Jump to bottom

459 comments
1 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 11:57:41am

And now he has computer and email access.

2 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 11:58:04am

*facepalm* Where's team america when we need them?

//

3 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 11:58:33am

Maybe he should stay in Berkeley...

4 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 11:58:52am

I could stand being under house arrest there.

5 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 11:59:38am

Anarchists aren't opposed to people living in big houses.

6 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:00:23pm

re: #4 SanFranciscoZionist

I could stand being under house arrest there.


Didn't he have any benefactors in the Bahamas or Beliz??

7 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:02:37pm

Crime does pay?

8 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:03:03pm

re: #5 Barrett Brown

Anarchists aren't opposed to people living in big houses.

I thought most anarchists were opposed to capitalism. But maybe it's OK if you inherit the money.

9 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:03:45pm
"a handsome modern erection"


Sounds nice.

10 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:03:56pm

re: #8 Charles

I thought most anarchists were opposed to capitalism. But maybe it's OK if you inherit the money.

Or, maybe they'll make an exception for him if there is a Starbucks nearby that can be trashed.
/

11 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:06:15pm

re: #4 SanFranciscoZionist

I could stand being under house arrest there.

It won't be too difficult for him.

I hear he'll be provided with housekeeping and catering services.

All that stress, you know?

12 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:07:19pm

re: #5 Barrett Brown

Anarchists aren't opposed to people living in big houses.

Unless the people who live in them aren't anarchists.

13 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:07:25pm

All those walls, hedgerows and gates should keep the peasants out. Lot's of privacy.

14 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:08:03pm

re: #9 Killgore Trout

Sounds nice.


....LOL...Come on..that HAD to be funny even in 1879 England...LOL!

15 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:08:11pm

re: #13 Killgore Trout

All those walls, hedgerows and gates should keep the peasants out. Lot's of privacy.

High walls are great for keeping the anarchists out, except the ones you choose as pets.

16 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:09:08pm

re: #8 Charles

I thought most anarchists were opposed to capitalism. But maybe it's OK if you inherit the money.

Anarcho-capitalism.

Anarchism is a wide ranging collection of highly varied and disparate philosophies, which on the opposite end includes Anarcho-syndicalism.

17 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:09:32pm

re: #1 researchok

And now he has computer and email access.

He was not arrested for using a computer.

18 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:09:40pm

re: #8 Charles

No, there's a great variance among the different sorts of anarchism. Even anarcho-syndicalists don't tend to oppose people living in big houses, and anarcho-capitalists, for instance, don't oppose capitalism at all as long as it's actually free capitalism as opposed to a series of mercantile arrangements drawing on the government's supposed force monopoly. Assange's anarchism is very similar to the sort I and a lot of other technophiles espouse, which itself concerns governments, not private individuals choosing to acquire a large home through trade. Communist anarchism of the Berkman /Goldman sort is what you're thinking of.

19 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:09:53pm

re: #16 goddamnedfrank

Anarcho-capitalism.

Anarchism is a wide ranging collection of highly varied and disparate philosophies, which on the opposite end includes Anarcho-syndicalism.

That's why I said "most" anarchists. I'm well aware of the anarcho-capitalist aberration.

20 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:09:59pm

There are plenty of rich anarchists, and plenty of poor authoritarians. (Anarchism isn't really a singular thing. There's too many varieties for the term "anarchist", by itself, to have any meaning.)

21 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:11:10pm

Just for the heck of it, I Googled "Anarchism and capitalism," and look what popped up: Anarchism and capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Some anarchists advocate free-market, laissez-faire capitalism,[1] while most anarchists oppose it.

Just sayin'.

22 Vicious Michigan Union Thug  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:12:08pm

I recall a trust-fund anarchist, who pointed to all the mansions in his parent's neighborhood: "After the revolution, all these homes will become 'People's Palaces,'" except for his own, "because I live there."

23 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:12:50pm

re: #19 Charles

Good, I thought perhaps you were trying to claim that there is something hypocritical about Assange staying in a large house as someone's guest, but since you acknowledge that anarchism varies such that he doesn't necessarily oppose private property, then we're not really arguing.

24 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:13:29pm

re: #21 Charles

Just for the heck of it, I Googled "Anarchism and capitalism," and look what popped up: Anarchism and capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Just sayin'.

It's all over the map.


There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive.[5] Strains of anarchism have been divided into the categories of social and individualist anarchism or similar dual classifications.[6][7] Anarchism is often considered to be a radical left-wing ideology,[8][9] and much of anarchist economics and anarchist legal philosophy reflect anti-statist interpretations of communism, collectivism, syndicalism or participatory economics. However, anarchism has always included an individualist strain [10] supporting a market economy and private property, or morally unrestrained egoism.[11][12] Some individualist anarchists are also socialists.[13][14]
25 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:15:15pm

re: #8 Charles

I thought most anarchists were opposed to capitalism. But maybe it's OK if you inherit the money.

Of course it is! Perception is as fungible as decorum to an anarchist.

26 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:15:31pm

re: #22 Alouette

I recall a trust-fund anarchist, who pointed to all the mansions in his parent's neighborhood: "After the revolution, all these homes will become 'People's Palaces,'" except for his own, "because I live there."

I knew some kids in college who went to some anarchist convention. When they got back they complained it was disorganized and a waste of time. Seriously.

27 Buck  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:18:44pm

I go to the meetings. I have to say that if you show up late they get really pissed off.


/

28 mojo9  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:20:02pm

seems the addage, "it's not what you know, it's who you know" fits here!

29 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:20:57pm

re: #28 mojo9

seems the addage, "it's not what you know, it's who you know" fits here!

That one fits absolutely everywhere.

30 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:21:58pm
31 Big Steve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:22:51pm

Lets see....Michael Moore bail paying......staying in a British Peerage Mansion....makes one ALMOST forget that the charges are rape.

32 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:22:57pm

More significant, I think, is that his residing there means he's being seen as a journalist.

33 Vicious Michigan Union Thug  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:23:16pm

re: #30 Charles

Anarchy expressed in wardrobe.

A real anarchist guy would wear the white dress.

34 mojo9  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:24:15pm

re: #30 Charles

looks like something from a Monty Python Twit sketch.

35 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:24:52pm

Is it ironic that Anarchist's groups have leaders?

36 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:25:03pm

re: #31 Big Steve

Yeah, and you're not supposed to forgot those charges; a lot of people worked very hard on them.

37 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:25:08pm

re: #31 Big Steve

What the charges are really doesn't matter, given that there's no reason to think he's guilty or innocent.

He's rather tone-deaf, if he thinks staying here isn't going to interfere with people's sympathy for him.

But he's out on bail; he can stay wherever he wants.

38 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:25:08pm

Antarctic Melting as Deep Ocean Heat Rises

Global warming is sneaky. For more than a century it has been hiding large amounts of excess heat in the world's deep seas. Now that heat is coming to the surface again in one of the worst possible places: Antarctica.

New analyses of the heat content of the waters off Western Antarctic Peninsula are now showing a clear and exponential increase in warming waters undermining the sea ice, raising air temperatures, melting glaciers and wiping out entire penguin colonies.

"In the area I work there is the highest increase in temperatures of anywhere on Earth," said physical oceanographer Doug Martinson of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. Martinson has been collecting ocean water heat content data for more than 18 years at Palmer Island, on the western side of the Antarctic Peninsula.

"Eighty-seven percent of the alpine glaciers are in retreat," said Martinson of the Western Antarctic Peninsula. "Some of the Adele penguin colonies have already gone extinct."

39 Big Steve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:25:09pm

re: #30 Charles

Anarchy expressed in wardrobe.


Its The Great Gatsby Anarchy

40 jaunte  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:25:12pm

re: #20 Fozzie Bear

There are plenty of rich anarchists, and plenty of poor authoritarians. (Anarchism isn't really a singular thing. There's too many varieties for the term "anarchist", by itself, to have any meaning.)

It's not really a very useful word.

41 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:25:37pm

re: #33 Alouette

I think that's just a random wedding taking place there.

42 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:26:06pm

re: #38 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

This is a good time to point out that Wikileaks published the edited CRU emails that were used as propaganda to smear scientists.

43 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:26:13pm

re: #41 Obdicut

I think that's just a random wedding taking place there.

Yes, he wore the dressy kilt.

44 Big Steve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:26:49pm

re: #42 Obdicut

This is a good time to point out that Wikileaks published the edited CRU emails that were used as propaganda to smear scientists.

Is that true......reference please.

45 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:26:52pm

So typical of these people. They fit so neatly into the elitist stereotypes. My father was right when he said "most of these people people are momma's babies."

Here's hoping that MI5 has the place bugged.

46 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:28:51pm

Why does it bug so many people when I say I'm not interested in an office potluck? You'ld think I just punched a kitten or something.

47 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:28:53pm

When something offends you, it isn't necessarily useful or good to appeal to its polar opposite. If you hold the position that anarchism is bad, then does it necessarily follow that authoritarianism is good?

48 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:29:04pm

re: #39 Big Steve

Its The Great Gatsby Anarchy

New idea for a show! It's called Queer Eye for the Anarchy Guy. "We can at least get them out of those black hoodies and get them into something more sophisticated, dashing and daring which reflects their nature."

49 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:29:19pm

re: #44 Big Steve

Yes, it's true.

[Link: www.anorak.co.uk...]

There's a video of him there defending it in highly fatuous terms, saying scientists should fight the lies with truth, and saying that they just publish stuff.

If they simply publish material leaked to them with no regard for whether its disinformation, they are abso-fucking-lutely useless.

50 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:29:25pm

Annnd, Michael Moore is back on the world stage.

51 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:29:28pm

re: #42 Obdicut

This is a good time to point out that Wikileaks published the edited CRU emails that were used as propaganda to smear scientists.

Absolutely correct. And a perfect example of how this blunt instrument can be abused -- easily -- by people who want to spread pernicious propaganda. It doesn't help that the main guy is one of the propagandists, either.

52 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:29:43pm

re: #26 Killgore Trout

I knew some kids in college who went to some anarchist convention. When they got back they complained it was disorganized and a waste of time. Seriously.

While we are dispelling anarchist myths, it should also be mentioned that anarchism isn't anti-order or anti-organization. Its precisely the opposite; the Circle-A anarchism stands for "Anarchism is Order" and the given method of decision making within anarchist groups, consensus, requires a great respect for organization. It is precisely the lack of organized solidarity that is perceived to be required for greater egalitarianism from the anarchist perspective.

53 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:29:43pm

re: #26 Killgore Trout

I knew some kids in college who went to some anarchist convention. When they got back they complained it was disorganized and a waste of time. Seriously.

While we are dispelling anarchist myths, it should also be mentioned that anarchism isn't anti-order or anti-organization. Its precisely the opposite; the Circle-A anarchism stands for "Anarchism is Order" and the given method of decision making within anarchist groups, consensus, requires a great respect for organization. It is precisely the lack of organized solidarity that is perceived to be required for greater egalitarianism from the anarchist perspective.

54 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:30:15pm

re: #47 Fozzie Bear

When something offends you, it isn't necessarily useful or good to appeal to its polar opposite. If you hold the position that anarchism is bad, then does it necessarily follow that authoritarianism is good?

Polar opposites can rarely be defined as good and bad.

It's usually the middle that makes the most sense.

55 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:30:22pm

Is there an echo in here?

56 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:30:23pm

re: #46 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

It probably has something to do with the way you phrased it. Next time, don't say, "Why would I want to eat with you assholes?"

57 Vicious Michigan Union Thug  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:31:22pm

re: #53 Alexzander

While we are dispelling anarchist myths, it should also be mentioned that anarchism isn't anti-order or anti-organization. Its precisely the opposite; the Circle-A anarchism stands for "Anarchism is Order" and the given method of decision making within anarchist groups, consensus, requires a great respect for organization. It is precisely the lack of organized solidarity that is perceived to be required for greater egalitarianism from the anarchist perspective.

A disciple of Chomsky, are you?

58 SpaceJesus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:31:46pm

re: #53 Alexzander


haha oh ok

59 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:32:03pm

re: #55 Charles

The Anarchist always posts twice.

60 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:32:09pm

And when I label Assange a "propagandist," I'm doing it on the basis of the edited video he released, titled "Collateral Murder," that actually showed nothing of the sort. His bias absolutely reeked in that one, and to be honest it pissed me off. He libeled American soldiers, and even I bought it for a short time.

61 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:32:09pm

re: #52 Alexzander

Some forms of anarchism are about consensus. Not all.

62 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:32:33pm

re: #55 Charles

Is there an echo in here?

Two TCP/IP packets diverged in a Cisco router
and since they could in fact travel both...

(you get the idea)

63 lawhawk  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:32:42pm

re: #30 Charles

64 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:33:04pm

re: #57 Alouette

Why would he necessarily be a disciple of Chomsky? Chomsky is indeed an anarcho-syndicalist and a prominent fellow but of course anarchism merely describes a range of somewhat-related anti-government tendencies.

65 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:33:39pm

re: #56 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

It probably has something to do with the way you phrased it. Next time, don't say, "Why would I want to eat with you assholes?"

More of a "Hey, there is that potluck going on, the one we sent an email about."

"Thats today?"

"Yeah"

"OK"

5 minutes later.

"Hey, the potluck is today."

"Yup."

"..."

66 Big Steve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:33:42pm

re: #48 Gus 802

New idea for a show! It's called Queer Eye for the Anarchy Guy. "We can at least get them out of those black hoodies and get them into something more sophisticated, dashing and daring which reflects their nature."


LOL....or Extreme MakeOver Anarchy Version......show can turn a Unabomber kind of guy in Assange.

67 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:34:42pm

Pfft. My cousin was a bit of big shot shot in the Anarcho-syndicalism movement. He graduated from CMU and was a robotics expert and later went on to computers. Now he's a consultant and has worked for large clients like Welles Fargo Bank. He owns a big house on Potrero Hill in San Francisco and has a husband and wife. Don't care since he's about as lukewarm like the rest of my family.

68 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:34:58pm

I apologize for the double-post, I'm on an awful internet connection (or at least, at the limit of the wifi's range).

69 jaunte  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:35:08pm

Commensalism:
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

70 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:35:22pm

I hope that Assange's character flaws won't overshadow the importance role entities like Wikileaks play in uncover illegal acts committed by world governments.

71 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:35:50pm

re: #70 JeffM70

I hope that Assange's character flaws won't overshadow the importance role entities like Wikileaks play in uncover illegal acts committed by world governments.

It already has.

72 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:36:03pm

re: #60 Charles

And when I label Assange a "propagandist," I'm doing it on the basis of the edited video he released, titled "Collateral Murder," that actually showed nothing of the sort. His bias absolutely reeked in that one, and to be honest it pissed me off. He libeled American soldiers, and even I bought it for a short time.

His facade about "truth" and free information collapsed pretty quickly. He and his supporters don't care about truth, they are simply trying to destroy the system.

73 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:36:17pm

After Assange pulled that shit with "Collateral Murder," I for one do not trust his motivations or his scruples, and I can't see him as any kind of hero.

And I'm speaking as someone who's partially sympathetic to the concept of Wikileaks - but not sympathetic at all to their current tactics.

74 Vicious Michigan Union Thug  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:36:59pm

re: #67 Gus 802

Pfft. My cousin was a bit of big shot shot in the Anarcho-syndicalism movement. He graduated from CMU and was a robotics expert and later went on to computers. Now he's a consultant and has worked for large clients like Welles Fargo Bank. He owns a big house on Potrero Hill in San Francisco and has a husband and wife. Don't care since he's about as lukewarm like the rest of my family.

Wait, what? Bisexuals get to marry one of each?

75 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:37:16pm

re: #66 Big Steve

LOL...or Extreme MakeOver Anarchy Version...show can turn a Unabomber kind of guy in Assange.

We can start a line of anarchist appliances or maybe even anarchist architecture. The appliances can work at random. Toss in you clothes into an anarchist washing machine and they come out all dirty. That way you can be at one with the disenfranchised 3rd world peoples.

76 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:37:33pm

re: #74 Alouette

He clearly said that guy lived near San Francisco.

77 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:37:38pm

re: #57 Alouette

A disciple of Chomsky, are you?

Not really no, but I've read a couple of his books. I just try to keep an open mind.

78 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:37:41pm

re: #74 Alouette

Wait, what? Bisexuals get to marry one of each?

Yep. I think he has two kids now.

79 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:37:52pm

No. They're married and he joins in.
///

80 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:38:23pm

re: #71 Fozzie Bear

It already has.

That's what I'm afraid of as illustrated by the initial reaction of our media. At least now some of the media are beginning to see the larger picture.

81 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:38:51pm

re: #73 Charles

After Assange pulled that shit with "Collateral Murder," I for one do not trust his motivations or his scruples, and I can't see him as any kind of hero.

And I'm speaking as someone who's partially sympathetic to the concept of Wikileaks - but not sympathetic at all to their current tactics.

There are a lot of people here, myself included, who defend wikileaks, or rather, the need for something like it, and get slammed as supporting Assange, which isn't really the same thing.

