News Stories

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Public knowledge coming from...?

Pretty much any newspaper you read or channel you watch. And not just in Italy tbh, but also in other parts of Europe. That the US had written down he's vain and ineffective isn't anything new to anyone. That's the point I'm trying to make here, and it's a very opinionated report on top of that. It doesn't really say anything.

[ganbaru]

Spanish airport authority says controllers return to work
http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNew...6B26O020101204
It's about time.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

Pretty much any newspaper you read or channel you watch. And not just in Italy tbh, but also in other parts of Europe. That the US had written down he's vain and ineffective isn't anything new to anyone. That's the point I'm trying to make here, and it's a very opinionated report on top of that. It doesn't really say anything.

Then write that, instead of saying "don't read news source, use your own experience".

[Ithekro]

There are always secrets that are intended to remain secret. At least while the people that secret could effect are still alive.

Thus a reason way documents are classified for 75 years in some cases. The likelihood that anyone directly involved with whatever it is will be dead when it comes to light.

[Anh_Minh]

Eh. I can quite understand the government classifying stuff and keeping it secret. Where people lose me is when they start claiming it's part of Assange's job to see to it the secrets stay buried.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Eh. I can quite understand the government classifying stuff and keeping it secret. Where people lose me is when they start claiming it's part of Assange's job to see to it the secrets stay buried.

ask yourself a different question.
if Assange was a professional journalist, would this fly ?
would he just be allowed to publish classified government information and yet keep his job ?
if the answer is no, then he has no right to do this either.
just because he's an Journalistic equivalent of a pirate or a bootlegger, doesn't make what he's doing acceptable.

the fact that its not his job to keep in buried, doesnt make it his right to make it public.

[Jinto]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

ask yourself a different question.
if Assange was a professional journalist, would this fly ?

Ask yourself a different question, if everyone would please totalitarian regimes, could you end totalitarianism?

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

would he just be allowed to publish classified government information and yet keep his job ?

Does this tell something about human ethics in general, or just something about the dubious ethics applied in the system he is working?

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

if the answer is no, then he has no right to do this either.

If the answer is yes, then he has every moral grounds to do so.

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

just because he's an Journalistic equivalent of a pirate or a bootlegger, doesn't make what he's doing acceptable.

Just because you apply your own POV definitions to describe him, doesn't make your statement more convincing.

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

the fact that its not his job to keep in buried, doesnt make it his right to make it public.

By turning the statement around (logical fallacy) it is not weakened. Honestly, your points are not convincing. But I will accept them as your personal oppinion.

[ChainLegacy]

The world will need to learn to live with this new information. Perhaps right now the 'sensitive' information that has been revealed will put some in danger. But this is just a transitional period. In a world of open information, soon governments would be forced not to act in secrecy. I think it's like taking medicine for the global community - it might taste bad at first, but it will ultimately help us get better. Because right now, the world is undoubtedly controlled by groups of people that benefit from hiding their agendas in the shadows, and screwing over the average person. That has to stop.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

ask yourself a different question.
if Assange was a professional journalist, would this fly ?
would he just be allowed to publish classified government information and yet keep his job ?
if the answer is no, then he has no right to do this either.
just because he's an Journalistic equivalent of a pirate or a bootlegger, doesn't make what he's doing acceptable.

the fact that its not his job to keep in buried, doesnt make it his right to make it public.

The answer is yes, because professional journalists have done exactly that, and kept their jobs. Whether you mean the exact same information - because, guess what, professional journalists have gone on to quote wikileaks - or other leaks - and in that case, the first one to get the scoop is generally rewarded.

Protecting state secrets is the government's job. A journalist's is to inform the public. There are words for journalists who forget that. They aren't very nice words.

Where, if anywhere, Assange falls short is that, unlike more classic journalists, he doesn't provide the analysis that goes with the facts. But, hell, plenty of other guys to pick up the slack, and not being a very good journalist isn't a crime.

[Frenchie]

I support Assange fully. Anyone in the US that can't take the wikileaks info stream, speaks of assassination or prosecution, is someone who speaks of the 1st Amendment with admiration and has no qualms in muffling that same right in the same breath.

A double-standard that they create, that they label patriotism. It's disgusting. There are really few things that inspire violence to me, but blatant double-standards like that have that quality.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Frenchie

I support Assange fully. Anyone in the US that can't take the wikileaks info stream, speaks of assassination or prosecution, is someone who speaks of the 1st Amendment with admiration and has no qualms in muffling that same right in the same breath.

A double-standard that they create, that they label patriotism. It's disgusting. There are really few things that inspire violence to me, but blatant double-standards like that have that quality.

You wouldn't know what the 1st Amendment's true purpose was if it was spelled out to you. So please do not act like you understand America's Constitution, when you clearly don't.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

ask yourself a different question.
if Assange was a professional journalist, would this fly ?
would he just be allowed to publish classified government information and yet keep his job ?
if the answer is no, then he has no right to do this either.
just because he's an Journalistic equivalent of a pirate or a bootlegger, doesn't make what he's doing acceptable.

the fact that its not his job to keep in buried, doesnt make it his right to make it public.

the US Supreme Court already answer this question in the 70s with the pentagon papers.

I don't blame Assange for release the files, I blame the guy who leak it to him. Going after Assange is only to make him into some sort of Martyr, Satisfying maybe but in the long run more trouble then it is worth.

[Frenchie]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

You wouldn't know what the 1st Amendment's true purpose was if it was spelled out to you. So please do not act like you understand America's Constitution, when you clearly don't.

