Wikileaks Cables Policy

**Ironduke** · 07 Feb 11,, 21:18

Dear Members,

Please do not post Wikileaks cables on the World Affairs Board.

Even if they have been released into the public domain, they are still classified/sensitive documents, and we do not wish to incur liability for having them being copied onto the World Affairs Board.

The discussion of analysis and commentary by the news and other legitimate media organizations on the Wikileaks cables are permitted (e.g. CNN, NY Times, Washington Post).

The only analysis and commentary that is permitted on the World Affairs Board is from media organizations that observe the Fair Use Provision of United States Copyright Law and are observant of the legal penalties for revealing classified/sensitive materials.

If a foreign media organization has articles, analysis, or commentary, use your judgment and be very cautious about posting excerpts from foreign media organizations onto the World Affairs Board.

U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright Law of the United States

For example, a link to Al-Jazeera's site may be permitted, but if the article linked to has substantial amounts of classified information, and it fails to observe the same legal standards a US media organization would, paste only excerpts or submit only the link and your own original thought/analysis.

Anybody who posts classified material on the World Affairs Board in a reckless and negligent manner is subject to an irreversible permanent ban and the incident may be reported to the proper authorities.

Regards, Ironduke

**Double Edge** · 08 Feb 11,, 22:21

Originally Posted by Ironduke

Even if they have been released into the public domain, they are still classified/sensitive documents, and we do not wish to incur liability for having them being copied onto the World Affairs Board.

The NYtimes has posted cables in the past and if they're doing it then does it not follow that its legal.

The value of these documents — and I believe they have immense value — is not that they expose some deep, unsuspected perfidy in high places or that they upend your whole view of the world. For those who pay close attention to foreign policy, these documents provide texture, nuance and drama. They deepen and correct your understanding of how things unfold; they raise or lower your estimation of world leaders. For those who do not follow these subjects as closely, the stories are an opportunity to learn more. If a project like this makes readers pay attention, think harder, understand more clearly what is being done in their name, then we have performed a public service. - Bill Keller Editor, NYTimes

Source

Has something changed recently ? if so am wondering what that is.

**Stitch** · 10 Feb 11,, 01:18

I'm with Ironduke on this one; just because a "respected" journalistic source posts them, that doesn't automatically make them "legal". Anyone else remember the "Pentagon Papers"? The documents in question were classified for a reason, and I don't think any of us here (well, very few of us, anyway) are qualified to determine what is technically classified/sensitive, and what isn't; until we are told otherwise, these documents should still be considered classified/sensitive.

**Double Edge** · 10 Feb 11,, 08:09

Originally Posted by Stitch

just because a "respected" journalistic source posts them, that doesn't automatically make them "legal". Anyone else remember the "Pentagon Papers"?

But the majority of judges in that case voted not to prosecute. Does not make it legal but doesn't make it illegal either

So what is it then ?

In a way i'm glad this topic came up because it needed to be clarified. This is a private board and if the owner wants it this way then i'm cool with it

**gf0012-aust** · 10 Feb 11,, 08:38

am double posting from my earlier response posted in another thread in WAB:

"The issue is that there is still a responsibility to treat official material as privileged. It is classified for a reason. Its not meant for public release. Its up to Organisations to make a determination on whether they recognise and respect the intended privilege that binds those documents.

Just because some general media outlet elects to publish said material does not make it acceptable or open slather for anyone else to do the same."

**Parihaka** · 10 Feb 11,, 20:43

To refine what Ironduke and gf0012-aust said above

1) No document that is stamped classified/secret is allowed to be uploaded to the WAB server.

2) No links to Wikileaks or any other site hosting Wikileaks material.

3) We allow links to major media outlet articles that discuss the leaks or contain quotes.

**USSWisconsin** · 10 Feb 11,, 20:58

I agree, this board is a voluntary membership situation, conditions of membership include following the rules. So when the rules tell us no, that's it - just because somewhere else the rules are different has no bearing on the rules here. The recourse is to go somewhere else where the rules are different - not fight the WAB - the WAB will win, there is no contest. I think this particular rule is highly responsible and makes me proud of the high standards of behavior here at the WAB.