82 Big Steve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:40:19pm

re: #70 JeffM70

I hope that Assange's character flaws won't overshadow the importance role entities like Wikileaks play in uncover illegal acts committed by world governments.

Don't buy it. The problem is that the business model of sites like Wikileaks is inherently flawed. Without the resources to actually check up on what you are getting, the site cannot ever determine whether they getting truly herioc whistle blowing versus rants of those who legitimately should get fired. It is the moral equivalent of hiding a camera in a public toliet. One hopes to occasionally get a supermodel in there undressing but most of the time you just catch a schlub like me.

83 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:42:55pm

re: #82 Big Steve

What you say is true of the internet in general.

84 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:45:40pm

re: #83 Fozzie Bear

How so?

Wikileaks represents a near-total lack of editorial discretion, except, apparently, when it comes to editing videos to make American troops look worse.

There are places on the internet that do, in fact, have editors, and don't edit videos to create a false impression.

85 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:47:00pm

Sweden appealed his release though and they're saying he may be released within the next 48 hours depending on the outcome of that appeal. That being said I do think he should be treated fairly on these charges and don't support any kind of "drumhead" conviction.

86 darthstar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:47:43pm

Meet my new wallpaper. Leaving it as an external link instead of a popup because the only way to do it justice is to go full screen.

It's a beautiful day in space.

87 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:47:54pm

I'm sort of confused by what appear to be conflicting reports about Assange's release. Is he actually out of jail now, or are we still waiting to hear about an appeal? It looks like there was a Swedish appeal and he will spend at least another night in jail before that is sorted out. I wonder what his cell is like.

88 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:48:06pm

re: #82 Big Steve

Don't buy it. The problem is that the business model of sites like Wikileaks is inherently flawed. Without the resources to actually check up on what you are getting, the site cannot ever determine whether they getting truly herioc whistle blowing versus rants of those who legitimately should get fired. It is the moral equivalent of hiding a camera in a public toliet. One hopes to occasionally get a supermodel in there undressing but most of the time you just catch a schlub like me.

If the media would do their job better, there would be no need for Wikileaks. I do think that some judgments can be made as to whether releasing secret information has any purpose beyond trying to embarrass the U.S. Also, remember that Wikileaks passes their information onto to media outlets, who make the decision to go public with them or not.

89 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:48:06pm

Bearing in mind that this Image: 500x_polanskichalet_9.30.jpg is where Roman Polanski spent his house arrest, it simply should serve to remind all those "hacktivists" sitting in their mothers' basements that their heroes are not cut of egalitarian cloth.

90 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:48:40pm

Sorry Gus 802, looks like you answered my question right before I posted it.

91 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:48:47pm

I wonder if that home has any Masonry heaters. [Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

92 wrenchwench  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:49:31pm

re: #86 darthstar

It's a beautiful day in space.

Heck of a commute, though. But traffic isn't bad.

93 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:49:41pm

re: #85 Gus 802

I'm glad to hear you say that.

94 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:50:44pm

re: #88 JeffM70

If the media would do their job better, there would be no need for Wikileaks. I do think that some judgments can be made as to whether releasing secret information has any purpose beyond trying to embarrass the U.S. Also, remember that Wikileaks passes their information onto to media outlets, who make the decision to go public with them or not.

You are presuming that the general public has a need and a right to see every piece of government correspondence and communication. That is not so. There is sufficient legal precedent (which I can't be bothered to cite, sorry) to establish that when applied for the common good and in pursuit of legal policy, government secrecy is both desirable and legal.

95 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:51:19pm

re: #89 imp_62

Bearing in mind that this Image: 500x_polanskichalet_9.30.jpg is where Roman Polanski spent his house arrest, it simply should serve to remind all those "hacktivists" sitting in their mothers' basements that their heroes are not cut of egalitarian cloth.

Wait... I thought egalitarianism was about treating everyone equally, is there some reason you can't be rich and an egalitarian?

96 darthstar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:52:03pm

re: #92 wrenchwench

Heck of a commute, though. But traffic isn't bad.

Yes but you can get a tan in 0.47 seconds.

97 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:52:10pm

re: #95 jamesfirecat

Wait... I thought egalitarianism was about treating everyone equally, is there some reason you can't be rich and an egalitarian?

As long as others are treated equally and I get to stay in a mansion during my bail hearing, I have no problem with egalitarianism.
/

98 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:53:02pm

re: #94 imp_62

I most certainly am not presuming that because there are some things that need to be kept secret from the public for security reasons.

99 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:53:15pm

re: #97 imp_62

As long as others are treated equally and I get to stay in a mansion during my bail hearing, I have no problem with egalitarianism.
/

Well does he own the mansion?

100 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:54:08pm

re: #88 JeffM70

That the media is in a terrible state does not, logically, lead to the conclusion that we need Wikileaks.

I think we need people who don't publish, for example, the edited, hacked emails of climate scientists that are being pushed in an effort to discredit them and derail an international meeting on climate change.

What do you feel about their publication of the CRU emails?

101 prairiefire  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:54:56pm

The first Wikileaks game has now been played 1 million times online:[Link: www.clubfemina.com...]

102 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:57:09pm

OT: By the way this is bound to help him in 2012....

Mitt Romney wants to priavitize unemployment insurance...


"The system is also not designed for a flexible economy like ours in which some employees move from job to job for short periods, and are therefore ineligible for unemployment compensation when they are faced with a protracted spell without work.

To remedy such problems we need a very different model, perhaps establishing individual unemployment savings accounts over which employees would exercise direct control when they lose their jobs, "

[Link: www.usatoday.com...]

103 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:57:18pm

re: #99 jamesfirecat

Well does he own the mansion?

No. Would the owner make the mansion available for Joe Shmo accused sex offender? Would Mike Moore post bail for some poor dope who was caught on the lam from the police? I hate these causes célèbres which get picked up by a bunch of self-righteous pricks and lavished with benefits ordinary people can only dream of. It is undemocratic to the core, and the fact that the Assange cause has been nade one of democratic values makes mem want to puke.

104 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:58:21pm

re: #102 jamesfirecat

How the hell would that differ from just a savings account? Jeez.

105 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:58:39pm

re: #68 Alexzander

I apologize for the double-post, I'm on an awful internet connection (or at least, at the limit of the wifi's range).

A good anarchist would have the BEST internet connection, even if he/she had to steal it.

106 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 12:59:20pm

re: #104 Obdicut

How the hell would that differ from just a savings account? Jeez.

Well, you see, they call it something different...

107 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:00:10pm

re: #100 Obdicut

That the media is in a terrible state does not, logically, lead to the conclusion that we need Wikileaks.

I think we need people who don't publish, for example, the edited, hacked emails of climate scientists that are being pushed in an effort to discredit them and derail an international meeting on climate change.

What do you feel about their publication of the CRU emails?

I notice that Wikileaks supporters don't seem to want to discuss this very much.

108 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:00:33pm

re: #104 Obdicut

How the hell would that differ from just a savings account? Jeez.

That's what I was thinking. An unemployment savings account would be a savings account regardless of the name. It would theoretically have to be a private unemployment insurance venture. What investor what want to support that is beyond me. Sounds like a big money loser and one that would be ripe with fraud.

109 APox  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:00:55pm

Has Glenn beck lost his fucking mind? [Link: mediamatters.org...]
I only ask this because this sounds more retarded than normal.

110 jamesfirecat  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:01:45pm

re: #108 Gus 802

That's what I was thinking. An unemployment savings account would be a savings account regardless of the name. It would theoretically have to be a private unemployment insurance venture. What investor what want to support that is beyond me. Sounds like a big money loser and one that would be ripe with fraud.

re: #108 Gus 802

That's what I was thinking. An unemployment savings account would be a savings account regardless of the name. It would theoretically have to be a private unemployment insurance venture. What investor what want to support that is beyond me. Sounds like a big money loser and one that would be ripe with fraud.

Not to mention it'd open up the door for people to make their own lives worse by blowing all of it too quickly if they don't realize just how far they need to make it stretch....

111 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:01:52pm

re: #100 Obdicut

That the media is in a terrible state does not, logically, lead to the conclusion that we need Wikileaks.

I think we need people who don't publish, for example, the edited, hacked emails of climate scientists that are being pushed in an effort to discredit them and derail an international meeting on climate change.

What do you feel about their publication of the CRU emails?

I agree entirely and did not intend to imply otherwise. Private e-mails or secret cables should not be leaked if the only reason for leaking them is to discredit someone or to spread propaganda. Nor should they be leaked simply for the sake of leaking them. There has to be real evidence of wrong-doing.

112 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:01:55pm

re: #107 Charles

And, almost ironically, the media isn't nailing him on it either.

113 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:02:37pm

re: #107 Charles

I notice that Wikileaks supporters don't seem to want to discuss this very much.

I don't think you'll find anyone here who supports wikileaks in anything other than a general "we need something like this" sense, rather than a "oh wow wikileaks is exactly what I would hope for" sense.

114 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:03:00pm

re: #109 APox

Has Glenn beck lost his fucking mind? [Link: mediamatters.org...]
I only ask this because this sounds more retarded than normal.

You're forgetting the key factor here.

Beck is a fucking moron.

115 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:03:21pm

re: #112 Obdicut

And, almost ironically, the media isn't nailing him on it either.

I think the only common ground in this whole discussion is...the media doesn't have a clue.

116 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:03:37pm

re: #107 Charles

We've discussed this at length over at The League. It's difficult to go into much depth on anything in this particular environment.

117 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:04:15pm

re: #113 Fozzie Bear

But what Wikileaks is 'like' is an organization that published the CRU emails.

What change would have to occur to Wikileaks so that they wouldn't publish the CRU emails?

118 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:04:53pm

re: #114 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

You're forgetting the key factor here.

Beck is a fucking moron.

The sky is blue.

119 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:04:57pm

re: #114 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

You're forgetting the key factor here.

Beck is a fucking moron.

IF he found a video with an Administration official discussion the new Chevy Volt, and the topic were engine Revolutions per Minute, would Beck think it was sort of a revolutionary speed dating video?

120 Sionainn  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:05:18pm

re: #109 APox

Has Glenn beck lost his fucking mind? [Link: mediamatters.org...]
I only ask this because this sounds more retarded than normal.

I had the misfortune of hearing him spout this nonsense today while I was in the car. He's ready for a straightjacket.

121 General Nimrod Bodfish  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:05:41pm

re: #109 APox

That implies that he actually had one to begin with.

J. F. C. That's just, fuck, I'm speechless. (shakes head)

122 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:06:20pm

re: #116 Barrett Brown

I really wouldn't call your discussion of it 'in-depth'. So far, you haven't addressed the huge, gaping hole that it leaves in Wikileaks utility; if they simply publish anything that's 'leaked' to them, what barrier is in place to them simply being used as a propaganda tool, just as they were when they published the CRU emails?

123 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:06:22pm

re: #116 Barrett Brown

We've discussed this at length over at The League. It's difficult to go into much depth on anything in this particular environment.

The League?

124 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:06:29pm

re: #117 Obdicut

But what Wikileaks is 'like' is an organization that published the CRU emails.

What change would have to occur to Wikileaks so that they wouldn't publish the CRU emails?

Not having Assange in charge, for one, and an actual editorial policy, for two. I'd like to see some emphasis on the "wiki" aspect of things, OR some emphasis on an editorial staff. WL is some kind of dysfunctional mish-mosh of edited and wiki'd, and it doesn't produce the best results.

125 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:06:35pm

re: #123 imp_62

[Link: ordinary-gentlemen.com...]

126 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:07:21pm

re: #124 Fozzie Bear

Having an editorial policy would fundamentally change what Wikileaks is.

Or how about this:

Describe what Wikileaks is.

127 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:07:36pm

re: #118 Gus 802

The sky is blue.

and all the leaves are green.
The sun's as warm as a baked potato.
I think I know precisely what I mean,
When I say it's a shpadoinkle day.

128 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:07:36pm

re: #105 Walter L. Newton

A good anarchist would have the BEST internet connection, even if he/she had to steal it.

I'm not really getting all the animosity.

129 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:07:57pm

re: #125 Obdicut

[Link: ordinary-gentlemen.com...]

Oh. I read the first paragraph of the Tough Crowd post. I am going to go cry into a glass of wine now.

130 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:08:00pm

re: #116 Barrett Brown

We've discussed this at length over at The League. It's difficult to go into much depth on anything in this particular environment.

When you say "this particular environment," are you referencing LGF in particular, or just the general public opinion against Assange and Wikileaks?

131 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:08:12pm

re: #117 Obdicut

But what Wikileaks is 'like' is an organization that published the CRU emails.

What change would have to occur to Wikileaks so that they wouldn't publish the CRU emails?

I think the idea of having a website that acts as a conduit for whistleblowers to leak documents to the media makes sense. Its just the fact that they also end up in the hands of everyone else. If it was NYT and the other newpapers, you'd end up with a somewhat reasonable editorial policy IMO.

132 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:08:38pm

re: #128 Alexzander

I'm not really getting all the animosity.

Stick around and you will get all the animosity you can handle :)

133 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:09:31pm

re: #131 McSpiff

But why does it make sense? What utility does that website have-- supposed anonymity?

134 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:10:10pm

re: #126 Obdicut

Having an editorial policy would fundamentally change what Wikileaks is.

Or how about this:

Describe what Wikileaks is.

It is what it is, and it's not ideally what I would make it , were it mine to remake.

I already said what I would do with it. It needs to either be:
A. A wiki
or
B. Edited by an editorial staff.

Is that not clear?

135 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:10:56pm

re: #119 imp_62

IF he found a video with an Administration official discussion the new Chevy Volt, and the topic were engine Revolutions per Minute, would Beck think it was sort of a revolutionary speed dating video?

...for gay soldiers.

136 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:10:57pm

re: #133 Obdicut

But why does it make sense? What utility does that website have-- supposed anonymity?

I never said anything about anonymity.

137 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:11:02pm

re: #122 Obdicut

I understand that you're not satisfied with my answers yet on that issue; I hope you would acknowledge that I'm not satisfied with a lot of the answers I've gotten on related issues. As you know I'm pretty active advocate of Wikileaks and I'm doing that advocating in a number of venues at once in addition to what I'm meanwhile writing for print publications in addition to my other projects. Still, if you'd like to discuss it further, you may leave additional comments at the League and I'll address them as soon as I can.

138 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:11:05pm

re: #134 Fozzie Bear

I already said what I would do with it. It needs to either be:
A. A wiki
or
B. Edited by an editorial staff.

Is that not clear?

No. Conservapedia is a wiki.

Hot Air has an editorial staff.

What is Wikileaks?

139 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:11:14pm

re: #134 Fozzie Bear

*edited by an editorial staff with a policy, not at the whims of Assange.

140 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:12:08pm

re: #138 Obdicut

No. Conservapedia is a wiki.

Hot Air has an editorial staff.

What is Wikileaks?

It is what it is. Do you not know? Do you have questions?

I'm not getting what you want here.

141 srjh  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:12:55pm

Seems he's back in jail while Sweden appeals to a higher court.

It's looking more and more like a show trial every day.

142 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:12:57pm

re: #137 Barrett Brown

I understand that you're not satisfied with my answers yet on that issue; I hope you would acknowledge that I'm not satisfied with a lot of the answers I've gotten on related issues.

I'll acknowledge the hell out of that. However, it's not that I'm not satisfied with your answer, is that I really don't feel like you actually have given an answer.

As you know I'm pretty active advocate of Wikileaks and I'm doing that advocating in a number of venues at once in addition to what I'm meanwhile writing for print publications in addition to my other projects. Still, if you'd like to discuss it further, you may leave additional comments at the League and I'll address them as soon as I can.

I already did.

To me, this is the central question; if Wikileaks doesn't do anything other than verify what's coming to them is indeed a 'leak'-- if they even do that-- then how are they at all insulated from disinformation?

143 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:12:58pm

re: #109 APox

Has Glenn beck lost his fucking mind? [Link: mediamatters.org...]
I only ask this because this sounds more retarded than normal.

They're taking over!!11ty

Funny hearing Beck get paranoid about the use of the word "revolution". That's also a common theme with the Tea Party crowd. They're also always making references to the American Revolution and using quotes like "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants."

144 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:13:15pm

re: #109 APox

Has Glenn beck lost his fucking mind? [Link: mediamatters.org...]
I only ask this because this sounds more retarded than normal.

Anybody within the sound of my voice that was a special ops person - anyone who has done any special ops for the United States military - you must inform your friends of the truth.

This is the way it happens. Whenever we have been - in special ops, if you've ever been, over the collapse of the Berlin Wall or the collapse of any other country, you know our special ops people are sent in at times just like this. And what is the instruction? Be there to help pick up the pieces and push, nudge, just nudge it. Push it.

That's what they're doing. They know what point we're at, and they know whose hands it's going to fall into. And so they're pushing it into revolution, and if you're in special ops, please - please - tell your friends, wake them up.

Go fuck yourself, Glenn.

