Actions speak louder than words:
Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
101–110 of 141 posts
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#102I'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…
There are plenty examples of corruption in the cables, but most of them are about other countries, not the US. But still, some examples: - The US spied on the UN, including credit card numbers and frequent flying numbers of its leaders. - The US wrote Spanish new IP law. - The US pressured Spain not investigate the killing of a Spanish journalist in Baghdad by US forces. The leak degrades the image of the US governme…
I think the part where the US tried to pawn off their Guantanamo Bay prisoners in such a way that they can not challenge their YEARS of illegal detention was one of the more damning bits.
That's one set of crimes (and the rendition flights) that is going to take a long long time to wash away.
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#103Quote - "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."
Actually, only one justice said that. Eight other justices said eight other things.
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#104If there is treason, it is with the person leaking the documents -- not the media vehicle which publishes them.
Apart from crazy people like Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich --- who claimed that Assange is an "active enemy of the American people", thus implying that everyone who donated money to Wikileaks has given material support to our enemies --- who is seriously claiming that Assange is a "traitor"? From my perspective, the theme that unites all the "formal" claims against Wikileaks is that they are all ludicrous. What crime…
"Apart from crazy people like..."
Hmm, I didn't realize Newt Gingrich was crazy. I wonder if your list of crazy people includes virtually everyone not in your preferred political party.
"Yet we're to believe that a single private in the military could possibly have judged the impact of what he was handing to Wikileaks"
Err, you take thousands of documents labeled "private" or "secret" and release them to the media and think what? That it is no big deal?
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#105Earlier 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…
It honestly wouldn't shock me that the restarted attacks on North and South Korea weren't because of Wikileaks. Or for that matter, I'd be surprised that the US isn't having setbacks on many diplomatic processes.
Your nick serves you well.
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#1062.07pm: 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...
Some have speculated that recent events have been influenced les by the Us state department than by Assange's mention of an upcoming release concerning a major US bank. Based on an earlier interview, there's widespread consensus that this is probably BofA and the interesting material might relate to to the bank's ongoing loan origination/servicing problems, which are causing many to demand the bank take back the risk it sold to others.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-30/wikileaks-says-it-h... http://www.cnbc.com/id/40548531 http://www.thestreet.com/story/10939901/1/bank-of-america-mo...
Bizarrely, you can use your Visa/MC to join the Ku Klux Klan: http://www.christianconcepts.net/informat.htm
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm referring to enemies of the West. Oh my! > If you live in the US, UK, or Eastern Europe and don't believe we have common enemies, then you are sadly mistaken. I guess I will have to take your word for it. > I've met them. In what capacity did you meet the enemies of the West ? > They don't like us. Did they specify any reasons ?
When I was in Afghanistan in 2008. I could name countless reasons, but you know them already.
So, because of your experience in Afghanistan (you were there as an aid worker?) you have decided that wikileaks is somehow illegal.
There are fanatic idiots everywhere, that does not mean that we can't strive for a more open government, especially not when it has come to light time and time again that our governments and corporations do not just have secrets because we all benefit from them, but for the most part that they have secrets in order to cover up the lies and the corruption.
If it weren't for that wikileaks would not even exist.
I'll take the extra 0.000025% (that's a doubling) chance of dying in a terrorist attack because of that, which is still substantially less than dying of old age in my bed.
Stop being afraid.
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm referring to enemies of the West. Oh my! > If you live in the US, UK, or Eastern Europe and don't believe we have common enemies, then you are sadly mistaken. I guess I will have to take your word for it. > I've met them. In what capacity did you meet the enemies of the West ? > They don't like us. Did they specify any reasons ?
When I was in Afghanistan in 2008. I could name countless reasons, but you know them already.
I was there as a US Army NCO. I'm not afraid, I'm simply pointing out that there are people that despise the West, and it's bad enough that we have to take it from them...we shouldn't have to take it from our own people too.
I didn't say Wikileaks is or should be illegal...I asked where we draw the line. I don't think Wikileaks is a benefit, that's all. I think it has the potential to do good, but the way he's released documents has been more reckless than intentionally beneficial.
Can't we push for an open government without extremes? I'd say that our electoral process still functions well, as does the legislative one.
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apart from crazy people like Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich --- who claimed that Assange is an "active enemy of the American people", thus implying that everyone who donated money to Wikileaks has given material support to our enemies --- who is seriously claiming that Assange is a "traitor"? From my perspective, the theme that unites all the "formal" claims against Wikileaks is that they are all ludicrous. What crime…
"Apart from crazy people like..." Hmm, I didn't realize Newt Gingrich was crazy. I wonder if your list of crazy people includes virtually everyone not in your preferred political party. "Yet we're to believe that a single private in the military could possibly have judged the impact of what he was handing to Wikileaks" Err, you take thousands of documents labeled "private" or "secret" and release them to the media an…
Yes, when you imply that thousands of Americans are guilty of giving material aid to an active enemy of the United States (a federal crime) because they've donated money to someone who posted documents that were handed to him --- when you, in effect, suggest that the New York Times is an accessory to an act of war on the United States ("act of war", by the way, being Newt's own words) --- yeah, I get to call you a crazy person. You are of course free to disagree.
No, suggesting that Julian Assange might not in fact be an active enemy of the United States and that his supporters might not be stepping close to the line of committing treason does not mean that I think Wikileaks is no big deal.
My favorite part about WL --- a subject I would happily support banning from Hacker News --- is how aggressively it tries to co-opt people into one of two factions. On this side, you have people who believe consent-based sexual assault legal frameworks are an tool of US hegemony, and on the other side you have people who believe that patriotism requires supporting the notion of guy with a bunch of leaked documents being assassinated. It's just a catalyst for drama.
The irony to this subthread? I was agreeing with you.
Re: Don't shoot the messenger for telling the truth
#110"For freedom of speech, there's Wikileaks. For everything else, there's Mastercard. And Visa. And, um, Paypal. And Amazon." -- James Ball, on twitter.