Tuesday, August 03, 2010



Wikileaks: The man who went too far

Some libertarians disagree but most people think that speech leading directly to death or serious harm (e.g. shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater) should not be protected free speech
"Australian-born Julian Assange is peddling a range of excuses for having put Afghans in harm's way.

Assange has been savaged publicly for releasing information that could lead to the death of many people identified in US military logs that range from 2004 to 2009.

Two days after WikiLeaks posted 76,000 of the documents on the internet, a team of reporters from The Times of London pored over the raw material. In a matter of hours they discovered that the names, villages, relatives' names and even precise GPS locations of Afghans who had co-operated with US-led forces were easy to spot.

If any Afghan informant were killed, Assange retreats to the argument that the harm caused would be outweighed by the importance of publishing the information. So disclosure is justice, apparently, regardless of consequences.

In a chronicle of the WikiLeaks saga, The Columbia Journalism Review says reporters from The Guardian and Der Spiegel specifically encouraged Assange "to be careful about the lethal harm that could come to people identified in the logs if he released certain documents unredacted". He did not follow this advice.

Much more HERE

Ian Gilmour was a very notable and privileged Englishman. Most of the Royal family came to his wedding. He was also once Lord Privy Seal of England in Margaret Thatcher's government. He was not however of her faction in the Conservative party and there is much that he said that I disagree with.

He did however write a book Inside Right which presented extensive and persuasive arguments from history in favor of the view that Conservatives have always been "trimmers" -- people who try to find a middle way in difficult matters -- so it seems clear that Assange is not of a conservative persuasion

12 comments:

Justice said...

WikiLeaks and Assange should be held accountable for the deaths they've caused. And yes, people have already been killed because of Assange's clear acts of, not journalism, but espionage. Take note of the fact that the classified information he has leaked has not caused the death of one terrorist. Instead, it is civilians and members of the US military who are being killed.

As for Pvt. Manning, a serving member of the US military, the crime is quite different. In his case, it is clearly, Treason. And, as i've said from the time this story broke, to think that this one little coward could have managed all this by himself was foolish. The link below proves that i was right. There are others involved, and at this point, no ones sure how many others. The others involved appear to be American citizens, and if that's the case, they too are guilty of treason, and, since we are at war, should be executed along with Manning.




http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/
08/01/afghanistan.wikileaks.suspect
/index.html

Bobby said...

I think WikiLeaks should be sued civilly and ruined, not criminally because the media usually has strong first amendment protections, after all, did the people who published the Pentagon Papers got prosecuted? I don't remember.

As for Pvt. Manning, he is a traitor, and as a member of the military he is held to higher standards and has agreed to different rules than in the civilian world.

So yeah, I want Manning to pay, but I don't want Obama or the government wtih the power to decide which websites get shut downed. Let's not open the door to a Brave New World where the government decides who gets to publish and who doesn't.

TheOldMan said...

"If any Afghan informant were killed, Assange retreats to the argument that the harm caused would be outweighed by the importance of publishing the information. So disclosure is justice, apparently, regardless of consequences." So if Assange is killed by someone who loses a relative due to the release of this information, it's ok by him.

Anonymous said...

I guess I'm one of those types that believe speech, in and of itself, is never wrong, so long as it is the truth.

And I also believe that it is the government who must first be honest and open with the citizenry. If they are not being forthcoming, then I am fully in favor of people breaking the law in order to shed proper light on a subject.

Now this doesn't mean that laws weren't broken and I'm not saying people can't be arrested. It should happen. Although, when it comes time for a trial, then it should be in front a jury and if the jury believes the law is wrong or if the crime the person committed actually had a benefit to society, or if this crime shows how bad the law is (taking pix of police doing their work in public comes to mind), then the jury should nullify the law.

But one thing that should never happen, is we allow our passions to over take our intellect. And if you can't do that, then you may understand why I don't think voting is a right.

jwenting said...

I've got a feeling Pvt.Manning is the fall guy selected by superiors to be the "expendable" person who gets to take the blame for a leak that was ordered and perpetrated much higher up.
I suspect this goes to beyond cabinet level.

As to Assange, he and his organisation should be listed and treated right next to Al Qaeda itself.

Earthling said...

Anonymous 11:33 said...
"I guess I'm one of those types that believe speech, in and of itself, is never wrong, so long as it is the truth."

Apparently, Anon 11:33 believes things like shouting fire in a crowded theater, inciting others to commit murder, or making public classified military information while we're at war is just fine. It seems you also believe the government shouldn't have any secrets. And, based on your comment, you also believe juries have the power to make (or break) laws, especially laws they dislike.

I'm not sure which planet you come from, nor how long you've been here on Earth, but things here don't work that way, unless of course, you spend lots of time in Disneyland doing copious amounts of serious drugs. Or, you could put the Kool-Aid down and extricate your cranium from your anus.

Anonymous said...

jwenting said...
"I've got a feeling Pvt.Manning is the fall guy selected by superiors.."

I can understand your thinking, and to a great extent, i agree with it, especially with the current Marxist government we have. (or has us) But, our military is filled with young people. Most are highly dedicated, patriotic, and brave beyond words. Most, but apparently not all. Remember, most of these young people went through an American education system that was/is controlled for the most part by anti-American leftists. It would be unreasonable to assume that every one of them was able to see beyond the propaganda they were fed.

Also, the leftist media, which can never be considered pro-American, is always hunting for people like Manning simply to exploit them. They'll never miss a chance to make our country and our govt, even this Marxist one, look bad in front of the world.

While it's obvious Manning did not act alone, i seriously doubt it came from this WH, (not that they're above that sort of thing) since the leaks also hurt them, and badly.

(Read the link provided by "Justice" on top)

Anonymous said...

The dude's a loose cannon and needs to be terminated with extreme prejudice.

bogsidebunny.... (still get error message when I use LiveJournal!!)

Anonymous said...

"Most, but apparently not all. Remember, most of these young people went through an American education system that was/is controlled for the most part by anti-American leftists. It would be unreasonable to assume that every one of them was able to see beyond the propaganda they were fed.
"

Which makes Manning a willing accomplice, but still a victim as much as a perp.
I don't say he didn't push the button sending those documents, I just doubt that sending them (or even obtaining them) was his idea and operation that was executed and planned without orders (and cooperation) from much higher up.

Anonymous said...

Victim? or dupe? There's a difference. One is willing while the other isn't.

Bobby said...

"I've got a feeling Pvt.Manning is the fall guy selected by superiors.."

--No he's not, he's a traitor. He did it out of spite because of relationship problems according to a British tabloid.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/7918632/Bradley-Manning-suspected-source-of-Wikileaks-documents-raged-on-his-Facebook-page.html

Anonymous said...

Interesting idea... Is this the plant needed to push a national security issue so Bo yaks control of the net? History repeating itself? Reichstag fire?