WikiLeaks a deep abyss for the system estéstica 
The great ally of the militant journalists, who were lynched, murdered or look back again when the night has its darker profiles, is the Internet. Assange Julian explains that the world will not be recognizable - either the past or the present - when "leaks" of the great global corruption are links running freely through the network of networks change many things. In this way, the world will experience the largest peaceful change in political history. The map of corruption or political map, would be open and freely accessible 24 hours a day, 365 days a year?
What in the world if there were no more secrets, if States do not use the "Top Secret" for their reports or conceal information Companies their business and negotiated, or the banks might conceal their money laundering transactions and fraud? While
Internet opens doors through which we can infiltrate to discover any truth, the press "Independent", "big media" world are closely linked to the system, do the opposite, (mis) inform, confuse, deceive , lie and mostly hidden. While one page WikiLeaks reveals what power do not want others to know, newspapers conceal the truth behind notes that say absolutely nothing.
The power of civil society-as-Assange Julian has collapsed, we might even say, that has dead to the power of financial flows that move faster than moral or ethical criteria. We live in a society controlled by the international financial system is beyond the knowledge of the societies that have lost their ability to interact with the real power flow chart.
live in a world we think we know, but in truth we know nothing. Our whole world is dull and dark. Major decisions will not pass through our hands and political systems are only a fiction of sovereign decisions to which we have to choose, follow, accept. Security has been erected in the center of real power, and live protected by the hidden security system is centered in the Together and not even the president of the damned country has real power to oppose its intelligence. The power is in the hands of large transnational corporations. The media is complacent and is not truly independent. The general answer to the owners of large firms, which in turn will command their presidents, they must do to increase their profits.
WikiLeaks is the thorn in the system, an "idea" that highlights the terrorist violence generated by the governments involved in the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the intelligence to make U.S. diplomats at their embassies, showing own and others' misery, or financial activities of corporations and banks looted countries, poorer people, launder money, swindle and bankrupt economies.
The media are owned by companies with interests that mediate. The world according Assange is a function of anarcho-capitalism that uses the security system as a shield to protect their interests. Citizens are becoming less informed and are less likely to object or to know the real world. Assange, mistakes and successes given a chance as never before to know what forever unknown.
Can a simple website with no advertising or public support to such information and generate as many problems? The answer is yes, can and does. Since the creation of WikiLeaks in December 2006 (but began operating in 2007) the site has become a speaker uncomfortable for governments, public authorities and multinational companies. Leak. Filtration. Free. These concepts come together in the name of the organization led by Julian Assange.
With over one million two hundred thousand documents or reports to his credit in four years, WikiLeaks (wikifiltraciones, Castilian) functions as a kind of container leaks found, a project from day one was opened to the public although it has lost sight traditional reporter, who served as liaison and applied his approach between the source and the environment. In order to WikiLeaks, meanwhile, is above all to protect their sources, known as the whistleblowers themselves.
Thus, the web, created by anonymous activists and journalists in the manner of participatory encyclopaedia Wikipedia offers any user the opportunity to host anonymously using an encrypted text, audio or video confidential portal whose authenticity was subsequently charged verified. Are unknown names of 20 full-time volunteers and about 800 to 1000 employees worldwide external (computer technicians, lawyers, journalists) are working on this site that feeds on donations and, as they say its founders, accepts no advertising or public aid. Among the donors, are the British newspaper The Guardian. Beyond
responsibilities incurred WikiLeaks sources, officials and hackers who have obtained and leaked the information, WikiLeaks is, in principle, a media exercising fundamental rights of freedom of expression and freedom of information recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948. Recall that the First Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits legislate against freedom of expression. And we must also mention that the same Swedish law broadly protects the freedom of expression.
WikiLeaks has grown from a site with little impact to a world reference site for the weight of their reporting. In 2008, he received the media award for the year by the Economist magazine. In 2009, the portal and its founder, Julian Assange, won the Amnesty International award in the category of New Media for bringing to light reports of massacres in Kenya.
In October 2009, the website leaked a detailed and long list of thousands of members of the BNP racist training (abbreviation in English of the British National Party) in which they could access the names of its members, and their home addresses and phone numbers. The controversy in the UK jumped by the secrecy surrounding a political party full of accusations of racism.