145 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:14:46pm

I had a sudden vision of what is going to happen in this thread. Most of it involves my getting a migraine from arguing political philosophy and international law.

I will now go to translate Rilke, instead.

Cheerio

146 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:14:47pm

re: #140 Fozzie Bear

I want to know what Wikileaks actually is. A lot of people are saying they would like Wikileaks if only it changed somewhat. So I'm asking what you think the central premise or identity of wikileaks is, that you would like to preserve even if aspects of it were changed.

147 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:15:44pm

re: #144 Shiplord Kirel

Go fuck yourself, Glenn.

The closest Beck has been to a uniform is assless chaps. Fucking imbecile.

148 theheat  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:17:13pm

We've been battling high winds, downpours, flooding, and all kinds of crazy winter weather. The power's been going out in towns all up and down the coast. So, I here I sit with wet socks, looking at Casa del Shithead, and seriously hoping the snow load on the roof lads itself in the middle of what must be a wood-paneled library, and his fucking pipes freeze.

What an asshole. Just a world class piece of shit.

149 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:17:39pm

One of my main objections to the massive document dump approach is very simple, and based on the human right to a reasonable expectation of privacy.

When you just release every stolen document you get your hands on, you're not just a noble warrior for the freedom of information - you're fucking around with thousands of people's lives. In the case of these diplomatic cables, the consequences of having their communications leaked in some countries may be extremely severe, and not just for the people named in the documents. It's naive and irresponsible in the utmost to think there won't be serious problems for many people.

What did these people do to deserve having their lives disrupted by Julian Assange's galactic ego? So far, the vast majority of what's been released shows these people doing their jobs, to the best of their abilities. But now their names and reputations and possibly their freedoms and lives are at risk.

The whole concept of doing it like this stinks. It's cruel and irresponsible, and completely disregards the human beings involved.

150 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:18:00pm

If the Pilsbury Dough-Beck wants some special ops types on his side, he can go to the local survival/militia/gun store and recruit some, equip them from the same store, and train them whatever way he likes. I wish him luck.

151 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:18:20pm

re: #19 Charles

That's why I said "most" anarchists. I'm well aware of the anarcho-capitalist aberration.

My point is that anarchism itself is a spectrum disorder, like autism. Kim Peak and Temple Grandin may be aberrations within that community, but that didn't make their abilities and behaviors in any way inconsistent with the label, that's all.

152 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:18:36pm

re: #142 Obdicut

Well, I've given an answer in the literal sense, even if you don't think it suffices, but I'll try to do a better job of answering your comments over there a bit later today as I'm apparently in a fight with my girlfriend.

153 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:19:31pm

re: #151 goddamnedfrank

My point is that anarchism itself is a spectrum disorder, like autism. Kim Peak and Temple Grandin may be aberrations within that community, but that didn't make their abilities and behaviors in any way inconsistent with the label, that's all.

Anarchism is a term oft used, but poorly. True anarchism can only be theoretical, and abusers of the term have done the concept no service.

154 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:20:20pm

re: #152 Barrett Brown

...as I'm apparently in a fight with my girlfriend.

We're always the last to find out. Good luck.

155 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:20:49pm

re: #145 imp_62

I had a sudden vision of what is going to happen in this thread. Most of it involves my getting a migraine from arguing political philosophy and international law.

I will now go to translate Rilke, instead.

Cheerio

Your doing your own translation of Rilke! Jealous....

156 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:21:46pm

re: #73 Charles

The new organization begun by the ex Wikileakers may be worthwhile.
[Link: openleaks.org...]

157 shutdown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:21:58pm

re: #155 Alexzander

Your doing your own translation of Rilke! Jealous...

:) It's my project for when work is wearing me down. I hope to get through Requiem für eine Freundin" before year's end.

158 Slap  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:22:56pm

re: #98 JeffM70

I most certainly am not presuming that because there are some things that need to be kept secret from the public for security reasons.

But there is the nut of it, right there.

Since you acknowledge that this need exists, who, then, makes the choice of what to publish, and to what end? This is the problem as I see it: the leakspeople are making no such editorial choices.

And it's a really naive kind of pseudo-anarchist mindset that insists that nothing should be secret.

Truth be told, I'm of the belief that even if we had ALL the cables of everyone from every major international embassy, unless we've been in place, in the middle of negotiations and backroom dealings and choosing the lesser of evils to keep people from dying, with a fluent knowledge of all the nuances of all the languages being used by diplomats as well as all the nuances and land mines that are already known amongst the diplomatic community, we STILL would not really know what is actually going on, and we'd still be massively unqualified to evaluate what amounts to the tiniest snippets of the whole cloth.

This isn't to say we're dumb. That's another discussion. It's to say that non-diplomats and non-politicians can mondaymorningquarterback this stuff all we like, and there's a damned good chance we'll still miss the truth because we don't know everything.

I don't have special trust for those involved in the complications of diplomacy, but those involved have both information and context which we will always lack as outsiders.

To quote Uncle Frank: Information is not knowledge.

If wikileaks, from the beginning, had been set up with real muckraking in mind, we would not be having this discussion. They're not muckraking, they are engaged in a campaign of information projectile vomiting. Their lack of discretion and absence of responsibility completely eradicates any real value to their actions. A pox on their practices.

159 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:23:33pm

re: #152 Barrett Brown

Bluntly, I feel like you answered a question I didn't ask, or you're answering it in a world that doesn't bear actual resemblance to ours. I'm asking about the weakness of Wikileaks being used to distribute propaganda, and your response wasn't actually on point to that.

However, girlfriend fights should be taken seriously, so go get beaten up.

Remember not to fight back too much.

160 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:23:45pm

re: #104 Obdicut

Tax free like an IRA?

161 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:24:31pm

re: #107 Charles

Nor the video you mentioned. They ruined their own brand.

162 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:25:10pm

There is a distinct difference between exposing knowledge of a specific questionable incident and throwing out every possible bit of information you can get your hands on and seeing which bits stick.

163 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:26:31pm

re: #146 Obdicut

I want to know what Wikileaks actually is.


You know what it is. Why do you keep asking me as though you don't?

A lot of people are saying they would like Wikileaks if only it changed somewhat. So I'm asking what you think the central premise or identity of wikileaks is, that you would like to preserve even if aspects of it were changed.


See my 124, and my 134 for how I would change it. The central premise is a place to anonymously leak information pertinent to the public interest, be it governmental or business. Where they have gone wrong, imo, is that some of that interest is not pertinent to the public, or is insufficiently edited (redacted) to protect important interests, or alternately, overly edited so as to convey an impression which isn't entirely accurate.

I view the existence of wikileaks in an environment that lacks a functional press to be preferable to the absence of wikileaks in the same environment. Preferable to that paradigm would be a functioning press, and no wikileaks, but that isn't an option.

(the really short answer is no one is watching the watchers. Better a shitty watcher-watcher than none at all.)

164 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:27:31pm

re: #146 Obdicut

I want to know what Wikileaks actually is. A lot of people are saying they would like Wikileaks if only it changed somewhat. So I'm asking what you think the central premise or identity of wikileaks is, that you would like to preserve even if aspects of it were changed.

I'll lay out my axioms, say what my ideal wikileaks would be, and go from there. Very little of what wikileaks currently is will meet my criteria. I don't even like their web design.

1. Organizations sometimes do things that are illegal. These can be companies, governments, etc

2. Some of these illegal acts are undertaken deliberately. They are not "a few bad apples", these are actual policy decisions.

3. In a large enough organization (multinational corporations or governments) these policy decisions, as well as evidence of the actual crimes end up documented.

4. In any organization, not all members will agree. Someone who sees these documents may wish to make, what is in their eyes, crimes, public.

So, I'd like a website in the same vein as crime stoppers.

You submit what you think is a leak, an initial assessment is made. If the documents provided pass the initial smell test, you'll be contacted for additional information. If you truly wish to go forward and make the story public, the editors need to know your identity. This does not necessarily need to be public, but I do think having it 'on file' somewhere secure would reduce abuse of the system.

On the other end, a team of editors and researchers does their best to verify the documents. Much like they have for as long as we've had angry people and printing presses. Its always difficult to route out the actual agenda of someone involved, but that's no different than today.

Really, all I want to see is what occurred with the pentagon papers updated to use today's technology. We don't need to have meetings in smokey car parks anymore. Encrypted email should do the trick.

I'm not advocating document dumps like wikileaks does, but I do think a certain amount of evidence is required for any news story to be taken seriously. Excerpts, document titles, etc should be enough however. There's no need to release every document an organization has produced. If anything, that just adds to the noise that your story will be buried in.

This sounds like a project I've been hearing a bit, OpenLeaks, founded by some former wikileaks people that are sick of Brand Assange. I haven't really looked into it however, so I can't say for sure.

165 Gus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:29:13pm

Here's the full video of the Glenn Beck screed: The Revolution Has Begun.

Right at around 4:10 he claims that we just gave the military the smallest raise in the last 50 years. Over at the Washington Post I found this:

Civilian federal employees and the military would get a 1.4 percent pay increase next year, according to President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget proposal.

That's much lower than the 2 percent civilian pay jump this year and the military's 3.4 percent increase. The proposed military pay bump is the smallest bump since 1973.

"It is lower than it has been in the past because inflation is lower than it has been in the past," Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag said on Monday morning.

Let's see. 2010 - 1973 = 37 years. And the latest raise is adjusted for inflation. The Washington Post also reminds us:

Remember: Obama's proposal is just that -- a proposal -- so both civilians and military personnel could eventually see a higher pay raise.

Anyway. He's screaming his head off here and calls Cass Sunstein "the most dangerous man in America!" True to form. Cass Sunstein is also part of an Alex Jones/George Soros conspiracy theory involving Wikileaks.

166 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:29:20pm

McSpiff summed up my feelings better than I did.

167 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:30:54pm

re: #158 Slap

This is where Assange has gotten lost. Information is not knowledge and knowledge is not freedom. The only reason in my mind to leak secret information is to expose things like violations of the law or human rights to name two examples. There has to be evidence of wrong-doing. Unfortunately discretion and common sense are not always used, as Assange perfectly demonstrates.

168 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:31:37pm

re: #164 McSpiff

TL;DR:

Really, all I want to see is what occurred with the Pentagon Papers updated to use today's technology. We don't need to have meetings in smokey car parks anymore. Encrypted email should do the trick.

And instead of doing that in an ad hoc manner, have a mechanism in place. A central contact point...like a website. And have a team in place with the necessary skills to begin the research.

169 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:31:48pm

An amusing mini-development in the Khodorkovsky case. Several Russian rockstars are apparently worried that the second trial isn't fair and sent a 'private' letter to Medvedev, writing that a person should not be imprisoned twice for the same deed. Doubly amusing for me is that one of the signatories is the ultra-conservative (and certainly antisemitic) Konstantin Kinchev whom I discussed here. Moreover, all of the signatories are not some rebels, but are loyal pro-regime guys. I wonder if it's a hint that the case may turn out well for Kh., or that Medvedev may issue a pardon.

170 Big Steve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:31:49pm

re: #164 McSpiff

Sounds exactly what the old time newspapers used to do ala Bradley at WaPo in the movie All the President's Men.

171 mikehaas82  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:32:04pm

Hello all. First post here.

First, what is WikiLeak's "viewer-ship", if and when WikiLeaks is actually online? Who reads it? Just "anarchists"? The General Public? The WH? Putin? The Taliban? I'm curious.

Internet soul and blogger that I am, I confess to having never once visited WikiLeaks, at least not intentionally and not because I have no interest. But why should I? All I have to do is read Rawstory, Huffington Post, LGF, et. al. to find out what all the noise is about. Therein lies my conflict with forming an objective opinion regarding the material "leaked". For every outlet that has reposted or at the very least, informed its readers about the content of the leaked material I'd have to say, if you have a negative opinion about Assange, his actions or his actions via WikiLeaks - why are you aiding and abetting him by (re)informing your readers of the content?

I've come to like and respect LGF very much. I think it took a lot of guts, not to mention intelligence, for Charles to step away from the GOP and see the Right Wing for what its become. But I have to say I'm a bit shocked by some of the opinions stated here regarding this issue. All in all, the leaked content seems to be slightly warm pile of gossip, innuendo and back-biting. What on Earth was Earth-shattering about any of this? Why is it being measured by the size of Assange's ego and the importance he places on it, rather than what it actually is?

If he were leaking troop movements I'd want his head. And what if instead he'd leaked what is rumored to be his next possible leak, the dirt on the Wall Street crowd?

I've heard the rhetoric on the lives he's supposedly put in danger with this leak and I call bollocks. Same on the rape charge considering what we're hearing about the source. I'm not tepid on rape, mind you. But it all sounds a little too convenient for me.

172 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:32:54pm

re: #163 Fozzie Bear

You know what it is. Why do you keep asking me as though you don't?

I really don't. I'm not playing around, Fozzie.

See my 124, and my 134 for how I would change it. The central premise is a place to anonymously leak information pertinent to the public interest, be it governmental or business.

Who makes that determination?

Where they have gone wrong, imo, is that some of that interest is not pertinent to the public, or is insufficiently edited (redacted) to protect important interests, or alternately, overly edited so as to convey an impression which isn't entirely accurate.

How will they be able to tell, without doing actual journalism of their own?

173 Alexzander  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:33:16pm

re: #157 imp_62

:) It's my project for when work is wearing me down. I hope to get through Requiem für eine Freundin" before year's end.

That was the first work of Rilke I ever heard read aloud it was a warm summer evening and a bottle wine being passed around. Letters to a Young Poet cemented my appreciation, and these days I most appreciate the Duino elegies, although I am restricted to english translations.

174 APox  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:33:25pm

What you guys seem to be describing is a responsible media unit. Last I checked journalists still try to find stories. / leaks on abuses.

Because that is not even close to what wikileaks is I don't know how you could support it at all in it's current form.

175 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:33:51pm

re: #170 Big Steve

Sounds exactly what the old time newspapers used to do ala Bradley at WaPo in the movie All the President's Men.

I'm not claiming anything revolutionary. But I think in today's digital world we're going to see a much larger volume of leaks, so might as well use the journalistic resources as efficiently as possible.

176 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:35:33pm

re: #172 Obdicut

Hence, the last part of my post above.

I view the existence of wikileaks in an environment that lacks a functional press to be preferable to the absence of wikileaks in the same environment. Preferable to that paradigm would be a functioning press, and no wikileaks, but that isn't an option.

(the really short answer is no one is watching the watchers. Better a shitty watcher-watcher than none at all.)

177 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:36:10pm

re: #174 APox

What you guys seem to be describing is a responsible media unit. Last I checked journalists still try to find stories. / leaks on abuses.

Because that is not even close to what wikileaks is I don't know how you could support it at all in it's current form.

Well, several of the worlds largest responsible media units have used wikileaks as a source. I'm saying bring that function in house, with the increased oversight and control that would provide.

178 Big Steve  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:36:15pm

re: #171 mikehaas82

Nice first post......however you say the leaks to date have been mild. I don't agree. When an ambassador writes to his bosses that he believes the head of the country he is posted to is literally and quite possibly insane......that actually does have an affect. Also some of the emails leaked, while the content isn't dramatic, clearly shows the role of the person writing it, and role that may not be public again in the country they are posted to.

179 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:37:18pm

Breaking news:
Gunman opens fire during Fla. school board meeting

PANAMA CITY, Fla. — A gunman has opened fire during a Florida Panhandle school board meeting. It's not immediately known if there were fatalities or injuries.

A WMBB television reporter at Tuesday's meeting says the man came up to the podium at the Bay District School Board meeting and said he had a motion. He then pulled out a can of red spray paint and painted a "V" with a circle around it.

Reporter Nadeen Yanes tells her station he then pulled out a handgun and started talking.

Yanes says a school board member hit the gunman with her purse and he pushed her to the ground and started firing randomly.

Yanes and others ran outside. Police confirmed a shooting but had no further information.

180 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:37:38pm

Some news stories break your heart and redden your vision at the same time. O.M.G.

Dallas Police: Dead Toddler Dropped in Boiling Water

Life in prison is too good.

181 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:38:09pm

re: #179 Shiplord Kirel

Breaking news:
Gunman opens fire during Fla. school board meeting

Another wingnut.

182 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:38:38pm

re: #180 Rightwingconspirator

You're underestimating just how hellish life in prison really is. It's as good as we can do without becoming monsters ourselves.

183 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:38:52pm

IBM computer to compete on 'Jeopardy!' with two of game show's best contestants

Named after IBM founder Thomas J. Watson -– not the Sherlock Holmes' sidekick -– the English-only computer will attempt to decipher and answer questions without being connected to the Internet.

Watson will battle Ken Jennings, who won 74 games in a row –- the most consecutive victories ever -– and Brad Rutter, who scored the most money with more than $3 million.

But this competition, to be aired Feb. 14, won’t be quite the same as the one in 1997 when IBM’s Deep Blue computer (and its ability to calculate 200 moves per second) beat chess grandmaster and world champion Garry Kasparov.

