[governance] Wikileaks - ISOC

[parminder]

Ian Peter wrote:
> >Do we want to say "we support Wikileaks" or do we want to say "we 
> disapprove of the (lack of) process that has been followed in dealing 
> with Wikileaks, and we think that a set of principles should be 
> >democratically developed to guide public and private responses in 
> future similar circumstances"?  Whilst I personally support Wikileaks, 
> I think that the latter approach is more within the IGC's area of 
> >core competence, and would also distinguish our statement better from 
> those of free speech groups et al.
>
> Along the lines of the latter I think – we can say recent events such 
> as those concerning Wikileaks highlight the need for....
>
> While arguing for the development of specific processes, we can also 
> be critical of the sorts of actions that have been taken in the 
> absence of such guidelines and the futility and ineffectiveness of  un 
> co-ordinated approaches taking place in the absence of established 
> legal protocols.
>
I agree. parminder
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
> *Date: *Thu, 9 Dec 2010 16:00:05 +0800
> *To: *<governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [governance] Wikileaks - ISOC
>
> On 09/12/2010, at 2:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote:
>
>     So far we have seen everydns, mastercard, amazon and paypal cave
>     in to political pressure, although there is no legal action
>     against wikileaks, let alone a successful one. On the other hand,
>     ISOC (and presumably PIR) and Facebook of all bedfellows have
>     stood firmly on the side of a free Internet.
>
>
> and Twitter.
>
>     I think an IGC statement on this issue would be useful!
>
>
> Do we want to say "we support Wikileaks" or do we want to say "we 
> disapprove of the (lack of) process that has been followed in dealing 
> with Wikileaks, and we think that a set of principles should be 
> democratically developed to guide public and private responses in 
> future similar circumstances"?  Whilst I personally support Wikileaks, 
> I think that the latter approach is more within the IGC's area of core 
> competence, and would also distinguish our statement better from those 
> of free speech groups et al.
>
> -- 
> *Jeremy Malcolm
> Project Coordinator
> *Consumers International
> Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, 
> Malaysia
> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
> *CI is 50
> *Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer 
> movement in 2010.
> Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect 
> consumer rights around the world.
> _http://www.consumersinternational.org/50__ 
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/50>
> _
> Read our email confidentiality notice 
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765 
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765>> 
> . Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20101209/65237a30/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t