In the UK, also uncovered the WikiLeaks case of protection for the company Trafigura. The carrier paid a local company in Ivory Coast to dispose of 400 tons of low quality gasoline. The operator simply hired spread it near the city of Abidjan. 85,000 people needed medical attention, paralyzing the fragile health of the country. Eight people died, apparently of exposure to the chemical waste. Trafigura turned to the judge asking for protection against the leaking of a confidential document and WikiLeaks revealed the whole network. Pretty
impact
also had tapes that revealed the inside story of the 11-S, second by second. WikiLeaks made available to the reader in November 2009 half a million of communications that have been issued and received on that day in the Twin Towers and Pentagon headquarters, most of them issued by the FBI or the NYPD. Phone calls, emails and text messages intercepted who were gathered on the web over 12 pages woke up the issue of respect to privacy of thousands of people or the need for the free show drama that ensued in the aftermath of the attacks.
But the most important was the Collateral Murder video broadcasting, the April 5, 2010, where a U.S. Apache helicopter brought down the July 12, 2007 to a dozen people in a Baghdad neighborhood. The video went around the world with over four million hits on YouTube in 72 hours. It showed that among the dead was a Reuters cameraman Namir Noor Eldeen, and driver Saeed Chmagh. The images brought complaints from journalists' organizations and forced the Pentagon to open a new investigation into the attack.
published in July 2010 92 000 documents were called "Diary of the Afghanistan war, in which show massacres of civilians, links between Pakistani intelligence and the Taliban and operations in which U.S. soldiers fell under action by friendly fire.
22 October 2010 released the "Diaries of the war in Iraq," consisted of nearly 400,000 records, which confirmed, among other revelations, torture as a systematic method of Barack Obama army. The Pentagon accused of giving WikiLeaks disclose information that endangered undercover agents and risk to military operations, although the organization noted that no published thousands of documents that could endanger lives. Because of these leaks, Assange replaced bin Laden as the priority in the scale of detention required by the Americans. So WikiLeaks founder became the number one enemy of America.
And now the final chapter (for now) WikiLeaks publications, the November 29, 2010 have been released a trove of secret documents from the State Department cables 251,287 which includes the embassies of the United States for the Department of State and 8,017 directives that the State Department sent its diplomatic posts worldwide. A single report originated in 1966, but the vast majority come from 2004 or later. That was the time when the United States created SIPRNET. The number of cables has grown steadily in recent years, 9,005 reports were sent during the first two months of this year. These documents reveal a practice that violates the sovereignty of allies, not allies of Washington. Never before in history, a superpower lost control of such sensitive information, data that can help paint a picture of the basis on which to build today's foreign policy U.S.. But at the same time, the latest documents leaked by page Assange absolutely nothing do not change the image the world has the United States, only confirm what everyone always suspected, that American diplomacy, at the state or business, makes intelligence for the benefit of the Empire and are hypocrites, murderers and dangerous than ever.
What makes these documents are particularly attractive? Is that many politicians in high places tell the unvarnished truth, confident that their thoughts are not made public. But in the end, and beyond reality superfluous moving international diplomats, documents "Pinched" reveal that the U.S. has a real belt encircles the world. Their embassies have become real autonomous power centers in the host countries.
The international scandal triggered by the leaks to WikiLeaks has become "a danger to national security" of the North country. And while this wretched country licks the wounds of the international newsprint have built-and it will take to heal, "the Barack Obama has launched all the means possible to" exterminate "the portal of Julian Assange, encircling them in court, throwing mass hacking the site and pushing for firms with more weight in the WikiLeaks web expel their servers. The U.S. company Amazon has removed the site from its servers to many computer attacks received since it began to filter diplomatic cables. WikiLeaks immediately responded to the decision to Amazon on Twitter: "If Amazon feels so uncomfortable in the First Amendment, should stop selling books." Starting Wednesday, Interpol confirmed that it had issued what it called Red Alert, an international request search and arrest Assange Julian, accused of rape and sexual harassment in Sweden.
filtration confidential documents U.S. diplomacy on the part of a web site leads to big questions, especially those wondering if the site did well or not publish such information, if the act that tries to open government is more important than the dangerous consequences that could result from this decision for people and countries involved in the documents, cables and reports. Should you prevail right to know the people on national security?