Watson will have to attempt to pick up the subtle meanings and riddles often woven into Jeopardy questions, which will be fed to the machine through typed entries while host Alex Trebek reads them to the human contestants.

184 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:39:13pm

re: #30 Charles

Anarchy expressed in wardrobe.

According to the article comments that picture has now been removed, because there are two different Ellingham Halls, and the one from that picture that is available for weddings is hundreds of miles away in Northumbria, not Vaughan Smith's in Suffolk.

185 APox  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:39:23pm

re: #177 McSpiff

Well, several of the worlds largest responsible media units have used wikileaks as a source. I'm saying bring that function in house, with the increased oversight and control that would provide.

And that would be great. But that isn't what they are trying to do or have been doing. I think that's the problem.

186 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:40:28pm

re: #164 McSpiff

Wikileaks bears almost no resemblance to that, though. They're not in any way mainly concerned with leaking illegal goings-on.

187 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:40:53pm

re: #181 Walter L. Newton

Another wingnut.

He then pulled out a can of red spray paint and painted a "V" with a circle around it.

More stupid V for Vendetta movie bullshit.

188 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:41:02pm

re: #176 Fozzie Bear

Why, though? Why is it better?

189 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:41:35pm

re: #186 Obdicut

Wikileaks bears almost no resemblance to that, though. They're not in any way mainly concerned with leaking illegal goings-on.

I'm holding some shred of hope that they'll do some good with the upcoming banking leaks, and that openleaks will do a better job. We'll see.

190 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:41:58pm

re: #186 Obdicut

Wikileaks bears almost no resemblance to that, though. They're not in any way mainly concerned with leaking illegal goings-on.


They certainly have leaked illegal goings-on. Just not exclusively, and that's the problem.

191 APox  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:42:04pm

re: #187 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

He then pulled out a can of red spray paint and painted a "V" with a circle around it.

More stupid V for Vendetta movie bullshit.

Reminds me of the kid that killed his parents because he thought he was in the matrix and trying to break out. Sigh.

192 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:42:16pm

re: #190 McSpiff

They certainly have leaked illegal goings-on. Just not exclusively, and that's the problem.

And those leaks haven't been their largest I should add.

193 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:42:26pm

re: #185 APox

I don't think any person here who supports Wikileaks supports what Assange has done or how he's handled himself. What they (we) support is the concept of Wikileaks.

194 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:42:32pm

re: #188 Obdicut

Why, though? Why is it better?

Because without a functioning press, representative democracy cannot work. It just can't.

195 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:42:39pm

Update on the Florida school board shooting:

Panama City police Sgt. Jeff Becker said one person was shot, but he would not say if it was the gunman. According to wjhg.com, it's believed the man fired blanks at school board members, and was then shot by authorities, or may have shot himself.
196 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:43:16pm

Shooting breaks out at Panhandle school board meeting; 1 reported dead

A man reportedly spray-painted a red "V" on the wall of the Panama City school board offices during a board meeting, then pulled out a handgun, according to multiple media reports. The man was later seen being taken from the school board offices on a stretcher after having been shot dead, according to the News Herald newspaper, The Associated Press and other media accounts.


Ugh.

197 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:43:36pm

re: #191 APox

Reminds me of the kid that killed his parents because he thought he was in the matrix and trying to break out. Sigh.

Well, that sounds like schizophrenia.

198 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:43:37pm

re: #194 Fozzie Bear

Because without a functioning press, representative democracy cannot work. It just can't.

But a disfunctional press does not help either.

199 APox  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:43:52pm

re: #193 JeffM70

I don't think any person here who supports Wikileaks supports what Assange has done or how he's handled himself. What they (we) support is the concept of Wikileaks.

But then you support the idea of good journalism. And that isn't the axiom wikileaks is running on. So I don't really get it.

200 Ericus58  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:44:07pm

re: #180 Rightwingconspirator

Some news stories break your heart and redden your vision at the same time. O.M.G.

Dallas Police: Dead Toddler Dropped in Boiling Water

Life in prison is too good.

Dear God.....
If the charges are found true, this warrants death. Without reservation.

201 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:44:19pm

Wikileaks has also leaked things like the list of sites on the proposed Australian internet filter. Does anyone have issue with the press making this type of information public?

202 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:45:10pm

re: #200 Ericus58

Naaa, life in prison is much, much worse than death.

203 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:45:19pm

Florida: Gunman opens fire during US school board meeting

WMBB television reporter Nadeen Yanes told her station that the man came up to the podium at the Bay District School Board meeting and said he had a motion. He then pulled out a can of red spray paint and painted a V with a circle around it.

Yanes told the station he pulled out a handgun and started talking. She said school board member Ginger Littleton hit the gunman with her purse and he pushed her to the ground and started firing randomly.

204 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:45:28pm

re: #194 Fozzie Bear

But Wikileaks is not a functioning press. So why is having Wikileaks and a non-functional press better than not having Wikileaks and having a functioning press?

To me, Wikileaks is just another part of the non-functional press.

205 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:46:08pm
206 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:46:26pm

re: #149 Charles

One of my main objections to the massive document dump approach is very simple, and based on the human right to a reasonable expectation of privacy.

When you just release every stolen document you get your hands on, you're not just a noble warrior for the freedom of information - you're fucking around with thousands of people's lives. In the case of these diplomatic cables, the consequences of having their communications leaked in some countries may be extremely severe, and not just for the people named in the documents. It's naive and irresponsible in the utmost to think there won't be serious problems for many people.

What did these people do to deserve having their lives disrupted by Julian Assange's galactic ego? So far, the vast majority of what's been released shows these people doing their jobs, to the best of their abilities. But now their names and reputations and possibly their freedoms and lives are at risk.

The whole concept of doing it like this stinks. It's cruel and irresponsible, and completely disregards the human beings involved.

Just that there hasn't been a "massive dump". Only the 5 newspapers have all cables. THEY publish them first, with names edited out, before they appear on Wikileaks.

Of those 250000 cables, only 15,652 are classified as "secret" (and most of those still are nothing more than political evaluations, stories about arms dealings etc.) Names are x-d out. Every cable has been vetted by editors of one of those 5 major newspapers.

Of the rest 101,748 are classified as confidential. If a confidential cable puts lives at risk I'd rather go to the guy who classified them in the first place and allowed them to be read by 2,5 million people with a clearance that a simple Private would have.

The remaining 133,887 are unclassified. They can't be a security risk. I find lovely witty stories like "Bruno the Problem Bear running wild in Bavaria".

It seems to me that some people are very upset that an Australian might have broken an U.S. (they are still busy finding one though).

I note that they are far less upset to learn that the U.S. government abducts an innocent German citizen to Afghanistan, holds him there in prison under dismal circumstances, tortures him and once they find out that Mr. Tuttle is not Mr. Buttle they dump him on a back road in Albania.

When German and Spanish authorities find out the real names of those who kidnapped him (kidnapping is illegal in the U.S. as far as I know), the U.S. pressures Germany not to ask the U.S. to extradite the criminals who did the kidnapping. The U.S. authorities also deny the kidnapped victim any legal recourse in the U.S., let alone compensation for his ordeal.

As long as these things can happen just because you just slap a "secret" on your document and deny innocent victim legal recourse because of "national security concerns" I will not condemn Wikileaks.

That doesn't mean that I agree with everything they do.

207 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:47:15pm

Hmm.

[Link: answers.yahoo.com...]

What does this sign mean: a red circle with a "V" inside?
I saw a T-**** with this sign at a Ron Paul march. What does it mean?
Report Abuse
2 years ago

Just in case one would want to blame it prematurely on some anarcho-leftist ;-)

208 APox  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:47:57pm

re: #201 McSpiff

Wikileaks has also leaked things like the list of sites on the proposed Australian internet filter. Does anyone have issue with the press making this type of information public?

I don't think anyone is mad about wrongdoings from either the government or business being released. It seems like the argument is now getting twisted into:

1: you support wikileaks and the revealing of bad things going on in the world
Or
2: you don't support wikileaks and thusly support the coverup of bad things in the world.

I think the correct argument is being missed.

209 srjh  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:48:19pm

re: #201 McSpiff

Wikileaks has also leaked things like the list of sites on the proposed Australian internet filter. Does anyone have issue with the press making this type of information public?

Probably a good example of why even concentrating on just "illegal activity" is a bit too restrictive.

A case-by-case "public interest" test would probably be ideal.

210 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:48:31pm

re: #207 Sergey Romanov

Hmm.

[Link: answers.yahoo.com...]


Just in case one would want to blame it prematurely on some anarcho-leftist ;-)

A basement in Florida will be empty tonight.

211 JeffM70  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:49:00pm

re: #199 APox

The media has become far too subservient to the government to be a very effective watch-dog. But what's not to get? Nobody here is advocating for Wikileaks in its current form, but rather the concept of a Wikileaks that is responsible with how it receives and disseminates secret information.

212 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:49:04pm

re: #209 srjh

Probably a good example of why even concentrating on just "illegal activity" is a bit too restrictive.

A case-by-case "public interest" test would probably be ideal.

Whose public interest?

213 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:49:07pm

re: #208 APox

I don't think anyone is mad about wrongdoings from either the government or business being released. It seems like the argument is now getting twisted into:

1: you support wikileaks and the revealing of bad things going on in the world
Or
2: you don't support wikileaks and thusly support the coverup of bad things in the world.

I think the correct argument is being missed.

I think both sides have been horribly misrepresented.

214 What, me worry?  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:50:06pm

Anarcho capitalism. What a crock of bull.

I think I'm of average intelligence, but this is really just another pie in the sky philosophy to me. If it was actually doable as a viable philosophy, why are there no governments which practice it. Or are there? Who are they?

How is anarcho capitalism different than communism? In the sense that eventually the chosen few would take control of the masses. When or rather how does all this free market capitalism actually trickle down to the poor and unwashed? How do the unintelligent and infirm ever expect to prosper in such a society where there is no government and the lesser masses have to rely on the greater masses to feed and cloth them? People like Asange? Oh yea! He cares for the little people LOL Yet another repackaging of libertarians is all it is.

Only the wealthy are anarchists, little brat spawns of bigger brats. Selfish bastards. The poor are too busy wondering where they're going to get their next meal.

215 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:50:56pm

re: #197 Fozzie Bear

Well, that sounds like schizophrenia.

How?

216 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:51:20pm

re: #210 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

A basement in Florida will be empty tonight.

There are very, very few basements in Florida. (It's probably a shed or an attic.)

217 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:52:00pm

re: #212 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Whose public interest?

And that's the $1 million question. And it comes down to trust. I want a wikileaks I can trust not to harm innocent people. So proper retraction, not leaking irrelevant documents, or documents that are released simply to harm the US/UK/Russia internationally.

Do I think the people have the right to know what websites there government has decided to ban them from? Yup.

Do I think the world needs to have a list of installations the US considered vital to national security? Probably not.

218 APox  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:52:52pm

re: #216 Fozzie Bear

There are very, very few basements in Florida. (It's probably a shed or an attic.)

Attics are too hot here. I'd go with a trailer behind mom and dads house. :)

219 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:52:56pm

Although I do notice that some of the farther left actually do like Paul. Funny how that works.

220 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:52:56pm

re: #215 Walter L. Newton

How?

Thinking you are stuck in the matrix and killing your parents to free them... What else does it sound like?

221 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:53:33pm

Julian Assange in house arrest is all too much like Roman Polanski's cozy quarters. Hide like a Polanski run like Roman.

222 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:53:48pm

re: #217 McSpiff

PIMF: s/there/their/

223 APox  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:54:21pm

re: #219 Sergey Romanov

Although I do notice that some of the farther left actually do like Paul. Funny how that works.

The crazy has melded somewhere along the left/right circle. :)

224 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:55:09pm

re: #220 Fozzie Bear

Thinking you are stuck in the matrix and killing your parents to free them... What else does it sound like?

A serious misunderstanding of the plot mechanisms.

225 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:56:06pm

I tend to think that the extremes of the political spectrum tend to view the problems of humanity as solvable, while the more moderate middle views them as manageable.

Once you think that the problems of humanity can be fixed, the next thing that comes along is the solutions, and that's where it gets really nutty.

226 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:56:39pm

re: #223 APox

The crazy has melded somewhere along the left/right circle. :)

The Venn diagram overlaps at "Jewish Bankers".

227 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:58:23pm

re: #206 Mark Winter

Of those 250000 cables, only 15,652 are classified as "secret" (and most of those still are nothing more than political evaluations, stories about arms dealings etc.) Names are x-d out. Every cable has been vetted by editors of one of those 5 major newspapers.

Of the rest 101,748 are classified as confidential. If a confidential cable puts lives at risk I'd rather go to the guy who classified them in the first place and allowed them to be read by 2,5 million people with a clearance that a simple Private would have.

The remaining 133,887 are unclassified. They can't be a security risk. I find lovely witty stories like "Bruno the Problem Bear running wild in Bavaria".

OK.

Suppose you're a government official in, say, Egypt or Syria, and you've been communicating with counterparts via classified diplomatic cables. Here comes Wikileaks and dumps all your classified cables for the past year, but "redacts" your name out of them.

How safe would you feel?

228 srjh  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 1:58:32pm

re: #212 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Difficult to answer really. It should be a case of balancing the pros and cons of releasing the content in the first place. If names can be redacted to minimise the impact on the innocent, this should be (and it appears it is being) done. If the leaks are little more than gossip, there's less of a public interest and they probably shouldn't be released.

Some of the leaks so far have been in the public interest, some haven't. It's not clear so far whether the total effect is positive or negative, but with the help of the traditional media in vetting the leaks, I'm leaning towards the former.

229 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:00:07pm

re: #227 Charles

OK.

Suppose you're a government official in, say, Egypt or Syria, and you've been communicating with counterparts via classified diplomatic cables. Here comes Wikileaks and dumps all your classified cables for the past year, but "redacts" your name out of them.

How safe would you feel?

The redacting argument is pretty weak.

1. Some uncensored cables are already available, as I've shown earlier. A meta-leak.

2. In many cases it's not hard to piece the puzzle together.

230 McSpiff  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:00:15pm

re: #227 Charles

OK.

Suppose you're a government official in, say, Egypt or Syria, and you've been communicating with counterparts via classified diplomatic cables. Here comes Wikileaks and dumps all your classified cables for the past year, but "redacts" your name out of them.

How safe would you feel?

There are many, many methods to deduce who wrote what. That's why the raw docs are so valuable. That's what I think wikileaks really fails to understand. There are only so many regional/topic experts in the state dept. These things can be deduced.

231 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:02:30pm

re: #221 Rightwingconspirator

Julian Assange in house arrest is all too much like Roman Polanski's cozy quarters. Hide like a Polanski run like Roman.

You should realize that Assange hasn't even been charged with a crime yet in Sweden, he's wanted on the equivalent of a material witness warrant, while Polanski is a convicted fugitive.

232 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:02:49pm

re: #227 Charles

OK.

Suppose you're a government official in, say, Egypt or Syria, and you've been communicating with counterparts via classified diplomatic cables. Here comes Wikileaks and dumps all your classified cables for the past year, but "redacts" your name out of them.

How safe would you feel?

Can you clarify? A Syrian government official? Or a U.S. official in Syria?

233 lostlakehiker  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:03:01pm

re: #23 Barrett Brown

Good, I thought perhaps you were trying to claim that there is something hypocritical about Assange staying in a large house as someone's guest, but since you acknowledge that anarchism varies such that he doesn't necessarily oppose private property, then we're not really arguing.

What Assange opposes isn't private property, but private diplomacy. Of course, there's nothing diplomatic about conducting international business through the newspapers. That's why "diplomatic" is another word for the opposite of "in your face and rude".

"Diplomatic" is also a word for the alternative to "military". Assange, in doing everything he could do to cripple diplomacy, has gone and made war more likely. Smooth move, dude.

234 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:04:24pm

Its relatively easy for someone without inside knowledge not to realize the signifigance of seemingly unimportant information. The idea that some disconnected editor could safely redact key information accurately is ludicrous.

235 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:04:48pm

I understand the frustration at wikileaks releasing the climate emails, however don't they act as an intermediate between the whistle blower and the public?

Lots of people who get info can't /won't release that info out of fear.

Is it in fact their duty to vet those releases?
Are they the arbitrator of truth?
Do we want them releasing only what they consider truth?

Or should they put it all out there and allow others to disseminate it, perhaps people more qualified than Assange?

236 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:05:07pm

BreakingNews

Update: Gunman shot, killed at Fla. school board meeting; no one else hurt, school official says - wjhg.com [Link: bit.ly...]

V

237 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:05:07pm

My first reaction was to think this was one of the filming locations for one of the many Pride & Prejudice productions.

It isn't.

All the same, I would expect tea every day at four on the lawn.

Including jam & scones and cucumber sandwiches.

238 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:05:41pm

re: #233 lostlakehiker

On the other hand, the recent tendency for the US government to classify nearly everything has led to lots and lots of people needing clearances to do their jobs, which in turn increases the chance of this kind of thing happening.

