1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

WikiLeaks & Government Secrets

Discussion in 'The OT' started by SayWhat?, Nov 28, 2010.

  1. Dec 4, 2010 #21 of 142
    sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,602
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    :rolleyes: What should they say? "Suuure, release it all?" He'll release it. "Don't release that part?" He'll release it. "Keep it all quiet?" He'll release it.
     
  2. Dec 4, 2010 #22 of 142
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    Anyone defending Julian Assange is defending an enemy of the state and someone who may be guilty of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion.
     
  3. Dec 4, 2010 #23 of 142
    Mike Bertelson

    Mike Bertelson 6EQUJ5 WOW! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    14,040
    94
    Jan 24, 2007
    Illegal activities are not to maintained as classified by law. You're trying to equate illegal activity to the day to day operations and it's not really applicable. IMO, there is a big difference between whistle blowing about illegal activity (I have no problem with that BTW) and unlawfully releasing classified information just because you can. It’s just plain wrong and actually can be dangerous.

    The truth is there is not cut and dry, black and white, and it’s clear that there are valid reasons to violate the law and release classified material (i.e. Abu Ghraib or Iran Contra) in the vein of civil disobedience. However, IMHO, this does not fall into that category.

    Mike
     
  4. Dec 4, 2010 #24 of 142
    Mike Bertelson

    Mike Bertelson 6EQUJ5 WOW! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    14,040
    94
    Jan 24, 2007
    Are you saying that Julian Assange asked the US gov't for guidance as to what should be held back? Do you have a link to the source because I’m having trouble finding it on any of news outlets?

    AAMOF, in the interview I read in Time, Julian Assange never said he attempted to get any sort of guidance from the gov’t. He flat out says it was his responsibility to release gov’t activities to the public. The same thing with the Guardian interview, and the CNN interview (which he walked out of). Where did he say he provide the latest released info?

    Mike
     
  5. Dec 4, 2010 #25 of 142
    sigma1914

    sigma1914 Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    14,602
    372
    Sep 5, 2006
    Allen, TX
    All the super right wing sites and blogs are claiming this, apparently.
    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Julian+Assange+contacted+obama
    And this:
    [YOUTUBE]t_0fU7SYqoI[/YOUTUBE]
     
  6. Dec 4, 2010 #26 of 142
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,262
    133
    Jun 6, 2009

    He's not an enemy of any state and the allegations are trumped up to get leverage to get Interpol involved.
     
  7. Dec 5, 2010 #27 of 142
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    ...wow. This person has willfully and knowingly endangered lives and our national security. Yes, he is an enemy of the state. You simply fail to understand the harm that has been done by information you may believe is "mundane." Anyone who does not understand this, has little understanding of issue at hand. Those with clearance, who had initial access, will be prosecuted for the crimes they have committed. Assange, the filthy slime that he is, will be dealt with as well.
     
  8. Dec 5, 2010 #28 of 142
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,262
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
  9. Dec 5, 2010 #29 of 142
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    One problem, though... is that you can't know the information you will uncover by the illegal act is vital information until AFTER you commit the illegal act. That's the circular argument... People defend the violation of law if it leads to good information, but condemn the act if it doesn't.

    The breach of security is always a violation of law... for the people who breach the security... but after that, it's information in the public domain already unless you want to prosecute all the news agencies who report on it after-the-fact and the public who view those reports.

    So... in my mind... it's a slippery slope to go after the reporter of the leaked information, unless you can directly link him to the original theft of the information. IF you can, then prosecute him too... but if you can't, then he is no different than any news agency who might be approached with that same leaked information.

    Does anyone really think that ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, CNN, etc. etc. wouldn't publish leaked documents if someone brought them forth? You know they would, and they have done so in the past... that's the free press at work.
     
  10. Dec 5, 2010 #30 of 142
    SayWhat?

    SayWhat? Know Nothing

    6,262
    133
    Jun 6, 2009
  11. Dec 5, 2010 #31 of 142
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    :rolleyes: It is perfectly appropriate.

     
  12. Dec 5, 2010 #32 of 142
    runner861

    runner861 Icon

    859
    0
    Mar 20, 2010
    What evidence do you have that the allegations are "trumped up"? Have you interviewed the victim? Have you interviewed any of the witnesses? Have you read any of their statements? Just asserting that the allegations are "trumped up" does not make it so.
     
