I had heard of the internet killswitch and the RIAA act, but not of the e-wiretap one. I wonder whether it's time we start thinking about a new, distributed and resilient Net 2.0 resistant to government/corporation control. +Rep
And they have been using it. http://torrentfreak.com/us-government-responds-to-domain-seizures-ignores-the-big-question-101129/ Also there is news that these leaks shows US Involvement in Swedish Anti-Piracy Efforts.
I think you're right. Thanks to the whole War On Terror thing, our government can just lock him away forever without ever formally charging him. That'll teach those uppity kids to expose corruption! Oh, wait... And speaking of fear, here we are knee-deep in a recession that is either getting better, getting worse, or staying the same depending upon which metric a given economic expert chooses to use that day. The economy is pretty much in the toilet, we have a high unemployment rate, and we're about to give yet another tax break to the wealthiest people while continuing two wars (what's that saying about insanity?). So what's on the administration's mind? Apparently the US Government is struggling with how to tell us that we're all going to be nuked. I'm sorry, but did I just wake up in 1950? Is this the best they can come up with? Have they officially run out of ideas, and are falling back on the duck-and-cover routine?
I was chatting to an American clan-mate last night and he said that the US could try him for treason, why I pointed out that's not possible he stated how much of a joke his country can be "Look, it's the US Government, if we want to try him for treason we will... and he will go down for treason." Scary enough though that he's right. What America wants America gets.
Interesting, but I think the US would have to bend the law to breaking point to make that one work. And they wouldn't do that, would they? Dude, we've always been at war with Eurasia.
To an extent you an Nexxo have a good point. But on the otherside of that arguement is one driving factor to his confinement. Non-Disclosure Agreement. He signed it. Whistleblowing is one thing, the complete dump of a classified database is another (especially when you don't what is all in that database). He signed the NDA and like everyone else in his office, also underwent an investigation before even obtaining his clearance where he swore by law during his interview that he would not disclose classified information. He IS being made an example of. An example, just like others before him who leaked classified information and recieved the same if not worse punishment. He just wasn't being paid by a 3rd party entity for the information. I see that far different from someone who is trying to put a stop to an unethical process he sees/endures. His intent was not whistleblowing at all (In my opinion). He just wanted to put as much info out there as possible on ANYTHING classified he got his hands on. It just so happens he had access to a massive repository of classified data. Yes you could relate to whistle blowing on the war and gov't, but seriously, who doesn't already know what's going? Who doesn't know that civilians are getting killed, that Tillman was killed due to friendly fire, and who is suprised that a diplomat of any nation says one thing and thinks another? It aint just those bad American diplomats that do it. They just happen to be the ones brought to light by the leaked cables.
Indeed thats what I said, It's just not possible. But look how the US disregarded the UN So easily over Iraq? A shrug of the shoulders and the UN wrote a stern letter... sounds like "The League of Nations" situation all over again if you ask me Nexxi.
Wasn't actually disregarding Wikileaks. I was speaking of Pcf Manning and his "whistleblower" status. And as I said, what exactly was revealed that will bring enlightment to the masses and drive us to this Golden Age of Government that has yet to exist anywhere except in our minds? So far all I have seen is the same things coming full circle. "Tag your it" on the "Who's goverment is considered the worst by who's standards." arguement that will never end.
The point is that by releasing this information, the public is actually presented with hard evidence rather than simple speculation on matters of corruption and other abuses of power. This is an important first step, as you can't simply say "I think you're corrupt" and expect anything to come of it, without any evidence. I am not familiar with all the released materials, but off the top of my head, I would say the video of a helicopter attacking civilians constitutes information which the public should be aware of, as it is done in their name and directly affects the security of their country and their families. Julian Assange has been released on bail.