I think the biggest story here is that the security apparatus of the US is out of control, but it's being overshadowed my details. the forest is being forgotten because there are so many trees.

239 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:06:02pm

re: #234 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Moreover, in many cases the names are not omitted. When asked about this, JA said that he relies on the mainstream journalists who are experts on these topics (that's apparently why he cooperates with the mainstream press). Still, the redaction does seem pretty arbitrary at times.

240 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:06:14pm

re: #237 EmmmieG

My first reaction was to think this was one of the filming locations for one of the many Pride & Prejudice productions.

It isn't.

All the same, I would expect tea every day at four on the lawn.

Including jam & scones and cucumber sandwiches.

Watercress sandwiches... my dear.

241 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:06:55pm

re: #240 Walter L. Newton

Ick! Too much texture, not enough flavor.

242 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:07:20pm

re: #227 Charles

OK.

Suppose you're a government official in, say, Egypt or Syria, and you've been communicating with counterparts via classified diplomatic cables. Here comes Wikileaks and dumps all your classified cables for the past year, but "redacts" your name out of them.

How safe would you feel?

Probably the same way the Chinese leadership feels about The Tienanmen Papers.

244 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:10:06pm

re: #237 EmmmieG

In the snow??
....Ok!

245 Killgore Trout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:10:24pm

re: #236 Stanley Sea

BreakingNews

Update: Gunman shot, killed at Fla. school board meeting; no one else hurt, school official says - wjhg.com [Link: bit.ly...]

V

Yeah, we'll see where this goes. He was almost certainly insane but he was also making a political point. The V for vendetta thing has been coopted by a lot of different extremist groups, Paulians, Anarchists and even Wikileaks supporters.
It's frustr4ating that the press will report the V thing but won't inform their readers about what it means.

246 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:10:26pm

re: #234 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Its relatively easy for someone without inside knowledge not to realize the signifigance of seemingly unimportant information. The idea that some disconnected editor could safely redact key information accurately is ludicrous.

So you agree Assange should not edit the docs?

247 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:11:25pm

re: #244 reloadingisnotahobby

In the snow??
...Ok!

You can just wear fur jackets (faux fur, to be kind) and have the servants bring out some braziers.* It will be a party. Maybe some ice sculpture.

*please note this is not the word some of you think it is.

249 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:11:56pm

re: #242 goddamnedfrank

Probably the same way the Chinese leadership feels about The Tienanmen Papers.

Apropos China

250 Amory Blaine  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:12:42pm

re: #248 Sergey Romanov

Wingnutty stance, but at least totally consistent.

That dude is a full on fascist.

251 SpaceJesus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:13:12pm

re: #250 Amory Blaine


Dude is a war criminal

252 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:14:16pm

re: #239 Sergey Romanov

Moreover, in many cases the names are not omitted. When asked about this, JA said that he relies on the mainstream journalists who are experts on these topics (that's apparently why he cooperates with the mainstream press). Still, the redaction does seem pretty arbitrary at times.

Well the Germans found out about a mole in the Free Democratic Party who gave confidential info from coalition talks to an U.S. embassy.

The cables outed him. The unnamed U.S. embassy official broke German law, too. Nobody will prosecute him. We're friends, after all.

Of course nobody in the U.S. gets upset when an U.S. official breaks German law. Only when an Australian citizen might have broken a nebulous law of 1917 when he exposed that U.S. citizens were breaking German laws.

It's all a matter of perspective.

253 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:14:33pm

re: #242 goddamnedfrank

Probably the same way the Chinese leadership feels about The Tienanmen Papers.

I'm not talking about the leadership. I'm talking about an official in the bureaucracy, who presumably has a family and a life like most other fairly successful people. What gives you or anyone else the right to arbitrarily decide that everything he wrote should now become public? Do his human rights and livelihood just not matter, because he was in a position to write classified cables?

And I mentioned Egypt and Syria as two examples where one of the best outcomes for someone who wrote something the regime didn't like would be to lose their jobs. There might be real problems just for having your name appear, regardless of the content.

Redaction is meaningless, when they're posting digital source documents that can easily be checked against originals. It's trivial for the governments involved to figure out who wrote the cables.

254 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:14:52pm

re: #250 Amory Blaine

That dude is a full on fascist.

Yep. TPer. And his personal history is illustrative too.

255 reloadingisnotahobby  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:15:07pm

re: #245 Killgore Trout

...and firing a gun with blanks?
I guess shooting himself with a real bullet would have been less
dramatic.....
Never heard of suicide by School board Meeting!

256 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:17:31pm

re: #246 ozbloke

So you agree Assange should not edit the docs?

If by not edit, you mean not publish, then yes.

257 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:20:31pm

re:

258 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:20:40pm

re: #251 SpaceJesus

Dude is a war criminal


Heh.

West spoke in September 2010 in defense of a group of US military personnel convicted of war crimes known as the "Leavenworth 10."[11]
259 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:21:02pm

Script ate my post... I sad.

260 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:21:12pm

Sarah Palin, Hard At Work

There are times I just can't help myself.

261 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:21:30pm

By the way, this isn't a purely academic discussion. An Algerian reporter has already been put in harm's way by the cable release: How many sources has WikiLeaks put at risk?

Despite warnings from the U.S. government that the publication of secret diplomatic cables could put the local reporters and human rights activists identified in them at risk, WikiLeaks this week published the name of an Algerian reporter who accused Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika of manipulating a 2006 parliamentary election during talks with American diplomats, according to a journalists' rights group.

The reporter's name was redacted on Thursday, two hours after the New York-based advocacy group, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), asked a lawyer representing WikiLeaks, Mark Stephens, to remove it. The disclosure shows that despite measures by WikiLeaks and some news organizations to prevent exposure of individuals at risk, some vulnerable names continue to slip through the cracks.

262 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:22:36pm

re: #107 Charles

I notice that Wikileaks supporters don't seem to want to discuss this very much.

I noticed it came up on sowhyiswikileaksagoodthingagain.com

263 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:23:55pm

re: #261 Charles

By the way, this isn't a purely academic discussion. An Algerian reporter has already been put in harm's way by the cable release: How many sources has WikiLeaks put at risk?

If I was an informant, I would seriously consider my options before confiding in a group that can't keep its classified information secure.

264 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:26:10pm

I wonder if the sudden firing of the Iranian Foreign Minister had anything to do with Wikileaks.

Iran has been a real focus of the cables released so far.

265 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:26:11pm

re: #262 000G

Wow. They really do. They say:

WikiLeaks has revealed how scientists manipulated global warming research data in order to make it seem more consequential.

What assholes are running that site?

266 SpaceJesus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:27:00pm

holy shit

267 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:28:22pm
268 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:28:31pm

re: #266 SpaceJesus

holy shit


[Video]

The ultimate sign that you should be studying or something.

269 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:28:42pm

re: #265 Obdicut

Wow. They really do. They say:

What assholes are running that site?

I have no clue. Run a WHOIS.

270 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:30:02pm

re: #265 Obdicut

Wow. They really do. They say:

What assholes are running that site?

Here

271 SpaceJesus  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:30:34pm

re: #268 Stanley Sea


haha, I have a 30 page land use regulation paper due friday. im in procrastination mode right now. i've been looking for anything to do that doesn't involve that paper. i've cleaned parts of my apartment i never knew existed today.

272 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:31:20pm

re: #268 Stanley Sea

The ultimate sign that you should be studying or something.

And in that vein, here's my contribution

273 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:32:16pm

re: #270 ozbloke

They're behind a privacy group. That's why it's a rhetorical question.

274 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:32:19pm

re: #272 Stanley Sea

LOLWTF

275 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:32:36pm

re: #271 SpaceJesus

Just wring it, dingbat deity.

276 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:33:07pm

re: #274 Fozzie Bear

LOLWTF

I know!

277 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:33:14pm

re: #273 Obdicut

They're behind a privacy group. That's why it's a rhetorical question.

You made a funny, why am I always the last to know?

278 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:35:13pm

re: #276 Stanley Sea

Only the Germans could come up with that.

279 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:35:19pm

How safe do you think that Algerian reporter feels right now? This was written Dec 3rd - he's probably in hiding with his family, or has fled the country. (I sure would.)

Thanks, Julian.

280 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:36:30pm

re: #279 Charles

How safe do you think that Algerian reporter feels right now? This was written Dec 3rd - he's probably in hiding with his family, or has fled the country. (I sure would.)

Thanks, Julian.

I'll bet the mansion has really old plumbing. A little drafty, too.

281 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:37:01pm

And that's one reporter brave enough to criticize a corrupt regime, silenced.

Is that what Wikileaks is for?

282 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:38:50pm

re: #281 Charles

And that's one reporter brave enough to criticize a corrupt regime, silenced.

Is that what Wikileaks is for?

Funny how many "brave and courageous" rich reporters and journalists make a name for themeselves standing up against countries that won't hunt them down and kill them.

283 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:41:22pm

BreakingNews

U.S. Air Force blocks Internet access to NYT, Guardian and 23 other sites posting WikiLeaks documents - Reuters

Doesn't make sense to me.

284 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:41:54pm

re: #165 Gus 802

Here's the full video of the Glenn Beck screed: The Revolution Has Begun.

Right at around 4:10 he claims that we just gave the military the smallest raise in the last 50 years. Over at the Washington Post I found this:

Let's see. 2010 - 1973 = 37 years. And the latest raise is adjusted for inflation. The Washington Post also reminds us:

Anyway. He's screaming his head off here and calls Cass Sunstein "the most dangerous man in America!" True to form. Cass Sunstein is also part of an Alex Jones/George Soros conspiracy theory involving Wikileaks.

The funny thing is that Assange is actually coming from the conspiracy theory milieu, informing his mindset, his worldview in which the powers that rule the earth, chief among them governments and corporations, are at core nothing but conspiracies and that if you create enough leaks in their information system, their core functions will cease.

285 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:42:07pm

re: #283 Stanley Sea

BreakingNews

U.S. Air Force blocks Internet access to NYT, Guardian and 23 other sites posting WikiLeaks documents - Reuters

Doesn't make sense to me.

Ugh. Here we go with the inevitable bureaucratic overreactions.

286 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:42:31pm

Seeing there is a willingness by media all around the globe to publish this info, if wikileaks wasn't involved and the info was passed to the media via Manning, who would we be going after?

287 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:42:36pm

re: #283 Stanley Sea

BreakingNews

U.S. Air Force blocks Internet access to NYT, Guardian and 23 other sites posting WikiLeaks documents - Reuters

Doesn't make sense to me.

Bit of a barn door feeling there. I'm not sure that their own people are the ones they shoulud be afraid of reading those documents.

288 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:42:40pm

re: #283 Stanley Sea

BreakingNews

U.S. Air Force blocks Internet access to NYT, Guardian and 23 other sites posting WikiLeaks documents - Reuters

Doesn't make sense to me.

Prevent unauthorized access to classified material on U.S. Government equipment.

289 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:43:04pm

re: #285 Charles

Ugh. Here we go with the inevitable bureaucratic overreactions.

This is exactly what Assange predicted would happen, unfortunately.

290 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:43:36pm

re: #289 Fozzie Bear

This is exactly what Assange predicted would happen, unfortunately.

Didn't take a genius.

291 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:44:29pm

re: #285 Charles

Ugh. Here we go with the inevitable bureaucratic overreactions.

Exactly. I totally see the points you and others are making about wikileaks, but damn if this is exactly what shouldn't have happened as a result.

292 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:44:44pm

re: #289 Fozzie Bear

This is exactly what Assange predicted would happen, unfortunately.

They sent an official notice warning DoD employees and contractors not to visit any sites hosting the material. This would be the next step.

293 Kronocide  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:47:43pm

re: #284 000G

The funny thing is that Assange is actually coming from the conspiracy theory milieu, informing his mindset, his worldview in which the powers that rule the earth, chief among them governments and corporations, are at core nothing but conspiracies and that if you create enough leaks in their information system, their core functions will cease.

Well said, this is the core distillation of my interpretation of Assange's belief system.

He sees himself as some Information Age Robin Hood. Instead of stealing ill gotten tax money and farm animals to give back to the peasants, he's stealing information and mass distributing it to the peasants.

294 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:48:13pm

re: #219 Sergey Romanov

Although I do notice that some of the farther left actually do like Paul. Funny how that works.

The way Left and Right and Conservative and Liberal (and Libertarian) are handled in the U.S. are sometimes confusing to us Europeans. ;-)

295 Kragar  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:48:14pm

Got to take the kid's to get their glasses fixed. Later.

296 Amory Blaine  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:50:18pm

re: #295 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Got to take the kid's to get their glasses fixed. Later.

BB Gun?

297 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:51:30pm

re: #225 Fozzie Bear

I tend to think that the extremes of the political spectrum tend to view the problems of humanity as solvable, while the more moderate middle views them as manageable.

Once you think that the problems of humanity can be fixed, the next thing that comes along is the solutions, and that's where it gets really nutty.

Reading tipp: Albert Camus: The Rebel

298 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:53:12pm

re: #296 Amory Blaine

BB Gun?


[Video]

I didn't even need to look. !

299 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:55:03pm

re: #15 Charles

High walls are great for keeping the anarchists out, except the ones you choose as pets.

Yep. It's just another version of radical chic, like the frat boys wearing Che t-shirts with their $150 jeans and $200 sunglasses.

Yawn.

300 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:55:54pm

re: #294 000G

The way Left and Right and Conservative and Liberal (and Libertarian) are handled in the U.S. are sometimes confusing to us Europeans. ;-)

Heck, sometimes confusing to Americans too, given the shifting political/social winds.

301 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:56:23pm

If nothing else this uproar is a wake-up call for a lot of people:

- Governments who keep so many secrets they can't manage them.

- "Reputable" journalists who are far too comfortable with government and corporate secrecy.

- A security apparatus so inept it entrusts secret diplomatic cables to a private who had been busted for assaulting another soldier.

- The vast number of conspiracy buffs and believers who are disappointed not to find any good stuff on UFOs, HAARP, chemtrails, or fake Moon landings in the documents. They can either reinforce their paranoid worldview by claiming this makes wikileaks just another part of the great cover-up, or they can start to question that worldview completely.

302 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:58:14pm

re: #301 Shiplord Kirel


- The vast number of conspiracy buffs and believers who are disappointed not to find any good stuff on UFOs, HAARP, chemtrails, or fake Moon landings in the documents. They can either reinforce their paranoid worldview by claiming this makes wikileaks just another part of the great cover-up, or they can start to question that worldview completely.

Everybody knows the docs don't cover that time period, sheesh !!1!!

303 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:58:16pm

re: #281 Charles

No, the U.S. does a much better job by killing journalists and having high-level discussions on the killing of more of them, as has been detailed by The Guardian and other publications and as I tried to explain yesterday only to have Killgore Trout immediately start making jokes about it. I know which of the two developments are more troubling to actual war correspondents.

304 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:58:55pm

re: #301 Shiplord Kirel

I doubt the birthers/truthers/UFO abductees/ and conspiracy hounds will ever change their worldview. Real is scary.

305 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:59:15pm

re: #303 Barrett Brown

So the Algerian reporter doesn't matter? Collateral murder?

306 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:59:38pm

re: #303 Barrett Brown

No, the U.S. does a much better job by killing journalists and having high-level discussions on the killing of more of them, as has been detailed by The Guardian and other publications and as I tried to explain yesterday only to have Killgore Trout immediately start making jokes about it. I know which of the two developments are more troubling to actual war correspondents.

How many journalists have been deliberately killed by US actions?

307 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:59:45pm

re: #303 Barrett Brown

No, the U.S. does a much better job by killing journalists and having high-level discussions on the killing of more of them, as has been detailed by The Guardian and other publications and as I tried to explain yesterday only to have Killgore Trout immediately start making jokes about it. I know which of the two developments are more troubling to actual war correspondents.

WTF?!

308 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:59:55pm

re: #302 ozbloke

Everybody knows the docs don't cover that time period, sheesh !!1!!

Of course they do. We released all those fake LRO photos of the landing sites just last year.
//

309 Jack Burton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 2:59:58pm

re: #265 Obdicut

Wow. They really do. They say:

What assholes are running that site?

My question exactly. Wikileaks is good because of... Climategate?

Really?!?

310 Jack Burton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:00:57pm

re: #303 Barrett Brown

No, the U.S. does a much better job by killing journalists and having high-level discussions on the killing of more of them, as has been detailed by The Guardian and other publications and as I tried to explain yesterday only to have Killgore Trout immediately start making jokes about it. I know which of the two developments are more troubling to actual war correspondents.

Did you forget to take some pills today or something?

311 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:01:03pm

BTW, about the 7 kids who were first beaten during the recent Moscow riot.

According to this report from the 1st Channel, 4 of them were ethnic Russians who merely went to eat pizza on their friend's 15th birthday together with 3 Caucasian friends. Symbolic.

Fucking Nazis. Sometimes I wish I were pro-death penalty.

312 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:01:31pm

re: #283 Stanley Sea

BreakingNews

U.S. Air Force blocks Internet access to NYT, Guardian and 23 other sites posting WikiLeaks documents - Reuters

Doesn't make sense to me.