Can you "fight" against WikiLeaks? No, to the extent that this struggle is not against an individual or against a company, but against the very nature of Internet. Is WikiLeaks good or bad? None of these things, just WikiLeaks is.
Recent events point to a long struggle against WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, not realizing that in fact you do not fight against them specifically, but against the Internet's ability to rebuild. Stubbornly insisting on such issues as "an example", the "punishment to deter similar attempts" or "they will think before doing something other, which have shown that never work due to network features and the same human nature. While the Internet is Internet - and do not forget that there is a groundswell of opinion, much more dangerous, he thinks that to avoid this sort of thing we should do is to remove Internet and strip it of its property as a neutral network - there are always people with similar initiatives, safe havens in their heads, protocols that hide or be distributed, and users willing to support them financially.
The problem is wanting to "persecute" WikiLeaks with the mechanisms that allow Internet before pursuing similar initiatives. Before the Internet, if a newspaper published something that was not appropriate, you could hijack the publication and you could even remove the license administratively closed or imprison those responsible. Before the Internet, if someone had access to information and thought that this information for some reason, should be subjected to public scrutiny, his ability to do so was limited: people did not have the means to publish anything, let alone adequate infrastructure to filter information with certain guarantees of personal safety, verification facts or to protect their sources.
Information has always been essentially asymmetrical, and having lived for centuries in these conditions has fueled an entire breed of leaders who believe that "there should never be revealed" that "the end justifies the means" or "everything is true according to what." Fortunately, the same power will slowly and awkwardly, putting up barriers to such issues: laws such as the Freedom of Information Act or the Mandatory Declassification Review, obtained after years of democratic struggle, trying to ensure that, with proper precautions the information will eventually be available to the public. However, it is clearly inadequate controls and did not even exist in all countries: in corrupt regimes, even that minimum transparency is feasible.
Is it good or bad WikiLeaks? Value judgments as so many people on earth. Depending on which side one stands and how those documents revealed affect us will depend on the way we think about Pretender judge is simply a waste of time: if WikiLeaks falls, if Julian Assange is stopped, it matters little and little will affect future developments. WikiLeaks If not, be called otherwise, and whether or not Julian Assange Bradley Manning, will other people who believe another site that helps uncover the truth hidden system. The important thing is that in the Internet age, while the existence of net neutrality still allow Internet Internet (WikiLeaks be unworkable in a world without net neutrality), who govern and those who manage information must do so knowing that it will always have a chance of reaching the public, and including the possibility of having to answer for their acts before justice.
These leaks are difficult to understand a phenomenon in all its magnitude. For now, the maze that leads to a well kept secret escape is as complex as a game of chess. There are always behind the disclosure, a "deep throat", which is usually the nickname of a penitent, one party that is known to be hiding something else, some industry opposition that seeks to weaken the current government or countless other variants. Notwithstanding the compelling that it is getting into the intricacies of the guerrillas of misinformation-information, there is a global political context of decline of the empire beyond its origins, these calls are very interesting WikiLeaks leaks. Primarily because the Australian Julian Assange, the visible face of the withering denunciations, is the path of a militant anti-globalization own one of these years. Assange early became an activist for freedom of information. At 18, as well as becoming a father, lived as a programmer and promoting free software. Designed Strobe, a free port scanner. He also participated in creating deniable Rubberhose Encryption, a program used to encrypt information so ultra sensitive. Began publishing articles in newspapers and magazines and co-wrote the book 25 years underground, an investigation that recounts the actions of the hacker movement, the postal invested in a society that would be portrayed only in its bourgeois tranquility. He never stopped studying. He scored in Physics and Mathematics at the University of Melbourne and came to participate in the Physics Olympiad 2005. In 2006 left the university and all other activities to concentrate solely on his most ambitious project: WikiLeaks. A mathematician, physicist, programmer, hacker, a journalist and a decade ago went on a crusade to reveal the orders of massacres or crimes committed by U.S. troops in the most diverse places on earth. Since there is no-longer be naive, "a determined and committed personality is not enough to explain why cracks emporium of intelligence more sophisticated in the world.