Which I completely understand yes you are right. The public does have a right to know, and this can and will affect our national security. But I think it won't have a profound affect on our population like has been idealized. It's easy to say the United States needs a transparent government, but fixing our government won't fix China's, Brazil's, Ireland's, Russia's, Korea's, Japan's, or anyone elses. It's great that at least one government has been brought to light, but I can't say any of this will bring our government to task because it's not how the governments of the world operate. Plenty of government leaders are grand standing against the U.S. because of these documents but I hardly believe that they don't have the same, if not more skeletons in their own closet. But, at the moment, it looks good on them to grand stand especially when it's not them under the microscope. Sorry, the discussion in this thread has been great, and everyone has great inputs (Nexxo, Monkey; always good to see your points) and opinions. I think maybe I became a little too personally affected by some comments that make the U.S. as a country out to be the only government in the world with their hands dirty and Government shrouded in secrecy.
I certainly think the UK government is nearly as bad as the US. (I say nearly as its too inept to make a proper job of it. ) I can also differentiate between the actions of the government and the general US populace, who I am sure, are as appalled as anyone else at what goes on behind closed doors. Apart from the fact that the leaks are US centric the reason the US is getting so much flak over this is its very outspoken (self appointed) role as 'the leader of the free world'. Freedom and democracy don't seem to count when you talk out against the government.
You're only as free as we want you to be... thats the idea I get, now that's been exposed, well... Lets see how much stuff kicks off the next few years eh?
The /SARCASM tag obviously got lost. The US has been changing the law to suit well before Gitmo and Iraq. Think the Bhopal lawsuit, for instance. The Wikileaks documents do not concern just the US, even if that is where the US, through its most vehement protestations, puts the world's attention. The documents also reveal corruption in other countries. It is just that those countries are not kicking up as much fuss about it. Mrs Clinton addressed a number of other issues in the speech: She named Tunisia, Uzbekistan, Vietnam and Egypt, as well as China, as countries where the "free flow of information" was threatened She said the US was supporting the development of new tools to enable citizens to circumvent politically motivated censorship Internet technologies were a mixed blessing, used by terror groups to spread hatred and by authoritarian governments to crush dissent She cited Saudi Arabia as an example of countries which blocked access to information about religions, including Islam Countries that employed censorship could make no distinction between political and commercial speech and were therefore harming their own interests I'd suggest you read the whole speech. Then read this one. Then take a deep breath and smell the irony. ORLY? What happened to: "Information freedom supports the peace and security that provides a foundation for global progress"? What happened to: "When we face serious disputes or dangerous incidents, it’s critical that people on both sides of the problem have access to the same set of facts and opinions"? Moreover: She fails to address the crimes and corruption revealed in the leaks, concentrating firmly on the gossip side; She fails to criticise the news media publishing this information (because she nows she can't: First Amendment and all that; She cites possible harm to innocent parties exposed by this information. What happened to: "But these challenges must not become an excuse for governments to systematically violate the rights and privacy of those who use the internet for peaceful political purposes...."? She uses a false analogy of confidentiality, by making a connection with professional confidentiality in law or medicine. She forgets that the people are the "client" or "patient". The people should know this confidential information and decide what happens to it. The problem with the US is that it always has placed itself firmly on the moral high ground as the defender of Democracy™ and the Free World™. Now it it exposed to be as corrupt and disrespectful of human rights as the countries it criticises. Of course that is going to cause outrage. But what really creates outrage is its reaction to Wikileaks, which is in outright contradiction to its preachings. Revealing this information may not bring governments to task, but in January Hillary Clinton was able to frame some most cogent and persuasive arguments for it: "Now, ultimately, this issue isn’t just about information freedom; it is about what kind of world we want and what kind of world we will inhabit. It’s about whether we live on a planet with one internet, one global community, and a common body of knowledge that benefits and unites us all, or a fragmented planet in which access to information and opportunity is dependent on where you live and the whims of censors."
hehe.. but seriously maybe jailtime is what julian needed a reality check that maybe he's just a rapist who doesn't know how to leak and blows everything out of proportion xD
+1, and +rep, Nexxo Edit: Have you been reading the whole thread? Do you fail to understand just why it is important for an organization like Wikileaks to exist, and why the whole event underscores the importance of transparency in government. Or are you still fixated on Julian Assange and the completely unrelated case against him?
yeah I was just kidding man.. just don't like the guy- guess see right through him.. classic con artist