Right! Because claiming your superiority in the knowledge of the 1st Amendment really does a lot for you. I believe that the 1st Amendment defends the right of a free press and Assange is a journalist.
You might not like his medium or his methods, but tell me this, when the amendment was passed in the Bill of rights, was there a clause somewhere that allowed you to choose which free press was deemed 'free?' Or perhaps you just make this shit up like WMD's. Do you have any actual evidence (I don't want US data, their reliability has been put into question. I want UN figures) of his meddling escalating violence in some way?

I learn at the feet of the master. Educate me.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Frenchie

Right! Because claiming your superiority in the knowledge of the 1st Amendment really does a lot for you. I believe that the 1st Amendment defends the right of a free press and Assange is a journalist.
You might not like his medium or his methods, but tell me this, when the amendment was passed in the Bill of rights, was there a clause somewhere that allowed you to choose which free press was deemed 'free?' Or do you have any actual evidence of his meddling escalating violence in some way?

I learn at the feet of the master. Educate me.

The First Amendment does not allow complete and utter freedom of the Press. Just as Free Speech does not allow you to yell fire in a theatre, or tarnish someone's record and reputation without merit, you cannot just release information out into the world that causes the deaths of Americans.

Assange isn't an American citizen either, so the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to him anyway.

[Frenchie]

I've seen a lot of talk about the US finding him and prosecuting him, wouldn't the 1st Amendment apply if he was tried there? And free press has two exceptions. Defamation law and copyright law.

The cables don't have copyright because they're secret.
The cables being released with 'no comment' means you can't use defamation law.

What are you gonna do then?

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Frenchie

I've seen a lot of talk about the US finding him and prosecuting him, wouldn't the 1st Amendment apply if he was tried there? And free press has two exceptions. Defamation law and copyright law.

The cables don't have copyright because they're secret.
The cables being released with 'no comment' means you can't use defamation law.

What are you gonna do then?

As I've said before... He cannot be tried for treason. He's not an American citizen. He does not fall under Constitutional law. He's not even on American soil. So none of this applies. NONE of it.

If he is deemed a danger to America or it's citizens, well that's where other methods come in. Of course, as I've also stated, if he isn't too careful, another Nation will take him out due to their own self-interests.

God I hate having to repeat myself in these threads over and over again, it's getting tiring. And this discussion of Wikileaks should be in the other thread Frenchie.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

ask yourself a different question.
if Assange was a professional journalist, would this fly ?
would he just be allowed to publish classified government information and yet keep his job ?
if the answer is no, then he has no right to do this either.
just because he's an Journalistic equivalent of a pirate or a bootlegger, doesn't make what he's doing acceptable.

the fact that its not his job to keep in buried, doesnt make it his right to make it public.

In the extensive writings of the people who founded the USA, they saw the "press" as an essential "4th branch" of government. Its purpose is to hold the other 3 branches accountable - that includes what goes on "in secret". Without a free press to go snooping and revealing, a great deal of harm can be done (see Russia for an example of how corruption, thievery, murder, etc. and the journalists being assassinated for uncovering it).

In US history, the "Pentagon Papers" were reacted to in much the same way as the 'wiki' leaks (e.g. "treason", etc) yet it uncovered some illegal, unethical, and exceptionally bad behavior on the part of government officials. Most of what the corporate media is going agog over is just the embarrassment of people foolishly documenting in writing their thoughts on other people in the world. Its like a huge celebrity tabloid frenzy on who said the most embarrassing thing.

I find THIS story of suppression exceptionally disturbing if it is true: Kiss your potential career goodbye if you mention the wikileak story -- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_792059.html

Talking about WikiLeaks on Facebook or Twitter could endanger your job prospects, a State Department official warned students at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs this week.
An email from SIPA's Office of Career Services went out Tuesday afternoon with a caution from the official, an alumnus of the school. Students who will be applying for jobs in the federal government could jeopardize their prospects by posting links to WikiLeaks online, or even by discussing the leaked documents on social networking sites, the official was quoted as saying.
"[The alumnus] recommends that you DO NOT post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter," the Office of Career Services advised students. "Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government."
While the massive disclosure of once-classified documents detailing some of the nation's most tightly-guarded secrets has inflamed allies and enemies alike, the move by the State Department represents a new front in the administration's campaign against unauthorized leaks.
The State Department has yet to respond to requests for comment.

I don't like linking to HuffPo so looking for a different report

"So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause."

[yezhanquan]

Originally Posted by Vexx

In the extensive writings of the people who founded the USA, they saw the "press" as an essential "4th branch" of government. Its purpose is to hold the other 3 branches accountable - that includes what goes on "in secret". Without a free press to go snooping and revealing, a great deal of harm can be done (see Russia for an example of how corruption, thievery, murder, etc. and the journalists being assassinated for uncovering it).

In US history, the "Pentagon Papers" were reacted to in much the same way as the 'wiki' leaks (e.g. "treason", etc) yet it uncovered some illegal, unethical, and exceptionally bad behavior on the part of government officials. Most of what the corporate media is going agog over is just the embarrassment of people foolishly documenting in writing their thoughts on other people in the world. Its like a huge celebrity tabloid frenzy on who said the most embarrassing thing.

I find THIS story of suppression exceptionally disturbing if it is true: Kiss your potential career goodbye if you mention the wikileak story -- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_792059.html
I don't like linking to HuffPo so looking for a different report

"So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause."

O-san nailed it for the most part. For once, the US is doing a China, aka over-reacting to something which may seem a big deal, but if one think deeper, is of no harm. The overreaction ends up doing more damage.

As I mentioned before, what the leaks did is to merely confirm what many observers have talked about in newspaper opinion pieces. They aren't any leaps of logic or ideology, just elephants in the room.

[flying ^]

i miss myspace

at least you don't have to use your real name like in facebook

down with facebook!

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by flying ^

i miss myspace

at least you don't have to use your real name like in facebook

down with facebook!

You don't even have to register with your real name in the first place.