are starfish than non stunner's.

If one can find a stunner that is not a starfish that is truly a find.

It is all an odds thing. Some guys are lucky some not. Some guys would not know the difference between a starfish or not a starfish.

I like a woman who sometimes also likes another woman. This cuts down my available pool of partners. So I am willing to trade off some things. I also don't like big boned women, wink wink. A little fat is OK but I prefer a smaller pelvic structure.

Then there are the mental and emotional characteristics of a woman. Too many to list.

I think WikiLeaks main goal is ego driven, after that Anarchy and after that harm to the US.

I think he will accomplish the first two goals. No one is going to forget this guy and the INTERNET will be in a state of Anarchy till some government steps in to control it.

Harm to the US? Probably. He might even go down in history.

Freedom, free speech, saving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan? Won't change anything.

He might be responsible for Bill Clinton committing suicide. Hillary is coming home. That would be enough to push me over the edge.

I sent him an email, we are about the same age. Told him he could use my couch.

The current result is damage limitation and shifting the blame from the original leaker to wl

Longer term I suspect more information will be exchanged by word of mouth, no email, no written memos, no telecalls

The UK already very much works that way

Many privy council communications are on "privy council terms" and are never disclosed

For a number of years I worked in overseas missions under contracts through the Department of State. I and most of the staff were privy to many cables. These, of course, were not classified documents. Much of the information was made available to staff because it directly affected their work. They were hardly secret and sometimes contained information about particular people--in this case Congressmen who were pushing a specific agenda that could affect what we did work wise.

Generally, they were factual, neutral, but were like the yellow traffic light; things could change quickly.

The difference and problem is that since the US gov't is the main 'victim' if you can call it that, and there persecutor is a foreign national (unlike the Pentagon Papers), there is an added dimension.

As some people predict, I think there will be tighter regulations concerning the internet. How enforceable they will be remains to be seen. There will be a tightening of diplomatic communication as well. Fewer people will have access to the information and as someone has said there will be more verbal communication and less written.

By and large on the news, I notice less and less about Wikileaks. Much of the information is more embarrassing than directly damaging.

I agree with Scott with "....There will be a tightening of diplomatic communication as well. Fewer people will have access to the information and as someone has said there will be more verbal communication and less written. ...."

Because of that hightened "security", some time in the future, a whistleblower will REALLY blow the whistle on some really damaging information.

Eventually, short of brain washing employees, governments may start to act with more integrity.

Communicating only verbally has been a trait in the UK privy council for rather a long time as I have commented before. Used by Lloyd George too in WW1

The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked and not, as Palin has insisted, hunting down the ultimate messenger.

Perhaps diplomats should learn to be diplomatic

caf

Communicating only verbally has been a trait in the UK privy council for rather a long time as I have commented before. Used by Lloyd George too in WW1

The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked and not, as Palin has insisted, hunting down the ultimate messenger.

Perhaps diplomats should learn to be diplomatic

caf

You are not talking about Wikileaks are you? The cables were stolen not leaked.

Communicating only verbally has been a trait in the UK privy council for rather a long time as I have commented before. Used by Lloyd George too in WW1

The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked and not, as Palin has insisted, hunting down the ultimate messenger.

Perhaps diplomats should learn to be diplomatic

caf

You are not talking about Wikileaks are you? The cables were stolen not leaked.

Incorrect.

No charges have been brought against Wikileaks for theft. A US government employee has been arrested in the States but he also has not been charged with theft because no "theft" took place.

Communicating only verbally has been a trait in the UK privy council for rather a long time as I have commented before. Used by Lloyd George too in WW1

The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked and not, as Palin has insisted, hunting down the ultimate messenger.

Perhaps diplomats should learn to be diplomatic

caf

You are not talking about Wikileaks are you? The cables were stolen not leaked.

Incorrect.

No charges have been brought against Wikileaks for theft. A US government employee has been arrested in the States but he also has not been charged with theft because no "theft" took place.

You said, "Perhaps diplomats should learn to be diplomatic." You said, "The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked." Please provide information that any of the stolen cables published by Wikileaks were supplied by diplomats.

Communicating only verbally has been a trait in the UK privy council for rather a long time as I have commented before. Used by Lloyd George too in WW1

The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked and not, as Palin has insisted, hunting down the ultimate messenger.

Perhaps diplomats should learn to be diplomatic

caf

You are not talking about Wikileaks are you? The cables were stolen not leaked.

Incorrect.

No charges have been brought against Wikileaks for theft. A US government employee has been arrested in the States but he also has not been charged with theft because no "theft" took place.

You said, "Perhaps diplomats should learn to be diplomatic." You said, "The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked." Please provide information that any of the stolen cables published by Wikileaks were supplied by diplomats.

The cables were not stolen. See my second paragraph. Start using google to get wider sources of information.

Reply to Caf.

I didn't ask about stolen cables. You said the diplomats leaked the cables. Please provide some documentation for your statement that the diplomats leaked the cables.

You said, "Perhaps diplomats should learn to be diplomatic." You said, "The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked." Please provide information that diplomats leaked anything.

Leaked or stolen, it doesn't matter; Caf's point is that diplomats should be diplomatic.

WikiLeaks will be remembered as a seed, planted in the world of Internet information and many seeds will follow. It's just a beginning and we can't even comprehend the total effect it will have on the people of so many countries.

Yes, Diplomats well get new instructions how to communicate and Diplomats in many countries will be more careful to one another. The documents/cables showed that the conversation between the Foreign Embassies and the Base at home (so to speak) wasn't chique and proper.

It also showed that many Governments didn't learn from previous experiences and keep on lying and cheating upon their own people; the same people who made it possible, not only because of their votes but also because of their paid taxes, that their leaders could take the seats.

That's a disgrace and that's why WikiLeaks is opening the eyes of hundreds of millions of people.

The question in the OP was "What will be the results of WikiLeaks' Actions Be.." and the largest mistake the Governments in question would make is to implement an even greater shield of secrecy around them, cutting off even more information to the citizens of the countries than they already withheld (from their people).

Nobody on this planet can possibly foresee the holes in the information possibilities and Internet since there will always be opportunities for people who are sick and tired of the lies by their own Governments and.............will leak information -this time in total anonymosity- to channels like WikiLeaks.

It's time our Governments play more open and transparent to their taxpayers without having a total transparency in place. But dishonesty and blunt lies should be punished.

It's time the people on top in those Governments realize that they're there - on top - BECAUSE the people allowed them to be there, and because of WikiLeaks the people of the world got a voice, a voice to protest against illegal, unlawful and dirty tricks their Governments were and still are playing.

It's time -and that time WILL come- that leaders will face the bench in the courtrooms of the world, to pay for their dirty and unlawful actions and wars...wars that killed millions of innocent people.

LaoPo

Leaked or stolen, it doesn't matter; Caf's point is that diplomats should be diplomatic.

I beg to differ. Caf's point was the diplomats were being careless and leaked the documents. That is untrue and he could not back up his false statement. It is black and white Harcort, Caf said, "The emphasis should in my view be on the diplomats who have leaked." How do you get anything else out of that except wrongdoing on the part of diplomats? I realize it is in the interest of untruths about the whole Wikileaks thing to cloud the issue but Caf was trying to paint an untrue picture of US diplomats. Unless he can substantiate his claims he should apologize for posting a falsehood.

If I said something blatantly false and got called on it I would apologize.