Basic fluid dynamics, restricting flow increases pressure. Now many people who never would have been interested in the material will have their curiosity stoked by a taboo.

313 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:01:56pm

re: #303 Barrett Brown

I guess that explains Katie Courics continued existence, as not really a journalist.
///

314 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:02:00pm

ahaha Michael Moore? Man, this world is turning into self parody

315 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:02:36pm

re: #283 Stanley Sea

BreakingNews

U.S. Air Force blocks Internet access to NYT, Guardian and 23 other sites posting WikiLeaks documents - Reuters

Doesn't make sense to me.

Well, if you think like the head of a huge government agency, it does kinda make sense. My husband and I were talking about this, and in his position and with his security clearances, it would be illegal for him to read classified stuff that got released illegally. That means he could be breaking the law unintentionally if he read a NYT article that had something leaked in the Wikileaks stuff. Obviously the DOD doesn't have the time or interest to prosecute people for that....but blocking these sites from government computers can save them having to try to figure out how to filter things individually.

Government computers are meant to be used for government work and not reading the NYT anyway. People can read newspapers on their own machines.

316 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:02:50pm

re: #286 ozbloke

Seeing there is a willingness by media all around the globe to publish this info, if wikileaks wasn't involved and the info was passed to the media via Manning, who would we be going after?

Anyone have any views on this?

317 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:02:53pm

re: #301 Shiplord Kirel

If nothing else this uproar is a wake-up call for a lot of people:

- Governments who keep so many secrets they can't manage them.

All you need is Google. Bet the Stasi would have loved to have had efficient cluster computing at their hands

318 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:04:17pm

re: #312 goddamnedfrank

Basic fluid dynamics, restricting flow increases pressure. Now many people who never would have been interested in the material will have their curiosity stoked by a taboo.

"Streisand effect"

319 researchok  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:04:22pm

Mr Brown- were you as worked up about the death of journalists when Daniel Pearl was slaughtered? Were you outraged over the Canadian female journalist killed in Iran?

Or is that outrage selective?

320 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:04:35pm

re: #81 Fozzie Bear

There are a lot of people here, myself included, who defend wikileaks, or rather, the need for something like it, and get slammed as supporting Assange, which isn't really the same thing.

THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT
THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT
THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT
THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT

321 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:06:26pm

re: #320 WindUpBird

I think this world would be a lot better if we had some more dudes who leaked a bit more of the fraud, malfeasance and all-around psychotic evil of our financial institutions a few years before it all threatened to suck our country through a black hole

322 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:07:17pm

re: #305 Charles

No, I didn't say that at all. As someone who has worked as a journalist in Mexico, lived openly American in Dar es Salaam during the early al-Qaeda attacks and whose friend lost his fiance in Iraq while serving as a war correspondent, I certainly don't think that threats against journalists are cute and fun. Wikileaks and others screwed up on this and redacted, although the details are thin at this point. I have concern for all working journalists.

323 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:07:25pm

re: #320 WindUpBird

THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT
THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT
THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT
THIS IS EXACTLY CORRECT

I remember when I got slammed for attacking Larry Sanger while not attacking Assange. Fun times!

324 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:07:50pm

re: #283 Stanley Sea

BreakingNews

U.S. Air Force blocks Internet access to NYT, Guardian and 23 other sites posting WikiLeaks documents - Reuters

Doesn't make sense to me.

wow, so that means someone in the Air Force might actually have to ask a friend to email, FTP, host or post those documents!

lol.

325 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:08:26pm

re: #323 000G

I remember when I got slammed for attacking Larry Sanger while not attacking Assange. Fun times!

Whee!

326 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:09:14pm

re: #286 ozbloke

Seeing there is a willingness by media all around the globe to publish this info, if wikileaks wasn't involved and the info was passed to the media via Manning, who would we be going after?

heh! :D

327 Amory Blaine  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:09:43pm

re: #315 funky chicken

Well, if you think like the head of a huge government agency, it does kinda make sense. My husband and I were talking about this, and in his position and with his security clearances, it would be illegal for him to read classified stuff that got released illegally. That means he could be breaking the law unintentionally if he read a NYT article that had something leaked in the Wikileaks stuff. Obviously the DOD doesn't have the time or interest to prosecute people for that...but blocking these sites from government computers can save them having to try to figure out how to filter things individually.

Government computers are meant to be used for government work and not reading the NYT anyway. People can read newspapers on their own machines.

An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances.

328 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:10:55pm

Manning =>wikileaks=>media. Basically, if the information is laundered a couple steps, it's cool ;-) Look over there!

329 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:11:21pm

re: #322 Barrett Brown

Would you please clear up whether you say the US deliberately kills journalists (I'd need some better evidence than Wikileakers) or that too many get caught in live fire (which I would agree with) or that the military is not careful enough. Thanks

330 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:11:23pm

re: #326 WindUpBird

heh! :D

Iv'e not normally failed to get a response from anyone, so I feel much better now thanks WUB

Its a hard question isn't it?

331 srjh  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:12:01pm

re: #316 ozbloke

I think the media would be a lot less willing to release the cables themselves, except for some of the more juicy ones.

But with the precedent of the Pentagon papers, there'd be virtually no chance of going after the traditional media with the same zeal as Wikileaks. Which is why the close involvement of the traditional media in the latest leaks is going to be a real problem for prosecuting Assange in the U.S. (let alone getting him there, which is unlikely). It's going to be hard to go after Wikileaks without going after the New York Times and Guardian, etc.

332 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:12:09pm

re: #328 WindUpBird

Manning =>wikileaks=>media. Basically, if the information is laundered a couple steps, it's cool ;-) Look over there!

Squirrel!!

333 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:13:49pm

re: #329 Rightwingconspirator

I wrote about the issue and discussed it here: [Link: ordinary-gentlemen.com...]

I will not get into it yet again at this venue. You may see my post here from yesterday and the "discussion" that ensued with Killgore Trout making jokes about it if you want to know why I will not discuss it here.

334 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:14:14pm

So! Who thinks we should do what the Tea Party dude says and censor news agencies who post the wikileaks stuff?


It's all just become so very interesting and weird, the Tea Party congressman-elect Allen West who's supposedly about freedom is explicitly advocating against a free press. it's all so great watching the weird philosophical u-turns

335 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:14:30pm

re: #332 ozbloke

Squirrel!!

WANT!

*runs off*

336 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:14:48pm

re: #301 Shiplord Kirel

If nothing else this uproar is a wake-up call for a lot of people:

- Governments who keep so many secrets they can't manage them.

- "Reputable" journalists who are far too comfortable with government and corporate secrecy.

- A security apparatus so inept it entrusts secret diplomatic cables to a private who had been busted for assaulting another soldier.

- The vast number of conspiracy buffs and believers who are disappointed not to find any good stuff on UFOs, HAARP, chemtrails, or fake Moon landings in the documents. They can either reinforce their paranoid worldview by claiming this makes wikileaks just another part of the great cover-up, or they can start to question that worldview completely.

My husband tells me he sits through lots of "top secret" briefings wondering WTF the info being presented is considered secret, or deserving of being kept secret. Kinda like the wikileaks diplomatic cables--I honestly can't think of a single one that has surprised me. Our diplomats think Karzai is corrupt? SHOCKER Our diplomats think Putin is the real power behind the government in Russia? NO WAY We get frustrated by China's lack of interest in getting rid of the North Korean bastard? WOW

Really--big whoop.

Now, as to this:

A security apparatus so inept it entrusts secret diplomatic cables to a private who had been busted for assaulting another soldier.

That's kinda shocking. Why does a PFC have access to all this info and the capability to save it all and transmit it to a non-secure computer? I still don't quite get that...unless these cables were all classified "top secret" as a bureaucratic reflex but weren't really very well protected like all of the "good" stuff really is.

337 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:15:37pm

re: #333 Barrett Brown

I wrote about the issue and discussed it here: [Link: ordinary-gentlemen.com...]

I will not get into it yet again at this venue. You may see my post here from yesterday and the "discussion" that ensued with Killgore Trout making jokes about it if you want to know why I will not discuss it here.

I'd like it if you stayed and did it here, but then again, I'm sort of an internet dork who's been steeped in 20 years of vigorous flamewars *_*

338 lostlakehiker  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:15:57pm

re: #246 ozbloke

So you agree Assange should not edit the docs?

His point is that when you're thinking about releasing docs, you should realize that many people will be in a position to see right through whatever fig leaves you paint over them to conceal the intimate details.

What you think you're showing the public:Very safe for work

What you're showing after those in the know work on it a bit: Same picture second verse, not maybe exactly safe for work. Though really it oughta be.

339 garhighway  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:16:31pm

re: #303 Barrett Brown

No, the U.S. does a much better job by killing journalists and having high-level discussions on the killing of more of them, as has been detailed by The Guardian and other publications and as I tried to explain yesterday only to have Killgore Trout immediately start making jokes about it. I know which of the two developments are more troubling to actual war correspondents.

And therefore getting more journalists killed is OK?

What kind of fucked-up logic is that?

340 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:16:50pm

re: #337 WindUpBird

Free Windy!

341 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:17:18pm

re: #339 garhighway

I don't know, I didn't say or imply that and this is the only place where anyone has gotten such an impression from my words.

342 garhighway  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:17:44pm

re: #4 SanFranciscoZionist

I could stand being under house arrest there.

OK. Bad news: he gets to live in a nice big house.

Good news: it's really drafty.

343 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:17:46pm

re: #315 funky chicken

Well, if you think like the head of a huge government agency, it does kinda make sense. My husband and I were talking about this, and in his position and with his security clearances, it would be illegal for him to read classified stuff that got released illegally. That means he could be breaking the law unintentionally if he read a NYT article that had something leaked in the Wikileaks stuff. Obviously the DOD doesn't have the time or interest to prosecute people for that...but blocking these sites from government computers can save them having to try to figure out how to filter things individually.

Government computers are meant to be used for government work and not reading the NYT anyway. People can read newspapers on their own machines.

I have a friend who has been Army and has a security clearance. When I was over at his house once, I was looking at some UK government website that had released documents of diplomatic correspondences between the US and the UK government during some time period in world history. It was even on the news, that's how I got to that site to begin with. When I was about to link to it at some forum, he requested me not to, in case the US government decided to classify the documents it had unclassified already, and it could get back to him for disseminating classified government documents, even if they had been specifically declassified at the time.

He seemed a little emberassed about the bizareness of the logic behind this reasoning, but I knew he was dead-serious and had to be because of what he was told and was contractually held to. The current system of classifying is, at least in my eyes, very apparently beyond "normal paranoia" and highly dysfunctional.

344 Political Atheist  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:18:07pm

re: #333 Barrett Brown

I missed that yesterday, given your experience I'm inclined to do the reading there and perhaps comment there.

345 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:18:38pm

First of all: There are no easy answers.
From the start my views on Wikileaks have been conflicted and at time I might even contradict myself.
Of course, I don't want innocent people to get into trouble for being exposed in the cables. I would feel very sorry for the Algerian journalist, should anything happen to him.
I have never liked the expression "collateral damage" but please note that this term has been invented by the military who usually don't feel very conflicted about it.
I support whistle blowing. It keeps the bastards a little bit more honest, maybe.
I also believe in responsible actions. That's why I would not appreciate the "dump" of 250000 cables. This is sensitive info and it should be handled with responsibility. I give credit to WL that they at least tried to do the right thing and let the media vet the cables. Btw they did offer the Pentagon and State Department to do the same but obviously pride was more important than a Algerian journalist.
That said, errors occur. They occur every day in the media, not just when handling classified info. The yellow press kills the reputation of people every day, and they don't seem to mind much.
A final thing: Did anyone tell the Algerian journalist that the confidential info he provided would be accessible to 2.5 million people?
Responsibility starts back home.

346 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:20:03pm

re: #321 WindUpBird

I think this world would be a lot better if we had some more dudes who leaked a bit more of the fraud, malfeasance and all-around psychotic evil of our financial institutions a few years before it all threatened to suck our country through a black hole

This may be the crux of the problem. It may be that big media and their parent corporations are too deeply connected to crooked banks and others to risk exposing them. This same reluctance may also come into play when foreign investors are involved. Would Fox News, partly owned by a Saudi prince, have revealed secret documents implicating Saudis in AQ funding, or calling for an attack on Iran? NBC will report on criticism of parent company GE's defense contracting, but would they take the next step and actually reveal company secrets to expose it? Of course they wouldn't.

I don't like or support Assange at all. He is a propagandist with an agenda, and potentially a very dangerous one. At the same time though, he has been a success in his own terms because he recognized a need, an un-met demand, and, in age-old business fashion, he seized the opportunity.

347 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:20:13pm

re: #334 WindUpBird

So! Who thinks we should do what the Tea Party dude says and censor news agencies who post the wikileaks stuff?

It's all just become so very interesting and weird, the Tea Party congressman-elect Allen West who's supposedly about freedom is explicitly advocating against a free press. it's all so great watching the weird philosophical u-turns

LOLZ, these guys are nuts. They want to disband the FDA because they want full health "freedom" but want to imprison Julian Assange for life.

Er, freedom means something different to them than it does to me, I guess.

348 garhighway  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:20:30pm

re: #341 Barrett Brown

I don't know, I didn't say or imply that and this is the only place where anyone has gotten such an impression from my words.

What am I missing? Charles says WL puts the Algerian journalist (as an example) at risk of life and limb through its exposure of him. Your defense is that the US does it, too.

If you didn't bring that up as a defense of WL, why else mention it?

349 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:20:57pm

re: #340 Stanley Sea

Free Windy!

he might be sort of checking out of the internet for a while, I dunno *_*

He does that sometimes

350 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:21:18pm

re: #339 garhighway

And therefore getting more journalists killed is OK?

What kind of fucked-up logic is that?

How did you get that out of what he posted?

351 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:21:55pm

re: #345 Mark Winter

I have never liked the expression "collateral damage" but please note that this term has been invented by the military who usually don't feel very conflicted about it.

You don't like it, but you're using it? And what do you mean that the military isn't conflicted about it-- are you saying the military doesn't attempt to minimize collateral damage?

352 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:22:23pm

re: #342 garhighway

OK. Bad news: he gets to live in a nice big house.

Good news: it's really drafty.

hahaha good news: There's two twins staring at him at the end of a long hallway.

353 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:22:32pm

re: #338 lostlakehiker

His point is that when you're thinking about releasing docs, you should realize that many people will be in a position to see right through whatever fig leaves you paint over them to conceal the intimate details.

What you think you're showing the public:Very safe for work

What you're showing after those in the know work on it a bit: Same picture second verse, not maybe exactly safe for work. Though really it oughta be.

Hey Losthiker,

Thanks for that, and thanks for the NSFW warning, my boss is an ahole.
I have been self employed nearly all my adult life.

354 Amory Blaine  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:22:42pm

re: #345 Mark Winter


A final thing: Did anyone tell the Algerian journalist that the confidential info he provided would be accessible to 2.5 million people?
Responsibility starts back home.

This

355 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:24:02pm

re: #348 garhighway

I said that it was a bad thing and then Wikileaks and others screwed up but then redacted it. As I said, I will discuss these issues at The League, but not here, as I'm frankly astonished at what happened yesterday.

356 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:24:22pm

re: #343 000G

Yeah, it's kinda silly. Laughable, really.

Just like Barret Brown's assertion that the US military seeks to assassinate war correspondents or other journalists.

357 lostlakehiker  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:24:26pm

re: #154 imp_62

We're always the last to find out. Good luck.

A little piece of advice: take a deep breath, and invite her to speak at length, without interruption or commentary from you, on her side of it. Say nothing in response immediately, except that you will need to go and think on what she's saying. Hot words cannot be recalled. Temporary silence is neither consent nor rejection; it's just a chance both to cool down, and to think.

358 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:27:09pm

re: #355 Barrett Brown

I said that it was a bad thing and then Wikileaks and others screwed up but then redacted it. As I said, I will discuss these issues at The League, but not here, as I'm frankly astonished at what happened yesterday.

So am I.

359 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:27:27pm

re: #356 funky chicken

Yeah, don't listen to the guy who writes books and articles about the media and works on projects with the best-known war correspondents and ex-intelligence officers and who's pointing to the actual assassinations and Bush and Blair's discussion of killing more, all from reputable Western news sources.

360 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:27:32pm

re: #355 Barrett Brown

I said that it was a bad thing and then Wikileaks and others screwed up but then redacted it. As I said, I will discuss these issues at The League, but not here, as I'm frankly astonished at what happened yesterday.

This isn't always the best place to be if you disagree with the zeitgeist. Pile-ons can take astoundingly hostile turns, and get extremely personal, quickly.

That said, I keep coming back, because much of the discussion is high quality. There are just a couple of position that are sort of verboten.

361 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:27:55pm

re: #351 Obdicut

You don't like it, but you're using it? And what do you mean that the military isn't conflicted about it-- are you saying the military doesn't attempt to minimize collateral damage?

