4 ms·
In doing business with criminals, you become one IMO. Sure, technically he's not violating any laws, but I think that points to flaws in the justice system (wor
by nhangen 16y ago
In doing business with criminals, you become one IMO. Sure, technically he's not violating any laws, but I think that points to flaws in the justice system (worldwide, not just the US) more than it does to his nobility.
If someone illegally sells/steals/shares confidential information, then where does the chain of responsibility/legality stop?
- jacquesm 16y agoExcellent question. Please google the Pentagon Papers and educate yourself some more on the subject. If we followed your conclusion pretty much all the newspapers in the world that actually did their jobs would be in the docket tomorrow. There has always been a tug-of-war between the press and the government about what is and what is not permitted and it is universally recognized that a free press is essential to the functioning of democracies. The issue at stake here is a complicated one, whether or not wikileaks is part of the press, and even if it isn't whether it should be counted as such. Governments the world over, from the worst to the best have figured out a loophole in the whole 'free press' business, which is to use 'access' as a coin with which to control the press. In a world where eyeballs govern the budgets of newspapers not having access directly affects a newspapers bottom line. WikiLeaks circumvents the access trick by simply not being susceptible to that kind of leverage and it is exactly because of that that I suspect that they are seen as 'dangerous' by those in power.
- nhangen 16y agoI don't see the issue as free press. I don't believe that our press has ever been more free than it is today. The issue I'm concerned with is that this turns people like Manning into heroes. Freedom of the press was not created to protect classified documents. They didn't exist at the time. It was created to protect the press' right to contradict and/or point out the flaw in the government system, and the people that manage it. It's meant to prevent government censorship. And legal or not, I'm just not comfortable with this level of freedom with national secrets. We'll see how it plays out over the long-term, but I don't think it's a fear of Assange you see, but fear of what these documents will do to strengthen our enemies.
- jacquesm 16y ago> but fear of what these documents will do to strengthen our enemies. I don't subscribe to your fear, or to your suggestion that we have a common enemy.
- nhangen 16y agoI'm referring to enemies of the West. If you live in the US, UK, or Eastern Europe and don't believe we have common enemies, then you are sadly mistaken. I've met them. They don't like us.
- jacquesm 16y ago> I'm referring to enemies of the West. Oh my! > If you live in the US, UK, or Eastern Europe and don't believe we have common enemies, then you are sadly mistaken. I guess I will have to take your word for it. > I've met them. In what capacity did you meet the enemies of the West ? > They don't like us. Did they specify any reasons ?
- nhangen 16y agoWhen I was in Afghanistan in 2008. I could name countless reasons, but you know them already.
- jacquesm 16y agoSo, because of your experience in Afghanistan (you were there as an aid worker?) you have decided that wikileaks is somehow illegal. There are fanatic idiots everywhere, that does not mean that we can't strive for a more open government, especially not when it has come to light time and time again that our governments and corporations do not just have secrets because we all benefit from them, but for the most part that they have secrets in order to cover up the lies and the corruption. If it weren't for that wikileaks would not even exist. I'll take the extra 0.000025% (that's a doubling) chance of dying in a terrorist attack because of that, which is still substantially less than dying of old age in my bed. Stop being afraid.
- 16y ago
- joshuaheard 16y agoSo you apply to the government for a job and in your job application, you put your address, social security number, telephone number, your personal references, etc. Then the government does a background check on you including your credit history, transcripts of interviews with your friends and family, copies of sealed court records, and copies of medical records obtained to qualify for employer insurance. One country wants to buy airplanes from another country. It has offered $1 million for the airplanes, but the seller wants $2 million. The country writes an email saying it is willing to pay $2 million, but wants to negotiate. If a newspaper published the email the seller would demand $2 million costing the country an additional $1 million. Suppose the military had a remote missile launch capability that allowed generals to telephone in and launch a missile. A newspaper gets hold of the phone number and launch codes allowing anyone to launch the missiles. Under your reasoning, it is right to publish these.