If Assange dared to walk idly by some lonely road, surely "suffer a fatal accident, the kind that we usually see in movies and as well happen in real life. The life of the founder and editor in chief of WikiLeaks has a price and there are many who demand that you run it. Are growing. "Those who give information to WikiLeaks should be executed," demanded Bill O'Reilly, Fox channel columnist "The United States should assassinate should use a drone, "advised Tom Flanagan, an advisor to the Prime Minister of Canada. "You have to chase as Al Qaeda, claimed Sarah Palin, leader of the Tea Bag Party. Obama administration was unmoved: "We will look at what alternatives we have to force them to do the right thing," threatened the Defense Ministry spokesman Geoff Morrel in demanding not to broadcast any files obtained. A member of the organization claimed to have been ambushed in Luxembourg. WikiLeaks two aides were killed in Kenya. Julian Assange, who had been invited to live in Sweden for the Pirate Party (a anarchic group that came to the Parliament of the labor of free information given) was reported in the Nordic country by rape. That charge is canceled their residence permit.
The United States has assembled the most powerful war machine in the history of mankind and a major leg of its strategy is the management information. It is very complex. Above all, it is mounted in the very mentality of Americans. The CIA or the State Department criticism hurts when people or media from having an impact within their ideology. An example: during the invasion of Vietnam, an image taken in 1969 by a cameraman Associated Press toured the world. It was a police chief-of-Saigon Vietnamese killed by a shot in the head of a prisoner. That picture helped the antiwar wave in the United States. However, in the presidential palace in what was South Vietnam, are available to the public, the pictures of U.S. soldiers blondes with smiles of children and heads of Vietnamese peasants in their hands. These photos do not hit. Do not pierce the head of a people of great power. Do not touch the heart. The bother and head right off the reading of "The Armies of the Night" Norman Mailer and the revelations of a U.S. officer on the My Lai massacre recounted by Seymour Hersh.
remains to be seen the reasons which led the major newspapers of the First World to be part of this barrage of revelations in the foreground. It is true that a few months ago, Le Monde, The New York Times, The Guardian and Der Spiegel received WikiLeaks images and documentation on atrocities committed by U.S. troops in Iraq. Now, with this real shock, the same day, plus the country, came out to tell these stories, the same day, same time. In journalism, almost all know, is published in top what publishers want. Not enough that WikiLeaks has good records. This is the most prestigious newspapers in Spain, France, United States the United Kingdom and Germany, no less. But they also are in the hands of private media companies with many interests and caring many interests. Opens a stage that can fade after the wave of scandals. But it can also be one more entry to the debate that is needed to find a way to change the management information of the great powers and, moreover, of large corporations.
So the question arises in this case, why choose media WikiLears addicted to the system and power system to publicize their information? Perhaps to show the world that your information is true, is effective and above all, is a journalist. Can not be taken as lightly what is published on page WikiLears because newspapers "prestigious" of the planet, the review and publish it. On the other hand, Assange can be accurate to the degree of censorship that each version has the information. He knows what he gave and can read any newspaper that was published. What is clear is that the five newspapers acted as true agents of communication from the Department of State. Did the cleanup work instead of services Hillary Clinton. In sum, in the name of freedom of expression and all the beautiful grounds, The New York Times, Der Spiegel, El País, Le Monde and The Guardian published what they alone judged appropriate, erased the names they deem appropriate before making public the whole matter, consulted with representatives of the Department of State.
The Tempest "that caused the leak last WikiLeaks still did not stop to whip the world, the damage caused can not be measured accurately to within several years. The truth is that the intelligence apparatus of the United States must weigh the consequences of trying to know everything, with a course of action that brings the level of inquiries from government to a police state.
Assange says he will not stop. Moreover, warned that the next documents that will be released to U.S. banks directly involved in fraudulent activities. An information charged shot of powder that reaches straight to the heart of capitalism on Wall Street.
At a time when journalism is challenged by the lack of rigor in the use of sources or to research due to its high cost, the lesser degree of analysis and observation of their employees, lack of desire seek the truth of events and show what happens beyond our eyes, the work of Assange and bold group allows us to think pure and simple information as a source of rigor for the near future communication.