Charles used it in "collateral murder".
And yes I would hope that the military will at least attempt to minimize collateral damage.

It just seems that they don't always succeed. Or the target is too important to bother.

We should at least recognize that WL attempts to minimize collateral damage. Maybe - or rather the vetting journalists - are not careful enough, or simply ignorant. Sometimes this also applies to the military.

362 lostlakehiker  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:28:48pm

re: #214 marjoriemoon

Anarcho capitalism. What a crock of bull.

I think I'm of average intelligence, but this is really just another pie in the sky philosophy to me. If it was actually doable as a viable philosophy, why are there no governments which practice it. Or are there? Who are they?

How is anarcho capitalism different than communism? In the sense that eventually the chosen few would take control of the masses. When or rather how does all this free market capitalism actually trickle down to the poor and unwashed? How do the unintelligent and infirm ever expect to prosper in such a society where there is no government and the lesser masses have to rely on the greater masses to feed and cloth them? People like Asange? Oh yea! He cares for the little people LOL Yet another repackaging of libertarians is all it is.

Only the wealthy are anarchists, little brat spawns of bigger brats. Selfish bastards. The poor are too busy wondering where they're going to get their next meal.

You underrate yourself. You are of well above average intelligence. But on every other point of your post, you're right.

363 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:28:57pm

re: #346 Shiplord Kirel

This may be the crux of the problem. It may be that big media and their parent corporations are too deeply connected to crooked banks and others to risk exposing them. This same reluctance may also come into play when foreign investors are involved. Would Fox News, partly owned by a Saudi prince, have revealed secret documents implicating Saudis in AQ funding, or calling for an attack on Iran? NBC will report on criticism of parent company GE's defense contracting, but would they take the next step and actually reveal company secrets to expose it? Of course they wouldn't.

I don't like or support Assange at all. He is a propagandist with an agenda, and potentially a very dangerous one. At the same time though, he has been a success in his own terms because he recognized a need, an un-met demand, and, in age-old business fashion, he seized the opportunity.


Yes, I agree with all this

if we have a press that is owned by criminals, they won't report on their own criminal behavior, or that of their owners.

so where do we go? We go to the internet.


Regardless of how much of an asshole Assange is, people WANT this, and they're going to keep valuing it. No matter what, people know they're being lied to, they know they're being manipulated by institutions beyond their understanding or control (see, people watching their unemployment as a football in congress, see: the US government protecting financial institutions that were obviously harming our countryl) and so they root for anyone bringing the secrets to them.

364 garhighway  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:28:58pm

re: #350 Fozzie Bear

How did you get that out of what he posted?

Charles said, in his post:

And that's one reporter brave enough to criticize a corrupt regime, silenced.
Is that what Wikileaks is for?

BB replies:

No, the U.S. does a much better job by killing journalists and having high-level discussions on the killing of more of them, as has been detailed by The Guardian and other publications and as I tried to explain yesterday only to have Killgore Trout immediately start making jokes about it. I know which of the two developments are more troubling to actual war correspondents.

It certainly sounds to me like the assertion being made is that because the US "does a much better job by killing journalists" that the death of the reporter Charles referenced was OK. Leaving aside the assertion that the US deliberately kills journalists, which I reject, it sure as hell sounds like a tu qouque argument to me.

365 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:29:39pm

re: #361 Mark Winter

It just seems that they don't always succeed. Or the target is too important to bother.

Of course they don't always succeed. That's nothing like what you said.


We should at least recognize that WL attempts to minimize collateral damage. Maybe - or rather the vetting journalists - are not careful enough, or simply ignorant.

No they don't.

366 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:29:44pm

re: #360 Fozzie Bear

This isn't always the best place to be if you disagree with the zeitgeist. Pile-ons can take astoundingly hostile turns, and get extremely personal, quickly.

That said, I keep coming back, because much of the discussion is high quality. There are just a couple of position that are sort of verboten.

Au contraire! its a GREAT place to be!

But you have to like being a bastard.

367 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:30:03pm

re: #359 Barrett Brown

You haven't pointed to any actual assassinations, unless you've brought proof of targeted killing that you haven't yet revealed.

368 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:30:42pm

re: #366 WindUpBird

Au contraire! its a GREAT place to be!

But you have to like being a bastard.

HAHAHA yes. You have to relish a good brawl. Or at least, not mind it that much.

369 Usually refered to as anyways  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:31:36pm

re: #358 Walter L. Newton

So am I.

Im surprised your going to France when you say they have dogs that eat their masters and hide in restaurants, and apparently the waiters know and they allow it !

Your text to link...

370 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:32:43pm

re: #367 Obdicut

I have brought as much proof as we have regarding many of the instances of Russian journalists being killed, and in fact more in light of the Bush-Blair conversation on bombing a news outlet's main HQ, which is something that doesn't seem to have made much of an impression here.

371 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:33:20pm

re: #368 Fozzie Bear

HAHAHA yes. You have to relish a good brawl. Or at least, not mind it that much.

I sorta do it here, because it's better than doing it in my other social circles online, where A) people believe more like I do and B) that makes the arguments WAY NASTIER when they occur. I got godwined by not being pro-gay ENOUGH, because of a bunch of TG politics relating to the Human Rights Campaign.

372 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:33:58pm

re: #370 Barrett Brown

I distinctly remember russian journalists being assassinated over the Chechnya...thing, but I don't know much about it

373 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:34:09pm

re: #365 Obdicut

Of course they don't always succeed. That's nothing like what you said.

No they don't.

Maybe you should afford the same margin of error to WL as you afford to the military.

We can certainly assume that nobody at WL wants to put the Algerian journalist into harm's way.

374 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:34:43pm

re: #370 Barrett Brown

I have brought as much proof as we have regarding many of the instances of Russian journalists being killed, and in fact more in light of the Bush-Blair conversation on bombing a news outlet's main HQ, which is something that doesn't seem to have made much of an impression here.

Well, there isn't actual proof that Russian state as such engages in killings of journalists, although it is certainly responsible for the climate which allows such killings to happen. And no, there is no evidence that Politkovskaya was offed on Putin's orders etc.

375 Kronocide  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:34:49pm

re: #367 Obdicut

You haven't pointed to any actual assassinations, unless you've brought proof of targeted killing that you haven't yet revealed.

There were discussions of bombing al Jazeera news facilities, and a tank shot at a hotel killing 3 (newspeople), inferred that the American tank actually aimed at the actual hotel room where the reporters were, deliberately trying to kill them.

I think we discussed it here when it happened.

That's all I know about.

376 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:35:03pm

re: #109 APox

Has Glenn beck lost his fucking mind? [Link: mediamatters.org...]
I only ask this because this sounds more retarded than normal.

Oh, for God's sake....I can assure everybody here that the SpecOps community isn't gonna take up arms if the Obama administration decides to enact strict regulations on Wall Street. Most of us military families ain't exactly in that whole derivative-trading or hedge fund class.

377 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:35:14pm

re: #370 Barrett Brown

I have brought as much proof as we have regarding many of the instances of Russian journalists being killed, and in fact more in light of the Bush-Blair conversation on bombing a news outlet's main HQ, which is something that doesn't seem to have made much of an impression here.

Seems like good strategy for a war, make sure no sympathetic news from the country being attacked gets out

378 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:36:22pm

re: #370 Barrett Brown

A conversation about a bombing that didn't happen isn't proof that targeted killing ever took place, by any stretch of the imagination. You're acting as though you talked about it and people simply didn't respond, instead of actually have arguments that differed from your position.

The Russian journalists were not killed by the US military, right? So what do they have to do with your assertion that the US assassinated journalists?

You're talking about 'actual assassinations', and then in the next breath saying you have as 'much proof as we have'.

379 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:36:47pm

re: #376 funky chicken

Oh, for God's sake...I can assure everybody here that the SpecOps community isn't gonna take up arms if the Obama administration decides to enact strict regulations on Wall Street. Most of us military families ain't exactly in that whole derivative-trading or hedge fund class.

I don't think he's ever gonna stop, i think he's here to stay, he saw his way in, he basically mainstreamed Alex Jones rhetoric

The Dark Future! We have a famous news guy who says shit like this, whee!

380 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:37:53pm

re: #373 Mark Winter

Maybe you should afford the same margin of error to WL as you afford to the military.
.

Why?


We can certainly assume that nobody at WL wants to put the Algerian journalist into harm's way

Which makes it all the stupider that they did. Nobody made them do it. They weren't trying to hit some other target when they released that cable.

What is the point, at all, of releasing any of the diplomatic cables that don't show malfeasance or criminal activities? What is the utility of exposing the conversations of diplomats?

381 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:38:43pm

I'll say for the record I find this wikileaks back and forth to be the most interesting reading here on LGF in a long time

382 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:39:13pm

re: #378 Obdicut

This is yet another time on which my case has been misrepresented. I talked about three separate attacks that occurred in a very short frame of time with an even more egregious attack having been discussed by the president of the United States and the prime minister of the U.K.

383 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:39:59pm

re: #377 WindUpBird

Seems like good strategy for a war, make sure no sympathetic news from the country being attacked gets out

That cannot possibly be the US strategy, or else there'd be much larger number of dead reporters. By an order of magnitude.

I mean, apparently the US not only assassinates reporters, but it's really incompetent at doing so.

384 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:41:03pm

re: #369 ozbloke

Im surprised your going to France when you say they have dogs that eat their masters and hide in restaurants, and apparently the waiters know and they allow it !

Your text to link...

Spelling problems again... that's the problem with trying to blog and playing "Satin Doll" on my keyboard at the same time. My keyboard is right behind me, and sometimes I spin around in my office chair and play a turn, then go back to typing... not paying attention.

385 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:41:20pm

re: #382 Barrett Brown

This is yet another time on which my case has been misrepresented. I talked about three separate attacks that occurred in a very short frame of time with an even more egregious attack having been discussed by the president of the United States and the prime minister of the U.K.

Look, dude, instead of talking about how your case has been misrepresented, remake the case. Three separate incidents do not prove jack shit. What is the possible motivation for the US to target reports so randomly and haphazardly?

Why on earth isn't the fog of war a sufficient explanation for those deaths? Why is the most obvious answer a conspiracy?

386 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:42:07pm

re: #383 Obdicut

That cannot possibly be the US strategy, or else there'd be much larger number of dead reporters. By an order of magnitude.

I mean, apparently the US not only assassinates reporters, but it's really incompetent at doing so.

I know it's not our strategy, it just didn't sound unreasonable to me that we would have talked about it

387 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:42:10pm

re: #359 Barrett Brown

Yeah, don't listen to the guy who writes books and articles about the media and works on projects with the best-known war correspondents and ex-intelligence officers and who's pointing to the actual assassinations and Bush and Blair's discussion of killing more, all from reputable Western news sources.

So, you're really gonna double down on your assertion that the US military seeks to assassinate war correspondents and other journalists?

Hysterical and laughable.

And narcissistic.

388 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:43:00pm

re: #373 Mark Winter

Maybe you should afford the same margin of error to WL as you afford to the military.

We can certainly assume that nobody at WL wants to put the Algerian journalist into harm's way.

The US military is accountable on many levels, with lots of oversight. It's part of a government that's democratically elected, or as close to that as we can come.

Who holds Wikileaks and Julian Assange accountable? Who elected them?

389 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:43:16pm

re: #245 Killgore Trout

Yeah, we'll see where this goes. He was almost certainly insane but he was also making a political point. The V for vendetta thing has been coopted by a lot of different extremist groups, Paulians, Anarchists and even Wikileaks supporters.
It's frustr4ating that the press will report the V thing but won't inform their readers about what it means.

This was Panama City. Attacks on Parliament don't exactly resonate there. If he drew a "V", that means they nailed him before he did the "D".

390 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:43:25pm

re: #378 Obdicut

Thank you.

391 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:43:44pm

re: #387 funky chicken

So, you're really gonna double down on your assertion that the US military seeks to assassinate war correspondents and other journalists?

Hysterical and laughable.

And narcissistic.

he said there was a discussion about it, not that they're "seeking to do it" that implies a plan in motion.

I'd like to see the links, but really? Our government has discussed WAY worse and weirder than just bombing a news outlet ;-)

392 Walter L. Newton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:44:14pm

re: #385 Obdicut

Look, dude, instead of talking about how your case has been misrepresented, remake the case. Three separate incidents do not prove jack shit. What is the possible motivation for the US to target reports so randomly and haphazardly?

Why on earth isn't the fog of war a sufficient explanation for those deaths? Why is the most obvious answer a conspiracy?

Here is some info on targeting journalist...

Did the US military target Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena in Iraq?

The shooting of Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena and three Italian intelligence agents by US troops near Baghdad international airport on Friday night has provoked an angry response in Italy and calls for the immediate withdrawal of Italian soldiers from Iraq. Sgrena was wounded in the attack that killed Nicola Calipari, the agent who negotiated her release, and injured two others.
At the very least, the incident highlights the ruthless methods employed by the US military in the face of continuing armed resistance and widespread hostility to the US occupation. But the reality could be even more sinister: that Sgrena, who had been held hostage for a month by a little known Islamic group, was deliberately targetted either to send a warning or to silence her.

[Link: www.wsws.org...]

393 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:44:48pm

re: #385 Obdicut

Three separate incidents plus the Bush-Blair discussion on doing exactly what I'm accusing them of doing. I'm sorry, but I've never had to restate my case at other venues, and I don't feel obligated to do it here.

394 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:45:21pm

re: #386 WindUpBird

I know it's not our strategy, it just didn't sound unreasonable to me that we would have talked about it

Of course Bush and Blair talked about it. That's perfectly real. And it proves nothing whatsoever in terms of whether such actions were ever actually acted on.

395 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:45:35pm

Fuck, the four star general with the new book (odyssey of a war hero guy, can't recall his name), was talking about it being discussed that we allow a spy plane of ours to be intentionally shot down by Saddam. To create the environment where we could invade.

discussed! Not put into action. But it was discussed!

396 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:45:54pm

re: #380 Obdicut


What is the point, at all, of releasing any of the diplomatic cables that don't show malfeasance or criminal activities? What is the utility of exposing the conversations of diplomats?

They are damn interesting.

397 Kronocide  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:46:20pm

re: #382 Barrett Brown

This is yet another time on which my case has been misrepresented.

I'm still trying to understand what your case is ex: Russian or American gov assassinating journalists. This is a blog, feel free to correct misinterpretations as they happen instead of complaining that you're being misinterpreted.

This is how it is in real life in interacting with others, I see no difference on a blog.

I sense that any misinterpretation of your position is perceived to be done callously or to toy with you: sometimes people are merely misinterpreting you and are due correction.

398 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:46:58pm

re: #396 Mark Winter

They are damn interesting.

Yeah, I think raw curiosity is a motivator for people

399 garhighway  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:47:13pm

re: #393 Barrett Brown

Three separate incidents plus the Bush-Blair discussion on doing exactly what I'm accusing them of doing. I'm sorry, but I've never had to restate my case at other venues, and I don't feel obligated to do it here.

Still... in what sense is this relevant to the Wikileaks discussion? What is the logical connection? Why bring it up?

400 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:47:24pm

re: #393 Barrett Brown

Three separate incidents plus the Bush-Blair discussion on doing exactly what I'm accusing them of doing. I'm sorry, but I've never had to restate my case at other venues, and I don't feel obligated to do it here.

Then don't be surprised when people remain completely unconvinced. People tend to die in war zones. Lots and lots of US troops have died in the war zone from friendly fire, for example.

The statistics are probably too small for a good margin of error, but I'll ask you again: Is the rate of death of journalists actually significantly higher than other civilians in the war zone?

401 Reginald Perrin  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:47:35pm

re: #374 Sergey Romanov

Last night I failed to mention that Eric Odom received funding from the Kochs and FreedomWorks prior to the founding of the Teabagger movement.*
A lot of what they call a grass-roots movement was created by Odom's odious network of blogs and the trolls who frequent those cesspools.

*they were calling themselves Teabaggers, before we called them teabaggers.

402 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:47:38pm

re: #397 BigPapa

to be fair, Killgore went off on him, so he might be playing a bit of D here

403 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:47:46pm

re: #396 Mark Winter

They are damn interesting.

That's not a reason. Or rather, that's a dilletantish reason.

404 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:48:01pm

And meanwhile I've got re: #395 WindUpBird

Plus Operation Northwoods, which although found in the national archives will merely strike some here as some hilarious conspiracy theory. I'm going to go attend to some other work now.

405 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:48:13pm

re: #401 Reginald Perrin

Last night I failed to mention that Eric Odom received funding from the Kochs and FreedomWorks prior to the founding of the Teabagger movement.*
A lot of what they call a grass-roots movement was created by Odom's odious network of blogs and the trolls who frequent those cesspools.

*they were calling themselves Teabaggers, before we called them teabaggers.

heh

406 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:48:18pm

re: #389 Decatur Deb

This was Panama City. Attacks on Parliament don't exactly resonate there. If he drew a "V", that means they nailed him before he did the "D".

