Any ideas that people had about free expression on the internet, about the value of a free press, about transparency and accountability, about unbiased educational standards, are all being called into question. Political figures who endorsed the value — and the necessity — of journalists pushing through government censorship are now calling for their government to censor journalists.

But this is what I mean. Five-hundred words in, and I still haven’t listed a day’s worth of facts, or addressed the content of the Wikileaks documents, or done much more than amass a collection of links. The only coherent picture I can make out of it all is exceedingly cynical about governments, media and corporate institutions, and overly idealistic about the people donating to Wikileaks, finding ways to circumvent the restrictions that the dominant power structures are imposing and becoming vocal about their dissatisfaction with a system that prizes largely pointless secrecy over truth and accountability.

In fact, the main reason I’m posting this is that the first time I thought about posting about it, I actually questioned whether doing so was in some way dangerous. And the fact that the atmosphere out there is such that it dissuades people from even entering a discussion — that the rhetoric from the government and politicians is having a legitimate chilling effect on the debate — is reason enough to get involved, even in a minor way.

This reaction by obscured or hidden power structures sees to be have been anticipated by Assange beforehand, described in essays from 2006.

An unpublished report acquired by Le Devoir shows the Canadian Forces are preparing to respond to more disasters, fighting, and general insecurity as a result of climate change and peak oil and other resource shortages.

The 176-report, L'environnement de la sécurité future 2008-2030 was approved by General Staff Headquarters of Defense in January 2009.

From Le Devoir (translated from French):

Conflict for control of resources within fragile states, including guerrillas, are expected. It will probably be necessary to conduct humanitarian missions to rescue people deprived of everything after a disaster, and possibly stabilization missions or reconstruction if civil unrest and instability lead to conflicts between peoples” military strategists write.

By 2030, environmental problems and scarcity of food and water, threaten to destabilize entire regions, they still feel. “It could be that the pressures caused by migration and the influx of refugees or displaced persons cause a resurgence of ethnic tensions, religious or territorial, instability and perhaps the collapse of states. These effects manifest themselves more in coastal areas (where lives 75% of world population), especially among groups of individuals, economic sectors and localities >that are already economically or environmentally sensitive to climate >variations. ”

And a specific reference to peak oil:

Operations which will also increasingly difficult to achieve as the oil will be scarce. The expected decline in fossil fuel resources and the simultaneous rise in oil prices will force the MoD to find alternative energy sources for military equipment. Rising fuel prices will drive the cost prohibitive, not to mention the cost of operations in the country or even abroad, which will strain an already tight budget. It will primarily carry out research and development to find forms of alternative fuels.

More at Le Devoir.