Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

theaustralian.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 141 posts

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#51

Post by jacquesm »

joshuaheard wrote: post #49

The "truth" has limits on publication: privacy, confidentiality, privilege, security, etc. Just because something is the truth, does not mean it is right to publish it. Assange is not a whistle blower. He is not exposing any misrepresentations or cover-up. He is simply exposing America's secrets in order to hurt America. That is criminal.

Oversimplification does not benefit anybody.

> He is simply exposing America's secrets in order to hurt America. That is criminal.

Assuming he is - which I really think misses the point - by what law is this criminal ?

He's not an American citizen, nor is he in America. Why do you feel this is criminal ?

Do you think it would it be criminal if an American did it ?

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#52

Post by [deleted] »

joshuaheard wrote: post #49

The "truth" has limits on publication: privacy, confidentiality, privilege, security, etc. Just because something is the truth, does not mean it is right to publish it. Assange is not a whistle blower. He is not exposing any misrepresentations or cover-up. He is simply exposing America's secrets in order to hurt America. That is criminal.

[deleted]

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#53

Post by St-Clock »

jacquesm wrote: post #32
ErrantX wrote: post #22

I'm not Assange's biggest fan (r.e. how he controls Wikileaks) but some of the nonsense coming from the US establishment (and elsehwere) is appalling. It probably even vindicates what Wikileaks stands for. This is one of those cases where damage limitation is the sane and sensible response; they've lost those cables, we are going to see them. Deal with it. They need perspective; in the grand scheme of things it is hi…

Which makes me wonder what is in the leaks that we haven't seen yet. After all if highly placed officials are getting their panties in a twist based on what we've seen so far then they are over-reacting to put it mildly. Time will tell. Some of the responses from politicians are beyond the pale and what bugs me more is that nobody even thinks of calling them to account over this, or so much as distancing themselves f…

"Which makes me wonder what is in the leaks that we haven't seen yet". Maybe there is nothing in those cables, but politicians must be very afraid of what could be published next... Although the irak cables were potentially far more damageable, they were not released in cooperation with major newspapers.

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#54

Post by frwdr »

ErrantX wrote: post #22

I'm not Assange's biggest fan (r.e. how he controls Wikileaks) but some of the nonsense coming from the US establishment (and elsehwere) is appalling. It probably even vindicates what Wikileaks stands for. This is one of those cases where damage limitation is the sane and sensible response; they've lost those cables, we are going to see them. Deal with it. They need perspective; in the grand scheme of things it is hi…

I'm not a big fan of his style either, but compared with the integrity of those accusing him I can make allowances. It takes but a few minutes to illustrate my point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbwiXRmzKi0

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#55

Post by makmanalp »

cromulent wrote: post #17
viggity wrote: post #7

If all wikileaks was doing was publishing information about illegal or highly suspect acts by the government it'd be one thing. But that isn't all they're doing, and it is these other releases that has really pissed me off. For instance, what legitimate purpose does it serve to release a list of infrastructure that are critical to national security? ( http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jWvPaI6hI... )…

Here's the Australian infrastructure that is listed as critical to US national security: "Australia: Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Brookvale, Australia Southern Cross undersea cable landing, Sydney, Australia Manganese -- battery grade, natural; battery grade, synthetic; chemical grade; ferro; metallurgical grade Nickel Mines Maybe Faulding Mulgrave Victoria, Australia: Manufacturing facility for Midazolam i…

Brilliant, now these people can double their prices. :)

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#56

Post by lkjhgfvhjk »

jacquesm wrote: post #34
necolas wrote: post #24

2.07pm: More financial problems for WikiLeaks: Visa says it has suspended all payments to WikiLeaks "pending further investigation". Earlier MasterCard said: "MasterCard is taking action to ensure that WikiLeaks can no longer accept MasterCard-branded products." http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2010/dec/07/wikileaks-us...

Visa has since followed suit. : http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jzXb7... The only corporate entity so far that does not have egg all over its face on this one is the French OVH which went to a judge to establish whether or not wikileaks was illegal according to French law, the judge rejected the first request and asked for more info on the second, pending a ruling OVH says they've done what the…

So since Visa and mastercard vet all their customers so carefully they presumably approve of any porn child or otherwise that is bought on their cards.

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#57

Post by jacquesm »

ErrantX wrote: post #43
jacquesm wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which makes me wonder what is in the leaks that we haven't seen yet. After all if highly placed officials are getting their panties in a twist based on what we've seen so far then they are over-reacting to put it mildly. Time will tell. Some of the responses from politicians are beyond the pale and what bugs me more is that nobody even thinks of calling them to account over this, or so much as distancing themselves f…

There is that. On the other hand it could be that they just can't see themselves reacting to it other way, and are just too short sighted. I feel that if anything explosive was to come then Assange would have hinted at it by now - he has done in the past.

I don't know. Before this 'dump' the rest of the press wasn't involved but this time around they are and I wonder if he asked for advice (and took it) on strategy. In a long-drawn-out media ploy if you put your most interesting stuff out first then it will fizzle out, if you draw it out and put more and more interesting material out then attention will not flag. It could be a deliberate ploy.

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#58

Post by semanticist »

nhangen wrote: post #41
mquander wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, look at the comment you originally replied to. It's a "reasonable objection" about Wikileaks. It also has actual content and a point that it makes, as opposed to, say, being a one-line opinion with no support. Now look at your comment.

I replied to a comment in the thread, re-enforcing that commenters opinion. I'm sure people don't like it, and that's fine, but to consistently be downvoted every time I post a negative reaction to Assange is absurd. I wish we, as a community, could elevate ourselves above the infighting reminiscent of an MSNBC or FOXNews.

You don't need to reply to 'reinforce' a comments opinion. Just click the 'up' button.

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#59

Post by crocowhile »

swombat wrote: post #28
resdirector wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's been calling to kidnap his son? I did a quick (1 minute) google search, but couldn't find a source.

According to TFA: * Sarah Palin says I should be "hunted down like Osama bin Laden", a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a "transnational threat" and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister's office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and har…

This doesn't really answer your parent's question, does it?

If you use TFA or RTFA make sure you do it properly, it's rude.

Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth

#60

Post by KC8ZKF »

[deleted] wrote: post #48
ra wrote: post #2

Quote - "In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said "only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government". The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth."

[deleted]

http://supreme.justia.com/us/403/713/case.html

New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)

"Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell. In my view, far from deserving condemnation for their courageous reporting, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other newspapers should be commended for serving the purpose that the Founding Fathers saw so clearly. In revealing the workings of government that led to the Vietnam war, the newspapers nobly did precisely that which the Founders hoped and trusted they would do."

Justice Black

Post reply on HN