  13. Dec 5, 2010 #33 of 142
    Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    Guys .. We're starting to tread into an area that we need to avoid.
     
  14. Dec 5, 2010 #34 of 142
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,954
    1,025
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    CNN refused re-release access to the documents. It IS possible for the media to show restraint.
     
  15. Dec 6, 2010 #35 of 142
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    WikiLeaks lists sites key to U.S. security

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/12/06/wikileaks/index.html?hpt=T2
     
  16. Dec 6, 2010 #36 of 142
    Cholly

    Cholly Old Guys Rule! DBSTalk Club

    4,934
    54
    Mar 22, 2004
    Indian...
    For those of you unfamiliar with the government's classification of documents: unless things have changed considerably since I was a government employee, it is rather difficult to have a document classified at any level above confidential. Higher security levels are subject to scrutiny before being applied.
    That being said, countless documents are inappropriately being classified as "Secret", not because release would be damaging to the national interest, but because the originator wanted to limit access. Documents such as these might prove embarassing to the originator, and even to the government if released.

    Julian Assange is a self confessed anarchist. His hacking of government communication sites is a criminal act, according to the laws of the United States and other countries. His actions are welcomed by those who would like to see the USA brought down.
    It doesn't matter if you are a conservative, liberal or libertarian: This type of behavior can bring harm to all who love our country and our present liberties.
     
  17. Dec 6, 2010 #37 of 142
    MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,526
    534
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    +1
     
  18. Dec 6, 2010 #38 of 142
    Dave

    Dave Icon

    864
    0
    Jan 28, 2003
    To finish up this course of the discussion. Assange had sex with a young woman. The problem arose when his condon broke. This was the sex crime everyone keeps harping about. At the most in the country it happened in it is a $ 1500 fine. It was reported on FOX news the first time around that he did contact the white house and ask them to look over the documents. They refused to do anything. So I guess that leaves us where we are now. Now to move on to the orginial subject at hand. Do you believe the government has the right to block free speech on the internet? Just because the government doesn't like something or somebody it does not give them the right to shut down your site or block your content. This makes the government just as guily as some countries of oppression and subversion in some peoples eyes. What do you do if say one of our moderators on the boards puts out a story regarding a cable company or Dish or DirectV, that said company does not want out there. Does said company then have the right to block this content and stop us from seeing it? If during the course of Disney's, Fox or whoever didn't like us the customer seeing the info about the discussion they then tried and had this discussion blocked. This is the road we are going down. Some of you scream about secrets and confidential. What is so secret about our country playing lets make a deal with other countries and sending them our tax dollars. The people voted for the politicians to provide a fair and open government not to trick or treat the people. So lets be very careful what slippery slope we let our government go down. Do you really want your government to act like China, Cuba, North Korea etc., etc..
     
  19. Dec 6, 2010 #39 of 142
    Cholly

    Cholly Old Guys Rule! DBSTalk Club

    4,934
    54
    Mar 22, 2004
    Indian...
    Thi is but another of Fox's fairy tales. No such contact existed.

    :backtotop

    True enough. However, it may well be that the government does have the right to shut down sites promoting terrorism or other criminal acts.

    Of course we don't want our government to act like a totalitarian state. However, deal making may of necessity need to remain secret. Don't try to paint things with too broad a brush.
     
  20. Dec 6, 2010 #40 of 142
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,611
    382
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I don't know or like the guy (Assange)... but I find it ironic that our country makes claims that other countries oppress their people and keep secrets... but then if our secrets are leaked, it's a crime above all other!

    We've really crushed China and the old Soviet Union for keeping secrets from their people... and you just know that our country has been responsible for trying to uncover things that others are doing to oppress their people.

    To some extent I'm comparing apples and oranges... but its part of the same old same old self-contradiction where if we do it, it is good, but others do it and it is bad.

    I understand why some things our country would not want to get out in public... but this is the same government who voted in power to wiretap private citizens just in case they might be doing something illegal... so it seems like a good-for-the-goose-good-for-the-gander situation.
     

Share This Page