V for Vendetta? Isn't that a comic book or something? And the guy was pissed off that his wife was fired from some unidentified job, so he takes the school board hostage? And, sorry if this is inappropriate at this time, but I got a chuckle out of this:

School Board member Ginger Littleton can be seen trying to knock the gun from the gunman's hand with her purse.

Not very macho of an image.

407 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:49:06pm

re: #388 Charles

Who holds Wikileaks and Julian Assange accountable? Who elected them?

Since we are in Analogy land: The people who are donating to WikiLeaks are, sortof. The Wau Holland Foundation only gives out money after having received receipts that match their foundation's goals and records these matters to be looked into by elected officials (in Germany, but whatever). What is keeping him "in office" is not votes, but money. Money by sympathizers, and apparently there are lots of them.

408 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:49:45pm

re: #404 Barrett Brown

And meanwhile I've got

Plus Operation Northwoods, which although found in the national archives will merely strike some here as some hilarious conspiracy theory. I'm going to go attend to some other work now.

That was out of the general's own mouth on the Daily Show, so I know at least he stands behind it :D

409 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:50:01pm

re: #401 Reginald Perrin

Last night I failed to mention that Eric Odom received funding from the Kochs and FreedomWorks prior to the founding of the Teabagger movement.*
A lot of what they call a grass-roots movement was created by Odom's odious network of blogs and the trolls who frequent those cesspools.

*they were calling themselves Teabaggers, before we called them teabaggers.

Interesting, thanks. BTW, was this blog-networking thing a hobby for him at first and work later, or was he paid from the beginning?

410 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:50:28pm

re: #406 funky chicken

V for Vendetta? Isn't that a comic book or something? And the guy was pissed off that his wife was fired from some unidentified job, so he takes the school board hostage? And, sorry if this is inappropriate at this time, but I got a chuckle out of this:

Not very macho of an image.

We're way inside 24 hrs, but the last story is that he was firing blanks, as in a suicide attempt or acting-out gone bad.

411 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:50:43pm

re: #407 000G

Since we are in Analogy land: The people who are donating to WikiLeaks are, sortof. The Wau Holland Foundation only gives out money after having received receipts that match their foundation's goals and records these matters to be looked into by elected officials (in Germany, but whatever).What is keeping him "in office" is not votes, but money. Money by sympathizers, and apparently there are lots of them.

Well, that's what keeps our politicians in office!

I mean, votes are involved, but that's like saying gas gets you from one place to each other, it's really the car doing that, it just needs gas :D

412 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:51:50pm

re: #404 Barrett Brown

Operation Northwoods, which was never actually acted on.

Is it insane that it was even a plan, that the Joint Chiefs signed it? Yes.

Does that mean it actually is evidence, in any way, of any actual actions? No.

I'm not saying that it's impossible for the US to have targeted journalists. I'm saying you've done nothing to show that they actually did.

413 reine.de.tout  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:52:01pm

re: #355 Barrett Brown

I said that it was a bad thing and then Wikileaks and others screwed up but then redacted it. As I said, I will discuss these issues at The League, but not here, as I'm frankly astonished at what happened yesterday.

Astonished?
Why?

I saw as many posting in support of you and your position, as posting against it.

Are you so very certain that you are right that you are "astonished" when there is strong disagreement?

414 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:52:31pm

re: #411 WindUpBird

Well, that's what keeps our politicians in office!

I mean, votes are involved, but that's like saying gas gets you from one place to each other, it's really the car doing that, it just needs gas :D

I dunno, if Meg Whitman versus Jerry Brown did not prove that you could not really buy an election, I don't know what would.

415 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:52:41pm

re: #388 Charles

The US military is accountable on many levels, with lots of oversight. It's part of a government that's democratically elected, or as close to that as we can come.

Who holds Wikileaks and Julian Assange accountable? Who elected them?

Who elected the free press? We all do, by using it, by contributing to it. If we, the people, do not want WL to exist, it would disappear.

Instead many people chose to mirror the WL site so that it won't disappear.

WL exists because a lot of people think that the media isn't doing it's job properly. Remember who invented the word "embedded".

416 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:53:03pm

re: #414 000G

I dunno, if Meg Whitman versus Jerry Brown did not prove that you could not really buy an election, I don't know what would.

an election in the United States, that is.

417 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:53:15pm

re: #415 Mark Winter

I don't think Wikileaks is doing its job properly.

418 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:55:08pm

re: #403 Obdicut

That's not a reason. Or rather, that's a dilletantish reason.

Nope. That's the only reason anything gets published in the first place.

419 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:55:08pm
No, the U.S. does a much better job by killing journalists and having high-level discussions on the killing of more of them,

Hey, my reading comprehension is pretty good. I'm almost certain I didn't misunderstand that italicized passage.

420 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:55:16pm

re: #413 reine.de.tout

All that boldface gives me the mental image of you speaking through a vocorder ^_^

421 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:55:38pm

re: #413 reine.de.tout

I actually wrote here at LGF recently that my astonishment thus far is not at all because I'm so clearly right, because I know that it's complicated, so please don't try to assert otherwise. I was astonished at the conduct of Kilgore Trouth and the support he received for engaging in that conduct.

422 Kronocide  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:55:40pm

re: #402 WindUpBird

to be fair, Killgore went off on him, so he might be playing a bit of D here

Yes, I read the whole thing and understand your point, and can understand if Barrett is defensive, this place being different than all his other venues he partakes in. Maybe it's because this place really is different than all the other places he participates, not implying that this is good or bad.

But in the end, the worst I saw KT write was 'having a few screws loose' and not taking Wikileaks supporters seriously in between oodling some respect upon Barrett. It really wasn't all that bad.

423 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:57:18pm

re: #374 Sergey Romanov

Well, there isn't actual proof that Russian state as such engages in killings of journalists, although it is certainly responsible for the climate which allows such killings to happen. And no, there is no evidence that Politkovskaya was offed on Putin's orders etc.

BTW, to expand on it a bit. At present, to repeat, nothing has been proven and mere suspicion ("COINCIDENCE?!!?") is not enough. But I can imagine secret services assassinating some inconvenient journalists, so if say Putin's regime fell and there were investigations, some cases _might_ have come up. There is such a famous case in Ukraine - the murder of Gongadze. Wiki it up. Recently it was officially proven that the order was given at least on the level of the former minister of interior. Whether Kuchma really ordered it is not known, but may be likely given the Mel'nichenko tapes (either this, or Kuchma's off-hand remarks calling for murder of Gongadze were taken too seriously by that minister, so he decided he was given an order and acted on it). But in Gongadze's case there's been serious work and investigation, not mere suspicion.

424 Barrett Brown  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:57:29pm

re: #419 funky chicken

Yes, but you're a disingenuous and mediocre person of the sort that routinely claims to be laughing at the hilariousness of his opponent's foolishness, so I'm not going to pretend like you merit me sticking around here to discuss this with you after having engaged in that sort of behavior.

425 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:57:34pm

re: #418 Mark Winter

Nope. That's the only reason anything gets published in the first place.

Okay, whatever. Sheesh.

That's a good defense of Rush Limbaugh.

426 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:58:18pm

re: #424 Barrett Brown

You really don't do yourself any favors when you just do the "I'm a better person than you" routine.

What's the point?

427 Fozzie Bear  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:58:30pm

Off to see a movie with my wife. I expect this conversation to be going strong in 3 hours!

(she is prying me away)

428 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:58:47pm

re: #417 Obdicut

I don't think Wikileaks is doing its job properly.

Maybe. Do you think the New York Times is? The Obama administration? Congress?

If it doesn't, say so. And try to make them do their job better.

429 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 3:59:02pm

re: #421 Barrett Brown

I actually wrote here at LGF recently that my astonishment thus far is not at all because I'm so clearly right, because I know that it's complicated, so please don't try to assert otherwise. I was astonished at the conduct of Kilgore Trouth and the support he received for engaging in that conduct.

This isn't the 92nd Street Y. Think Irish bar on 3rd Ave.

430 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:00:22pm

re: #415 Mark Winter

WL exists because a lot of people think that the media isn't doing it's job properly. Remember who invented the word "embedded".

people think they're being lied to by institutions

and this is the first time in history where we have the power to disseminate information incredibly quickly (internet)

I figured it was bound to happen.

when in was in jr. high, I was blown away when I ran across a BBS that had literally hundreds of pirated games for download. It was long distance so I didn't really download anything, but all of the games I wanted, all right there. C64, Apple II, the works. It's always happened. The scale is simply larger. it can now happen so much faster.

431 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:02:22pm

re: #428 Mark Winter

Maybe. Do you think the New York Times is? The Obama administration? Congress?

What does that have to do with anything?


If it doesn't, say so. And try to make them do their job better.

I do. What does that have to do with Wikileaks?

432 Charles Johnson  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:03:36pm

re: #415 Mark Winter

Who elected the free press? We all do, by using it, by contributing to it. If we, the people, do not want WL to exist, it would disappear.

Instead many people chose to mirror the WL site so that it won't disappear.

WL exists because a lot of people think that the media isn't doing it's job properly. Remember who invented the word "embedded".

In other words, you're fine with a self-appointed autocrat with very strong political biases, accountable to no one, determining what should be secret and what shouldn't.

I'm not.

433 funky chicken  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:03:46pm

re: #424 Barrett Brown

Yes, but you're a disingenuous and mediocre person of the sort that routinely claims to be laughing at the hilariousness of his opponent's foolishness, so I'm not going to pretend like you merit me sticking around here to discuss this with you after having engaged in that sort of behavior.

Laughable, hysterical, and narcissistic.

Dang, I was close the first time.

Gotta go drive the kids around.

Barrett, you're very young and excitable. That's OK, lots of folks are.

434 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:03:59pm

re: #430 WindUpBird

And people really are being lied to.

The eye-burstingly-frustrating part of this for me is that so many of the lies are out in plain fucking sight. We have a population that can't come to grips with progressive taxation, in the main. There is so much disinformation out there, and it can't be simply washed away with information. The disinformation itself needs to be attacked.

That's why I thin Wikileaks is dumb as shit. It is not what the world needs, or what the media needs.

435 garhighway  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:04:45pm

re: #431 Obdicut


I do. What does that have to do with Wikileaks?

There does appear to be a weird argument out there that goes "Because X is fucked up, Wikileaks is good."

And the X can be anything.

436 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:05:38pm

re: #425 Obdicut

Okay, whatever. Sheesh.

That's a good defense of Rush Limbaugh.

No. Maybe I should not say "interesting" but "of public interest".
What the U.S. has been saying publicly about certain countries does differ a lot from what it says in those cables.

And this is of public interest even if it doesn't involve malfeasance or criminal actions.

Oh, and if the U.S. government wants to know what food I order when I fly from Berlin to Paris I think I have the right to know what the U.S. government REALLY thinks about my country.

Checks and balances, folks.

437 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:06:33pm

Side note: The whole "Lavish Mansion" and "most anarchists are anti-capitalists" shtick humorously reminds me of my old history teacher in high school, calling Bertolt Brecht a "Salon Bolshevik" for smoking cigars and drinking whiskey. :-)

438 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:08:01pm

re: #436 Mark Winter

Thank you for changing your position to one marginally better.

Are you saying that all of the cables released serve the public interest?

439 Decatur Deb  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:14:21pm

Every sentient being knows the Internet is a sewer. If you drop your petit-fours into the grate, it's pretty useless to blame the rats. DoD and DoS security need a severe ass-kicking.

440 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:17:02pm

re: #432 Charles

In other words, you're fine with a self-appointed autocrat with very strong political biases, accountable to no one, determining what should be secret and what shouldn't.

I'm not.

I find Mr. Assange far more irrelevant than most Americans.
What about the accountability of the CIA operatives who are guilty of kidnapping?
If the U.S. thinks crimes can be justified because of "national security concerns" then it's a bit difficult to blame non U.S. citizens for not paying too much respect to what the U.S. wants to keep a secret.

441 Reginald Perrin  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:19:43pm

re: #409 Sergey Romanov

Interesting, thanks. BTW, was this blog-networking thing a hobby for him at first and work later, or was he paid from the beginning?


He had a cover operation that marketed his networking skills towards small internet entrepreneurs. He was a internet consultant, while at the same time he was running trolls all over the web. One of his upper echelon trolls was Mark Koldys, aka Johnny Dollar. Koldys was a Ron Paul supporter in 1988 when Paul lost the nomination to the senior President Bush.
This was never play to Odom, he is a mercenary.

442 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:20:44pm

re: #438 Obdicut

Thank you for changing your position to one marginally better.

Are you saying that all of the cables released serve the public interest?

I haven't read all of them but yes, much more than Lindsey Lohan's problems with Mr. Booze.

The impressions are not all negative, btw. I found many cables of U.S. diplomats quite clear-sighted.

443 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:22:56pm

re: #440 Mark Winter

I find Mr. Assange far more irrelevant than most Americans.
What about the accountability of the CIA operatives who are guilty of kidnapping?
If the U.S. thinks crimes can be justified because of "national security concerns" then it's a bit difficult to blame non U.S. citizens for not paying too much respect to what the U.S. wants to keep a secret.

This.

The case of El-Masri was despicable, to say the least.

444 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:23:04pm

re: #442 Mark Winter

I haven't read all of them but yes, much more than Lindsey Lohan's problems with Mr. Booze.

Why are you under the impression that there's a comparison going on?

445 Stanghazi  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:26:09pm

re: #439 Decatur Deb

Every sentient being knows the Internet is a sewer. If you drop your petit-fours into the grate, it's pretty useless to blame the rats. DoD and DoS security need a severe ass-kicking.

THIS

446 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:29:50pm

re: #444 Obdicut

Why are you under the impression that there's a comparison going on?

Being a starlet obviously justifies "public interest" and trumps privacy.
Why shouldn't this apply to government which is accountable to us?

447 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:32:49pm

re: #446 Mark Winter

Being a starlet obviously justifies "public interest" and trumps privacy.

No it doesn't.


Why shouldn't this apply to government which is accountable to us?

If the only argument you can make in favor of Wikileaks is a comparative one, you really don't have much of an argument.

448 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:34:51pm

re: #447 Obdicut

No it doesn't.

You call this an argument?

449 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:39:06pm
450 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:39:27pm

re: #448 Mark Winter

You call this an argument?

Do you call your original assertion that it does an argument?

451 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:44:42pm

re: #253 Charles

I'm not talking about the leadership. I'm talking about an official in the bureaucracy, who presumably has a family and a life like most other fairly successful people. What gives you or anyone else the right to arbitrarily decide that everything he wrote should now become public? Do his human rights and livelihood just not matter, because he was in a position to write classified cables?

And I mentioned Egypt and Syria as two examples where one of the best outcomes for someone who wrote something the regime didn't like would be to lose their jobs. There might be real problems just for having your name appear, regardless of the content.

Redaction is meaningless, when they're posting digital source documents that can easily be checked against originals. It's trivial for the governments involved to figure out who wrote the cables.

These bureaucrats communicated with US diplomats and the US government failed to keep their communications secure. I'm not sure their expectation of privacy were all that reasonable considering they were talking to representatives of a foreign power while working for corrupt, anti democratic regimes. I'm also not sure what moral imperative a third parties has not to publish and discuss such communications once those communications have become demonstrably insecure. Yes the bureaucrats will have families and human rights, just like the Iranian Basijis would if their membership list were to become public and just like those young boys who were raped at Dyncorp's bacha bazi party for Afghan police recruits did.

Now the journalist who was exposed is a much more scary and chilling example, in as much as he wasn't a representative of the Algerian government.

452 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:47:02pm

re: #450 Obdicut

Do you call your original assertion that it does an argument?

Yes, I believe that a "government of the people, by the people, for the people" should be accountable to its people.

"No government ought to be without censors, and where the press is free, no one ever will. If virtuous, it need not fear the fair operation of attack and defence. Nature has given to man no other means of sifting out the truth whether in religion, law or politics. I think it as honorable to the government neither to know nor notice its sycophants or censors, as it would be undignified and criminal to pamper the former and persecute the latter." --Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1792

453 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:50:50pm

re: #452 Mark Winter

Not that assertion.

This one:


Being a starlet obviously justifies "public interest" and trumps privacy.
454 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:54:10pm

re: #453 Obdicut

Not that assertion.

This one:

Yes I rate the "privacy" of governments lower than that of individuals when it comes to "public interest".

455 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 4:55:57pm

re: #454 Mark Winter

Yes I rate the "privacy" of governments lower than that of individuals when it comes to "public interest".

But do you honestly think that a starlet has no privacy?

456 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:16:00pm

re: #455 Obdicut

But do you honestly think that a starlet has no privacy?

Actually I do. That's my point.

457 Mark Winter  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:16:54pm

I mean, yes she does have

458 Obdicut  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 5:41:11pm

re: #456 Mark Winter

You really haven't made an argument that is at all, in any way, clear.

459 Eclectic Infidel  Tue, Dec 14, 2010 7:30:04pm

Sweet digs. The grounds will make for a lovely morning walk. Especially in that English fog. I am envious.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh