See other Resistance Articles
Title: WikiLeaks sets the stage for the ‘No Send List’
Source:
Aletho News
URL Source: http://alethonews.wordpress.com/201 ... he-stage-for-the-no-send-list/
Published: Dec 17, 2010
Author: Richard K. Moore
Post Date: 2010-12-17 12:55:07 by Original_Intent
Keywords: Wikileaks, disinformation, PsyOp, Control
Views: 899
Comments: 84
Hillary Clinton has called WikiLeaks “an attack on the international community”. Coming from her, we must assume that is meant in all seriousness. We must compare it to what we saw on our screens on 9/11: “America under attack”. When a Secretary of State announces that we are ‘under attack’, it follows without saying that we can expect some kind of response to that attack. Indeed the word ‘attack’ is more or less reserved for occasions where a response is planned. Otherwise the statement would be interpreted as reflecting weakness and impotence. When America was ‘under attack’, we got the Patriot Act domestically, and never-ending war internationally — the Constitution was shredded along with international law. That was a very big response. What kind of response can we expect when the ‘international community’ is declared to be ‘under attack’, because a website has revealed a few relatively harmless secrets? If the State Department really felt that the WikiLeaks operation was a serious threat to national security, or even a serious embarrassment politically, they could have shut it down at any time. They have their ways. And they could have ‘gotten to’ Assange in one way or another, as they got to David Kelly, who really was a threat, with his testimony that WMDs did not exists, testimony that was never heard about again, after he ‘committed suicide’. Instead, with WikiLeaks, we have Assange at large flaunting it, and we see the leaks being published in the mainstream media, both in print and online, conveniently indexed. What’s wrong with this picture? If the leaks are harmful, why are they doing everything they can to make sure everyone, including any ‘potential terrorists’, sees them? The WikiLeaks affair has become a major dramatic story line on the stage of the global mass media. It’s very much like the launch of a new television series. We’ve got a dramatic personality at the center, seen by some as a super hero and others as a super demon, who is able to reveal a million secrets at a single bound. We’ve got increasing dramatic tension, as the attack alarms ring, the secrets keep coming out, and… nothing decisive is being done. Something must be done! That’s clearly where this story line is leading. By doing nothing decisive, and with Assange out on bail, the message between the lines is that new legislation is needed. Perhaps new legislation is already being discussed; I haven’t been following that part of the story. But as the dramatic tension mounts in the media, so that it becomes ‘obvious’ that something must be done, we can be sure we will end up with a draconian Cyber Terrorism Act, akin to the Domestic Terrorism Act. Clearly, the provisions of this act will be very far-reaching. That has been the consistent pattern with each of our various ‘terrorism’ acts. Currently, anyone can be arbitrarily declared a domestic terrorist, and be locked up forever incommunicado. That hasn’t been happening on any significant scale, yet, but the provisions are that far reaching. Similarly, in a Cyber Terrorism Act, we’ll get a provision that any website can be arbitrarily declared ‘in aid of terrorism’, closed down, and anyone involved with it can be treated as a domestic terrorist. The Act will be that far-reaching, but we probably won’t see a lot of such closures happening. Instead, we’ll get hit in more subtle ways. Websites will simply be seized, without fanfare, and that’s already been happening, under the logo of Homeland Security. I think we can take a clue from the TSA experience at airports, as regards what we can expect at ‘net ports’. Consider, for example, the ‘no fly’ list. If you’re on the list, you can’t fly, they don’t give you any reasons, and they even seem to flaunt how arbitrary the list is. They are arbitrarily restricting your ability to connect with people face to face. Similarly, from what might be called the Communications Security Administration (CSA), we can expect a ‘no send’ list. If you’re on the list, you can’t send or post messages, and no reasons will be given. They will be arbitrarily restricting your ability to connect with people remotely. Already, I’ve been encountering problems with sending, where my IP address has been mysteriously tagged as a spam source, and my ISP claimed to have no explanation. Consider also the invasive screening process at airports. Everyone is treated as a potential terrorist, until they pass the invasive screening process. Similarly, every message anyone tries to send will be treated as a ‘potential cyber threat’, until it passes an invasive ‘threat filter’. Google is already deploying such a filter, and calling it a spam filter. Currently, with manual intervention, you can rescue a message from the filter. The CSA’s filter will simply delete your message, end of story, before it even gets to your ISP. Air travel and the Internet have been the ‘great global connectors’, of people and of ideas. The thrust of ‘security’ measures has had little to do with terrorism, and everything to do with making ‘connection’ more and more difficult. Same story when you try to cross a border in your car. (My Note: For example requiring a Passport to travel to and from Canada. The point being to restrict travel, and, more importantly, the exchange of information.) WikiLeaks is indeed the 9/11 of the Internet. The leaks themselves are an inside job, just like the Twin Towers, with the leaks carefully selected to avoid anything really damaging, or anything embarrassing to Israel. And just as they didn’t scramble the interceptors, they didn’t close down the WikiLeaks site. They let both events play out, down on Highway 61, and then they splashed them all over the media. Such things are always done for a purpose.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-4) not displayed.
.
.
.
#5. To: ghostdogtxn (#1)
I was raised (by my secular Jewish mom) to look at Germans with a jaundiced eye for what happened there under Hitler and the Nazis. But now I've pretty much forgiven them -- seeing what has been happening here. In fact, I am pretty much holding my fellow Americans in contempt, because unlike the Germans, they have access to alternative media and can research what is the truth, and choose not to. The Germans didn't have the internet, and even shortwave radio usually only permitted access to state-sponsored propaganda which may or may not have differed from their own.
Democrats don't mind war as long as they can have big government. Republicans don't mind big government as long as they can have war. I don't know that I would call it an "inside job" although I have not ruled out the possibility. There are two possible culprits, and I do think that it is ultimately being run by someone's intelligence agency. The pattern of disclosures suggests Israel as the most likely, but we have no smoking gun. I would suggest reading more history of the underside of the Turd Reich might be in order. Hitler was financed and brought to power by corporate interests - most likely as a counter to Stalin. It seems probable that the operation did go out of control, and Hitler double crossed the Banksters which is why they took him down. American corporations continued to do business with the Turd Reich throughout the war through intermediaries such as Switzerland. Some of the large corporations, such as I. G. Farben, Krups, and banking interests such as the Rothschilds continued to have sway right up to the end. They were "airbrushed out" AFTER the war.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
Remember die Weiße Rose.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
No. But thank you very much for the link!
Democrats don't mind war as long as they can have big government. Republicans don't mind big government as long as they can have war. You are most welcome.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
"THAT MUST HAVE BEEN EMBARRASSING for her as she faces the world with the potential of criminal charges against her" Am I missing something about that issue? Does anyone really think since 9/11 and the oxymoronic "Patriot Act" that the U.S. State Department isn't monitoring credit card or other money flow , especially internationally and interdepartmentally, under the guise of "fighting The War on Terror"? Has the financial community decreed that what's embarassing about WikiLeaks' supposed "news" on the subject is that the credit card info wasn't promptly put up for sale to mailing-list profiteers so as to give the State Department a bit more spending money and those soliciting "enterprises" a boost in business? Meanwhile, if people use their credit cards instead of cash to buy so much as a pizza, there might go their credit card info onto a mailing list and off to circulate and re-circulate among whoever wants to buy it to junk mail them, for example. I'm underwhelmed about Assange's alleged "public service announcement".
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Meanwhile, try to post a YouTube music video that the musician(s) don't want in the public domain for free because it might reduce their sales. Who owns the copyrights to the stolen info-property that Assange is trafficking in for money? My guess is that Assange doesn't own those copyrights, nor does the entire world. He isn't publishing stolen info for fair use educational purposes. He solicits money for it and gets lots of it from donations and other funding backers. We already have copyright laws and trafficking in stolen property laws here, at the very least, that should apply to him and WikiLeaks, yes?
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Here is an essay on the Future of Freedom Website. I am minded of quote of Robert Heinlein: "You cannot conquer a free man. The most you can do is kill him." ~ Robert Anson Heinlein ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The White Rose: A Lesson in Dissent by Jacob G. Hornberger, January 1996 The date was February 22, 1943. Hans Scholl and his sister Sophie, along with their best friend, Christoph Probst, were scheduled to be executed by Nazi officials that afternoon. The prison guards were so impressed with the calm and bravery of the prisoners in the face of impending death that they violated regulations by permitting them to meet together one last time. Hans, a medical student at the University of Munich, was 24. Sophie, a student, was 21. Christoph, a medical student, was 22. This is the story of The White Rose. It is a lesson in dissent. It is a tale of courage--of principle--of honor. It is detailed in three books: The White Rose (1970) by Inge Scholl, A Noble Treason (1979) by Richard Hanser, and An Honourable Defeat (1994) by Anton Gill. Hans and Sophie Scholl were German teenagers in the 1930s. Like other young Germans, they enthusiastically joined the Hitler Youth. They believed that Adolf Hitler was leading Germany and the German people back to greatness. Their parents were not so enthusiastic. Their father--Robert Scholl--told his children that Hitler and the Nazis were leading Germany down a road of destruction. Later--in 1942--he would serve time in a Nazi prison for telling his secretary: "The war! It is already lost. This Hitler is God's scourge on mankind, and if the war doesn't end soon the Russians will be sitting in Berlin." Gradually, Hans and Sophie began realizing that their father was right. They concluded that, in the name of freedom and the greater good of the German nation, Hitler and the Nazis were enslaving and destroying the German people. They also knew that open dissent was impossible in Nazi Germany, especially after the start of World War II. Most Germans took the traditional position-that once war breaks out, it is the duty of the citizen to support the troops by supporting the government. But Hans and Sophie Scholl believed differently. They believed that it was the duty of a citizen, even in times of war, to stand up against an evil regime, especially when it is sending hundreds of thousands of its citizens to their deaths. The Scholl siblings began sharing their feelings with a few of their friends--Christoph Probst, Alexander Schmorell, Willi Graf--as well as with Kurt Huber, their psychology and philosophy professor. One day in 1942, copies of a leaflet entitled "The White Rose" suddenly appeared at the University of Munich. The leaflet contained an anonymous essay that said that the Nazi system had slowly imprisoned the German people and was now destroying them. The Nazi regime had turned evil. It was time, the essay said, for Germans to rise up and resist the tyranny of their own government. At the bottom of the essay, the following request appeared: "Please make as many copies of this leaflet as you can and distribute them." The leaflet caused a tremendous stir among the student body. It was the first time that internal dissent against the Nazi regime had surfaced in Germany. The essay had been secretly written and distributed by Hans Scholl and his friends. Another leaflet appeared soon afterward. And then another. And another. Ultimately, there were six leaflets published and distributed by Hans and Sophie Scholl and their friends--four under the title "The White Rose" and two under the title "Leaflets of the Resistance." Their publication took place periodically between 1942 and 1943--interrupted for a few months when Hans and his friends were temporarily sent to the Eastern Front to fight against the Russians. The members of The White Rose, of course, had to act cautiously. The Nazi regime maintained an iron grip over German society. Internal dissent was quickly and efficiently smashed by the Gestapo. Hans and Sophie Scholl and their friends knew what would happen to them if they were caught. People began receiving copies of the leaflets in the mail. Students at the University of Hamburg began copying and distributing them. Copies began turning up in different parts of Germany and Austria. Moreover, as Hanser points out, the members of The White Rose did not limit themselves to leaflets. Graffiti began appearing in large letters on streets and buildings all over Munich: "Down with Hitler! . . . Hitler the Mass Murderer!" and "Freiheit! . . . Freiheit! . . . Freedom! . . . Freedom!" The Gestapo was driven into a frenzy. It knew that the authors were having to procure large quantities of paper, envelopes, and postage. It knew that they were using a duplicating machine. But despite the Gestapo's best efforts, it was unable to catch the perpetrators. One day--February 18, 1943--Hans' and Sophie's luck ran out. They were caught leaving pamphlets at the University of Munich and were arrested. A search disclosed evidence of Christoph Probst's participation, and he too was soon arrested. The three of them were indicted for treason. On February 22--four days after their arrest--their trial began. The presiding judge, Roland Freisler, chief justice of the People's Court of the Greater German Reich, had been sent from Berlin. Hanser writes: "He conducted the trial as if the future of the Reich were indeed at stake. He roared denunciations of the accused as if he were not the judge but the prosecutor. He behaved alternately like an actor ranting through an overwritten role in an implausible melodrama and a Grand Inquisitor calling down eternal damnation on the heads of the three irredeemable heretics before him.... No witnesses were called, since the defendants had admitted everything. The proceedings consisted almost entirely of Roland Freisler's denunciation and abuse, punctuated from time to time by half-hearted offerings from the court-appointed defense attorneys, one of whom summed up his case with the observation, "I can only say fiat justitia . Let justice be done." By which he meant: Let the accused get what they deserve. Freisler and the other accusers could not understand what had happened to these German youths. After all, they all came from nice German families. They all had attended German schools. They had been members of the Hitler Youth. How could they have turned out to be traitors? What had so twisted and warped their minds? Sophie Scholl shocked everyone in the courtroom when she remarked to Freisler: "Somebody, after all, had to make a start. What we wrote and said is also believed by many others. They just don't dare to express themselves as we did." Later in the proceedings, she said to him: "You know the war is lost. Why don't you have the courage to face it?" In the middle of the trial, Robert and Magdalene Scholl tried to enter the courtroom. Magdalene said to the guard: "But I'm the mother of two of the accused." The guard responded: "You should have brought them up better." Robert Scholl forced his way into the courtroom and told the court that he was there to defend his children. He was seized and forcibly escorted outside. The entire courtroom heard him shout: "One day there will be another kind of justice! One day they will go down in history!" Robert Freisler pronounced his judgment on the three defendants: Guilty of treason. Their sentence: Death. They were escorted back to Stadelheim prison, where the guards permitted Hans and Sophie to have one last visit with their parents. Hans met with them first, and then Sophie. Hansen writes: "His eyes were clear and steady and he showed no sign of dejection or despair. He thanked his parents again for the love and warmth they had given him and he asked them to convey his affection and regard to a number of friends, whom he named. Here, for a moment, tears threatened, and he turned away to spare his parents the pain of seeing them. Facing them again, his shoulders were back and he smiled. . . . "Then a woman prison guard brought in Sophie. . . . Her mother tentatively offered her some candy, which Hans had declined. "Gladly," said Sophie, taking it. "After all, I haven't had any lunch!" She, too, looked somehow smaller, as if drawn together, but her face was clear and her smile was fresh and unforced, with something in it that her parents read as triumph. "Sophie, Sophie," her mother murmured, as if to herself. "To think you'll never be coming through the door again!" Sophie's smile was gentle. "Ah, Mother," she said. "Those few little years. . . ." Sophie Scholl looked at her parents and was strong in her pride and certainty. "We took everything upon ourselves," she said. "What we did will cause waves." Her mother spoke again: "Sophie," she said softly, "Remember Jesus." "Yes," replied Sophie earnestly, almost commandingly, "but you, too." She left them, her parents, Robert and Magdalene Scholl, with her face still lit by the smile they loved so well and would never see again. She was perfectly composed as she was led away. Robert Mohr [a Gestapo official], who had come out to the prison on business of his own, saw her in her cell immediately afterwards, and she was crying. It was the first time Robert Mohr had seen her in tears, and she apologized. "I have just said good-bye to my parents," she said. "You understand . . ." She had not cried before her parents. For them she had smiled." No relatives visited Christoph Probst. His wife, who had just had their third child, was in the hospital. Neither she nor any members of his family even knew that he was on trial or that he had been sentenced to death. While his faith in God had always been deep and unwavering, he had never committed to a certain faith. On the eve of his death, a Catholic priest admitted him into the church in articulo mortis --at the point of death. "Now," he said, "my death will be easy and joyful." That afternoon, the prison guards permitted Hans, Sophie, and Christoph to have one last visit together. Sophie was then led to the guillotine. One observer described her as she walked to her death: "Without turning a hair, without flinching." Christoph Probst was next. Hans Scholl was last; just before he was beheaded, Hans cried out: "Long live freedom!" Unfortunately, they were not the last to die. The Gestapo's investigation was relentless. Later tried and executed were Alex Schmorell (age 25), Willi Graf (age 25), and Kurt Huber (age 49). Students at the University of Hamburg were either executed or sent to concentration camps. Today, every German knows the story of The White Rose. A square at the University of Munich is named after Hans and Sophie Scholl. And there are streets, squares, and schools all over Germany named for the members of The White Rose. The German movie The White Rose is now found in video stores in Germany and the United States. Richard Hansen sums up the story of The White Rose: "In the vogue words of the time, the Scholls and their friends represented the "other" Germany, the land of poets and thinkers, in contrast to the Germany that was reverting to barbarism and trying to take the world with it. What they were and what they did would have been "other" in any society at any time. What they did transcended the easy division of good-German/bad-German and lifted them above the nationalism of time--bound events. Their actions made them enduring symbols of the struggle, universal and timeless, for the freedom of the human spirit wherever and whenever it is threatened. " ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember "The White Rose", and may there names live every in the annals of honor. And a line at the end of the first link, so poignant and telling it brought tears. "“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
No. There is a distinct difference between revealing concealed criminality and stealing the sweat and labor of another as in writings or music. All writings within the government, and all actions, are the collective property and responsibility of the citizens of the United States. To allow the government to keep secret its actions and criminal behavior is repugnant to liberty. I am not a fan of Mr. Assange as I believe he is playing a hidden game, but the publication of disclosures of the actions of our government are needful for protecting and defending liberty. Where such disclosure, as here, exposes actions and behaviors antithetical to liberty and the honor of the American Nation and its people it should be disclosed and published widely by whatever means available.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
I'll agree that it's the collective property of Constitutionalist citizens of the United States. What should we do about it as our responsibility? Have everything sent automatically to WikiLeaks, CNN et al, post all info and defense data on .gov websites, classify nothing? Other countries should all do that too? So the gist is that there should be no such thing as Espionage anymore? If that's the case, what's the definition of Defense? What's next -- pressure our Military to quit wearing camouflage and painting their faces to hide from snipers and such?
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Yes. As the US State Department focuses attention on foreign embassy personnel's credit cards and practices, it misses the mark about foreign policy here in America to keep us safe from foreign intrusion. And the US State Department has blundered just about everything in terms of foreign relations other than doling out the US taxpayer's hard earned money to bribe, swindle, extort, push, shove or connive American interests in such a way as to create havoc the world over.
"In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," ... "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it" -- Ron Paul, circa 2010-12-02
For one I think we need to reach a clear definition as to what should and should not be in the public domain. For me it is quite simple: Dangerous weapons technology - such as nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Military plans and capabilities, but only so long as they are conducted within the law, and only for so long as disclosure would present a clear and present danger to the United States. Sensitive diplomatic proceedings and communications which are within the law. Actual intelligence operations where lives are at risk, but ONLY those operations conducted within the law. AT NO TIME should any illegal activity, war crimes (such as torture), abuse of power, collusion with business interests, or fraud, waste, and abuse be accorded any protection, and disclosure of such is an absolute defense against any charge of disclosing classified information. No information pertinent to a trial under law, where such information is of material consequence, may be withheld under ANY circumstances. Any attempt to withhold or destroy such information should be punishable under law as Official Malfeasance. Where it would result in provable material harm to the nation it may be restricted to only the Judge, Prosecution, Defense Counsel, AND THE JURY. Any official withholding, falsely, under cover of "National Security" any information regarding a crime under law committed by any individual, agency, or activity SHALL be subject to a charge of Treason for directly interfering with the open presentation of information material to the citizenry and the legitimate governance of the United States thus lending aid and comfort to our enemies. I did not say that, but where the information disclosed presents valid information regarding crimes committed by employees, agencies, or activities it is NOT espionage. Espionage is the stealing of State Secrets for the benefit of another State. Where such information is disclosed to open public scrutiny it might legitimately be a violation of legitimate security but that is a determination to be made by a Jury and again disclosure of wrong doing is an absolute defense. Defense is NOT the protection of criminal wrongdoing from public scrutiny. It is NOT the protection of individuals committing acts contrary to our laws and constitution. Defense is simply those actions taken to protect the nation from invasion and/or conquest, and NOTHING more. Defense is NOT an excuse to play "the ends justify the means". Of course that should not be taken to silly extremes as absolutes are unobtainable, but an action taken needs to be justified on the basis of it doing more good that harm. It also needs to be kept within humane and honorable standards such as an absolute prohibition on torture. Don't be silly - those are legitimate tactics when lawfully engaged in the defense of the nation. However, if it is a "hit" on someone politically inconvenient ... Defense, and governance, do not need to be conducted in the shadows. To say such is generally artifice put forth by those who have committed criminal acts for which they do not wish to be held to account. Where something is a close call I'll vote in favor of sunlight, disclosure, EVERY TIME. An interesting set of questions though. Basically it boils down to this: When is it legitimate to withhold information from public view? Certainly people engaged in criminal and/or unethical activity want to keep their crimes undisclosed, but in a free nation the presumption always has to weigh most heavily in favor of open proceedings and disclosure. "“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
And the US State Department has blundered just about everything in terms of foreign relations other than doling out the US taxpayer's hard earned money to bribe, swindle, extort, push, shove or connive American interests in such a way as to create havoc the world over. I'm not convinced that foreign embassy personnel should be completely trusted. They could be spies and enemies, money laundering and that sort of thing. I'm almost certain that our embassy personnel are scrutinized abroad as well. Kinda goes with the territory of the job. However, I can't dispute your second paragraph. In fact, imo, the entire State Department is wrongly classified as a subdivision of the Executive Branch because the Executive Branch is not authorized by the Constitution to set or control our foreign policy. The State Department should be re-classified as a Congressional concern. That might at least slightly improve its performance and accountability.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
And had the communists won, what road would they have traveled????
Who said the State Department was about a free romp in the forest with potential spies? The issue is how the US State Department handles the same; and it is obviously poor under Hillary Clinton with 0bama's oversight. USG perception is falling BECAUSE of earlier and well-known issues and today WikiLeaks has ensured a death-knell into the same perception. The question for me and most folks is very simple: Isn't transparency in and about US government operations the same or similar as to already publickly released and authorized information?
"In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," ... "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it" -- Ron Paul, circa 2010-12-02
You should have been on Col. Lakin's defense team. All this talk about "sunshine" re: WikiLeak's and the shadowy paleface, Assange, is almost funny. He's definitely not "The Sun King". Is this the new- look for the "World Court" where all he or anyone has to do is declare something "criminal wrongdoing" in their opinion and then blammo! -- Global Kangaroo Court is in session, regardless of the consequences to others? Let's not pretend that WikiLeaks is the proper place to file such charges or that if American courts all refused to address those charges, the Hague would refuse too. WikiLeaks is motivated by money and fame but evidently not Justice. What has he "disclosed" from his dumpster that couldn't have been petitioned through a Freedom of Information request? Instead, all he's accomplished really is to turn over the redaction process here to the New York Times Commie-rag. Now we have not only a Congress that's abdicated it's war powers, as well as a largely apathetic/hawkish populace that couldn't care less and acts like it's not their job to think about the Constitution at all, but much worse. Assange has complicated the troop abandonment problems for America with all those shirkers and subversives by "popularizing" the notion that our Military shouldn't be afforded any diplomatic shields or due process either. I'm not grateful. "Flash. Flash. Flash. We pass in the blind." That's the USS Liberty coded message under fire that comes to my mind when I think of WikiLeaks' big waves of U.S. State Department secrets. A blur of mystery "confetti" being dropped haphazardly into the ether, rather like who-knows-what weapons jettisoned into the sea from our recalled rescue planes before being given clearance to land but for probable pick-up by Liberty's attackers. I don't dismiss this as not Espionage and such because a particular foreign state hasn't been identified as the intended receiver.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I'm not sure what you and the WikiLeaks fan club expect in the way of transparency. Are you?
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Yes, I do. If America had a formally declared contemporary WAR based upon a Congressional Act as mandated by the US Constitution, we would all be better off. But because of the continuous cloud of secrecy dealings based upon the US government's under-handed dealings, we the PEOPLE are fucked. With a wee bit of luck, you might be able to understand my perspective.
"In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," ... "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it" -- Ron Paul, circa 2010-12-02
With a wee bit of luck, you might be able to understand my perspective. America hasn't had a formally declared contemporary WAR based upon a Congressional Act as mandated by the US Constitution since the UN was formed because the globalist's agenda and their Israel offspring's agenda for us is about "conflict management" on their terms. WikiLeaks isn't concerned with America's best interest on that point or peace either.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
As I alluded to in my previous post, and elsewhere, I am not a member of the Julian Assange Fan Club. I believe WeakeyLinks is a Disinformation/PsyOp - a very sophisticated one but a PsyOp nonetheless. However, government secrecy is not a minor matter. The charade of classifying criminal activities and serial dishonesty is not a light matter. Putting a stamp on a piece of paper that exposes a crime should not be regarded with any reverence whatsoever. Your question misses the point the enemy is not the whistle blower or leaker who releases documentation of criminal activity it is the people who commit the crimes and then use the phony excuse of "National Sekurity" and classification stamps to prevent the crimes from becoming known. There is still a significant amount of information about the Kennedy assassination still under high sekurity. The problem of course is that as a disinformation operation it has had a significant amount of false information planted among the good. For example: Assange has made multiple comments opposed to 911 truth. He collaborated with the Main Stream Media to redact and publish a carefully tailored picture. The released data asserts that Saddam is still alive, only 150,000 civilians (only 150,000) have been murdered in Iraq, and that the mythical WMD's were found in Iraq. This is likely all planted false data i.e., disinformation. Independent counts put the number of civilians killed in Iraq at close to 2 MILLION, no evidence of WMD's has ever been produced, and Saddam mostly likely died in December of 2001. WeakeyLinks is to some degree a tempest in a teapot. Very little of what has been released rises much beyond the level of tabloid chatter and reveals nothing of any earth shattering significance. Most of it merely confirms things we already knew, pushes existing propaganda lines, or items for which there was significant circumstantial evidence already. The drumbeat of the media and the hyperbolic caterwauling of the usual suspects in CONgress are merely noise which are intended to promote this as some sort of big breach - more of the propaganda hurdy gurdy. They are puffing up the WeakeyLinks releases to further another agenda - censorship and the stifling of dissent from their criminal activities. I operate on facts, on data, not hyperbole. If Assange was a real threat and was actually releasing damaging information he would likely already be dead. However, the issue of the National Sekurity State is another matter, and deserves a longer treatment than I can give it right now. However, to sum up my attitude - we need more leaks not less. Our government is engaged in massive criminality and the only way to combat that is to expose it to the best disinfectant - sunlight. A secret government equals a population of slaves.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
Canadian Philosopher John McMurtry as he comments on the psychological warfare that has afflicted us all: "It is like a trance. So what can break a trance? The only thing that can break the trance is the light of truth."
That's not true. Between web sites being accessable via IP addr, mirror sites (over 1500 that I last saw) and bittorret tech out there, keeping any info off the net is beyond any government's capability. Just FYI...
Good prelude and introduction. How on this green planet Earth did you leap to that conclusion?
"In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," ... "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it" -- Ron Paul, circa 2010-12-02
That's not true. Between web sites being accessable via IP addr, mirror sites (over 1500 that I last saw) and bittorret tech out there, keeping any info off the net is beyond any government's capability. Just FYI... Oh, I agree that once the information is out there it is out there, but as an operation there are any number of ways to shut it down. Sometimes people have "accidents". Just ask Dr. David Kelley, Deoborah Jean Palfrey, and Paul Wellstone. The debate could be moderated by the Reverand Martin Luther King and scored by John Fitzgerald Kennedy. It is naive to think that people who would murder millions, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan, would hesitate a second to murder a flea that was biting them UNLESS he was their flea.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
That is part of it, but first they have to open their eyes or the bright light just makes them squint even harder. The problem is both the absence of the light of truth and the unwillingness of many to even look when there is a glimmer. Take for example that strange twilight zone wherein dwell the defective slack jawed, drooling, mouth breathing buffoonish retards of El Pee and Freeptardia. yukon alone is platoon of retards all by himself not to mention the alcoholic anti-depressant gulping dissipated mistress of that realm of surreality.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
By that logic, anything that happens that appears to be against the government's interest is presumed to be a fake, covert op. And since discussion here on 4um is generally anti-government (while still being pro-country) then I suppose 4um is presumed to be a covert op as well. After all, if they wanted to shut 4um down, they could. While I do agree that there are people in this world who would not and have not hesitated to instigate the murder of 100's of thousands or even millions to further their interests, and that W Bush is one of those people as he demonstrated handily, I don't subscribe to the theory that the government is all powerful. It is, after all made of up of the same dumb-down public that passes for educated in the USA today. And killing Assange wouldn't stop it. Nor would killing the whole crew. Hackers wouldn't accept that. Others would rise up, but probably what the hackers would do is design a new internet protocol for sharing info anonymously through something similar to a bittorrent type service. In fact there is/was a "darknet" type protocol for filesharing that way. In cyberspace, the field is permanently slanted against those desiring to keep secrets and in favor of those who wish to share info. Hackers will win this war in the end. Mark my words.
An historical footnote to your well thought out post (above) ... Common Sense by Thomas Paine.
"In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," ... "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it" -- Ron Paul, circa 2010-12-02
What happened there? I have had just about enough of this poor me victimization canard form so-called Jews. Not that you or most people really care about what really happened there. Just go ahead and demonize the Germans some more and say "I pretty much forgive you." I'm part German and damn proud of it. I have not forgiven what "Jews" have done to the German people, and for that matter the America people. Why? Cause they aren't sorry in the slightest and are still demonizing them.
God is always good!
By that logic, anything that happens that appears to be against the government's interest is presumed to be a fake, covert op. Did I say that? No. You're engaging in weak logic. As we both know there are other data points as well. However, deaths of inconvenient people is not uncommon either - take Ron Brown for example - and the Flight Attendant who allegedly survived the crash but sadly and unfortunately died in the helicopter flight down the mountain from a severed femoral artery. Look up the femoral artery sometime it is the most major artery in your legs. If you have a severed femoral artery you are going to lapse into unconsciousness from blood loss in about 30 seconds. A Stewardess with a severed femoral artery would have been long dead before any medivac. However, there are circumstances where people who are inconvenient do manage to stay alive - usually by getting out and getting as much public awareness as possible. However, if Assange was actually wreaking as much havoc as all the caterwauling would suggest a way could be found to silence him one way or another. Don't kid yourself the forces at play under the surface have the power to do just that. There are only two likely reasons for his still being alive: 1. He's their boy. Or 2. Too much publicity at the moment. (However, that did not stop them from whacking Princess Diana, JFK, RFK, JFK jr., Paul Wellstone, or MLK.) I'm sure they could, but it would be too obvious and shutting down one small forum cures nothing. There are plenty of other forums some of them a lot more anti-government and conspiratorial than 4um. I've never accused criminals of being bright - just brutal. Although some of the people working in the shadow government/black ops are are what could be classified as "evil geniuses" - after all their Psychs have turned American Television into one gigantic mind control scheme. Being insane does not stop them from being insanely intelligent. However, they have a poor sense of prediction and their logic is that of the insane. It does not take a great degree of intelligence to be evil since most people are not evil and often it is simply not real to them that someone could be as evil as the people we are up against who have managed to grasp the reigns of power. Not being willing to accept it and being able to stop it are two different things. Why do you think the shadow gov is working to find a way to corral the internet without stampeding the sheep? Hackers are a nuisance, nothing more. Some of the most proficient hackers already work for the government. The Israelis have them, the Chinese have them, and we have them. The shadow gov is not yet so powerful that they dare announce their supremacy as the society around them would collapse taking them with it. That is why you have seen the gradual militarization of police, the build up of Mercenary outfits such as Blackwater/Xe, and the imposition of tighter and tighter controls on movement and expression. Free Speech Zones anyone? The frog is being boiled slowly and the puppet masters will not become open about their control until it is absolute, and they are working hard toward that end. Cyberspace can be shut down on a moment's notice. Sever the backbone and it is dead. That would of course be in and of itself a big revelation as to the true state of affairs, but you are not going to get a lot of hackers doing much of anything if all of their access routes are disabled. People would try to get around it, but it would be local and disorganized. No hacker group can muster the same level of resources as a national government.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
The government NEEDS the net running for commerce and so much more, so the gov has a love/hate relationship with the net. And that assumes they really could if the wanted. Unless other countries agree and do the same, the US, including the gov, would suffer more than anyone/anything else.
The government NEEDS the net running for commerce and so much more, so the gov has a love/hate relationship with the net. And that assumes they really could if the wanted. Unless other countries agree and do the same, the US, including the gov, would suffer more than anyone/anything else. You have to understand the logic of power. More than they need or want the internet the hereditary Bankster Families and the Royals they are allied with and intertwined with desire power, and they will do whatever they feel is necessary to maintain that power. From the point of view of the normal person it is not sane or logical, but that is their perspective. You can see the action at a smaller scale in the tinpot dictator who will kill anyone and everyone to maintain their autocratic position. And they are in constant fear of revolt and loss of power and thus you see the creation of Secret Police and all the apparatus that goes with the oppressive dictatorial state to maintain power. So, while it might be a major inconvenience if it is in their view the internet or their position atop the pyramid the internet loses every time. At this point the U.S. and the U.K. (including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and most of the rest of the British Commonwealth) are pretty much under control, and that is also where most of the top hackers are.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
This is not about their *desire* for power. This is about the ability to control it. Bottom line, you really over estimate what they are capable of. Actions have consequences. It's true at all levels, small and great.
They embraced totalitarianism and persecution of minorities -- just as Americans are today. I guess on the face of it, my upbringing is irrelevant.
Democrats don't mind war as long as they can have big government. Republicans don't mind big government as long as they can have war. This is not about their *desire* for power. This is about the ability to control it. Their inability to sanely control power is part of the problem. The desire to be in a position of power is in and of itself not bad. It is how that power is exercised which truly defines it. Left to their own devices, unopposed or ineffectively opposed, I see two possible outcomes: Social collapse into an anarchic state followed by the rise of an autocratic state. Or the imposition of a totalitarian system somewhere between "Brave New World" and "Dante's Inferno". I want to be careful to not be insulting because that is not my intent, but quite frankly the naivete encapsulated in your statement surprises me. You are an intelligent man, of that I have no doubt, however your view of the capabilities of our opposition woefully underestimates them. There are so many evidences of their activity and the results of their actions that your statement bespeaks an unawareness of the scope of the problem. At this point we are facing: Nearly total control of all major media - television, newspapers, and motion pictures. Nearly total control of the banking and monetary system (the Chinese are fighting back but it does not do us much good - other than to slow the tightening of the financial hegemony). Essentially complete control of the U.S. Federal Government, that of Britain, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada (and all their possessions). Through those puppet strings they control about 2/3 of the effective military of the planet. The military budget of the U.S. alone is greater than the rest of the world combined. The centralization of police power in the U.S. through various Federal Agencies and Programs e.g., FEMA and the "Fusion Centers" etc., ... The complete control of CIA and FBI (which were corrupt to begin with but have grown far worse). The proliferation of the medicalization of life's problems with the solution being drugging via various Psychiatric drugs - Anti-Depressants and Atypical Anti-Psychotics being the two largest categories. This has been done to the point to where about 1 in 7 adults is either now on or has been on one of those drugs. The control has been established without a lot of fanfare or advertisement but it is there. Jesse Ventura was very revealing when he pointed out that there was a CIA detachment in the Governor's Offices when he took over as Governor of Minnesota. I presume that there are like detachments in every State Capitol. Much of the control is exercised via mass manipulation - television being the main venue, but it is not limited to TV. No, the control is not yet absolute but it has reached a very very dangerous level and the approach is being made upon absolute control. The Internet has been a two edged sword as it has allowed the spread of information, but that is not enough. As long as the electoral system is under the control of outside influences, which it is on the national stage, then there is no peaceful way to defang the beast. We still have some freedom at the local level but even that is beginning to come under control with installation of psychotic police, and increasing controls on speech and movement. I could spend several hours on this, and I could organize the presentation a little better, but the signs are all there. They, what we call the "NWO" which is mostly the Banksters, the Old Nobility, and organized Psychiatry are spending a lot of time and money to build their "Brave New World". That it is a psychotic vision is what makes it dangerous. Just envision the worst of "Brave New World" and "1984" combined and you can reach a basic approximation of where all of these plans are headed.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
Evidence, like how WL must be a covert op because the info they released hurts Israel's enemies? Which is the same thing as saying "I didn't like what they published?" That is not evidence, OI, especially when they are supposedly only 1-2 % of the way through publishing the cables, but that is what some of the supposed patriot types are citing. I know what it's like to run a forum and attempt to defend the right of others to speak their minds, and in doing so I was attacked, OI. Perhaps much like Assange is being attacked. Christine didn't understand why I was doing the things I was on LP, until she started running 4um, and then I remember her mentioning to me that "I know what it's like now" to do the best job you can at a thankless job, but doing it because it's the right thing to do, only to be attacked for doing it BECAUSE you just didn't do it the way some armchair warriors, of which there are no shortage on the net, *KNOW* it should be done though some kind of divine revelation, no doubt, since they have no experience whatsoever in the subject. I was further relentlessly attacked here because I dared, in one fleeting moment, express some degree of value of life for the Iraqi people which was somehow twisted into being anti-2nd Amendment. Thankfully there were some who listened to me but others refused to, those whom you and I would both agree are intelligent people. So I guess OI that I can kindof empathize with what Assange is going though right now, which is much like what Ron Paul has gone through as well. There will always be people, in spite of being intelligent, who will come to wrong conclusions about good people simply because they disagree or refuse to understand the decisions those good people make, again, the lack of experience in the work those people actually do being no obstruction. Now do I know for a fact that Assange IS on the level? Of course I can't know that. But I do know for certain that people who do conscientious type things and become well known ARE ALWAYS demonized and accused of having screwed up motives, so the accusations that are being targeted on Assange is, or should have been, fully predictable from the outset. I understand "openleaks.com" is going to be coming online in about a week, started by WL defectors, and they have some nifty plan to release info to one reporter after another until someone finally does a story on it. How long will it be before they too are accused of some Israeli ties? That by, again, people who have no idea of the logistics that are behind running an operation like that? OI, even intelligent people can delude themselves into seeing things that simply are not there. Intelligence is no safeguard against falling for such a thing. Perhaps one difference between you and me is that I know what I don't know. As for your quote above, I stand by my previous statement. Actions have consequences, and that is true for anyone who tries to control, great or small. I think the PTB's would be very happy for fiat money to continue to work as it has been, but the consequences are now coming to bear, and it's not something that they can control. Of course one can always say "It's all part of the grand plan, they planned for the economy to crash". Unfortunately events will unfold in only one way and there will always be intelligent people who will claim that, regardless of how it unfolds, it unfolded according to some master plan. Ergo, the PTB's are just all powerful types and we have no hope of ever fighting back. And if planet Earth exploded tomorrow, that would be part of their plan as well. No OI, I do not accept that these PTB's are on par with God himself. But if I'm wrong, I'm just wrong.
This is our SOS who claimed that the US had to build up a missile defense system in Poland to protect Poland from the Iranian missile menace. With a straight face.
Hitlery is just being a good NWO/Dixie Mafia Soldier. Give the poor girl a break. Just because she has murdered and lied her way to the top is no reason to come down on a nice Dyke like her. Just ask Mary Caitlin Mahoney how sweet she is.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
With a straight face. I never did figure out the intent of that one, good bad or indifferent. I wondered, what in hell is this really about. Total nonsense.
Your summation is terrific. Yet, two days has elapsed since your post and no response. Can't OI (at least) acknowledge your otherwise well thought out post?
"In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," ... "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it" -- Ron Paul, circa 2010-12-02
Uh, buck, we were at an impasse. He is well aware of the evidence and chain of reasoning as laid out. Since he has his mind made up regardless there is little point in continuing. I believe a preponderance of the evidence and actions point at WeakeyLinks being a PsyOp to justify Internet Censorship. The exemption given to Israel is really just an indicator as to the likely force behind WeakeyLinks (along with collaboration with the major media which is firmly under Zionist control). So, there is little point in rebutting again. The facts and circumstances speak for themselves.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
I would rather say that you were beaten to a bloody pulp on your continuous assumptions based on hot-aire and gossip.
"In a free society we're supposed to know the truth," ... "In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it" -- Ron Paul, circa 2010-12-02
Comments (46 - 84) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIn Germany things started much like this
If you believe in small government, then you shouldn't be in the White House.
#6. To: ghostdogtxn (#1)
I disagree that Wikileaks is an inside job, but that's just opinion on my part.
In Germany things started much like this, and there was a hand in hand cooperation between the government and the corporate powers that be. Ultimately, though, the state outgrew the corporate powers and became their absolute master, ...
#7. To: PnbC (#5)
The Germans didn't have the internet, and even shortwave radio usually only permitted access to state-sponsored propaganda which may or may not have differed from their own.
#8. To: Original_Intent (#7)
Remember die Weiße Rose.
If you believe in small government, then you shouldn't be in the White House.
#9. To: PnbC (#8)
#10. To: buckeroo (#2)
(Edited)
[Hillary Clinton] "urging State Department employees to identify and report the credit card numbers of the international community that they deal with."
#11. To: Original_Intent (#0)
#12. To: PnbC, ALL (#8)
"The White Rose should be studied by everyone, and their story should be made known because someday, there will be a time when the world will need a White Rose to bloom again."
The tree of liberty must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants. ~ Thomas Jefferson
#13. To: GreyLmist (#11)
Meanwhile, try to post a YouTube music video that the musician(s) don't want in the public domain for free because it might reduce their sales. Who owns the copyrights to the stolen info-property that Assange is trafficking in for money? My guess is that Assange doesn't own those copyrights, nor does the entire world. He isn't publishing stolen info for fair use educational purposes. He solicits money for it and gets lots of it from donations and other funding backers. We already have copyright laws and trafficking in stolen property laws here, at the very least, that should apply to him and WikiLeaks, yes?
#14. To: Original_Intent (#13)
(Edited)
All writings within the government, and all actions, are the collective property and responsibility of the citizens of the United States.
To allow the government to keep secret its actions and criminal behavior is repugnant to liberty.
#15. To: GreyLmist (#10)
Am I missing something about that issue?
#16. To: GreyLmist, all (#14)
I'll agree that it's the collective property of Constitutionalist citizens of the United States. What should we do about it as our responsibility? Have everthing sent automatically to WikiLeaks, CNN et al, post all info and defense data on .gov websites, classify nothing? Other countries should all do that too?
So the gist is that there should be no such thing as Espionage anymore?
If that's the case, what's the definition of Defense?
What's next -- pressure our Military to quit wearing camouflage and painting their faces to hide from snipers and such?
It should be remembered as an axiom of eternal truth in politics, that whatever power in any government is independent, is absolute also; in theory only at first while the spirit of the people is up, but in practice as fast as that relaxes. ~ Thomas Jefferson
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. ~ Thomas Jefferson
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. ~ Thomas Jefferson
“Sunshine is the greatest disinfectant” ~ The Honorable Louis D. Brandeis
“The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.” ~ Patrick Henry
“Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their government, for whenever things go so far wrong as to attract their notice, they can be relied on to set thing right.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
“Secrecy is the freedom zealots dream of: no watchman to check the door, no accountant to check the books, no judge to check the law. The secret government has no constitution. The rules it follows are the rules it makes up.” ~ Bill Moyers
“The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.” ~ John Fitzgerald Kennedy
#17. To: buckeroo (#15)
As the US State Department focuses attention on foreign embassy personnel's credit cards and practices, it misses the mark about foreign policy here in America to keep us safe from foreign intrusion.
#18. To: Original_Intent (#12)
Their father--Robert Scholl--told his children that Hitler and the Nazis were leading Germany down a road of destruction.
#19. To: GreyLmist (#17)
#20. To: Original_Intent (#16)
(Edited)
No information pertinent to a trial under law, where such information is of material consequence, may be withheld under ANY circumstances. Any attempt to withhold or destroy such information should be punishable under law as Official Malfeasance. Where it would result in provable material harm to the nation it may be restricted to only the Judge, Prosecution, Defense Counsel, AND THE JURY.
#21. To: buckeroo (#19)
The question for me and most folks is very simple: Isn't transparency in and about US government operations the same or similar as to already publickly released and authorized information?
#22. To: GreyLmist (#21)
I'm not sure what you and the WikiLeaks fan club expect in the way of transparency. Are you?
#23. To: buckeroo (#22)
If America had a formally declared contemporary WAR based upon a Congressional Act as mandated by the US Constitution, we would all be better off. But because of the continuous cloud of secrecy dealings based upon the US government's under-handed dealings, we the PEOPLE are fucked.
#24. To: GreyLmist (#20)
What has he "disclosed" from his dumpster that couldn't have been petitioned through a Freedom of Information request?
#25. To: Original_Intent, GreyLmist (#24)
Our government is engaged in massive criminality and the only way to combat that is to expose it to the best disinfectant - sunlight.
No Planes. Think about it. ................. Guaranteed Penetration (no it's not porn)
#26. To: Original_Intent (#0)
If the State Department really felt that the WikiLeaks operation was a serious threat to national security, or even a serious embarrassment politically, they could have shut it down at any time.
#27. To: GreyLmist (#23)
America hasn't had a formally declared contemporary WAR based upon a Congressional Act as mandated by the US Constitution since the UN was formed because the globalist's agenda and their Israel offspring's agenda for us is about "conflict management" on their terms.
WikiLeaks isn't concerned with America's best interest on that point or peace either.
#28. To: Pinguinite (#26)
If the State Department really felt that the WikiLeaks operation was a serious threat to national security, or even a serious embarrassment politically, they could have shut it down at any time.
#29. To: wudidiz (#25)
Canadian Philosopher John McMurtry as he comments on the psychological warfare that has afflicted us all: "It is like a trance. So what can break a trance? The only thing that can break the trance is the light of truth."
#30. To: Original_Intent (#28)
It is naive to think that people who would murder millions, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan, would hesitate a second to murder a flea that was biting them UNLESS he was their flea.
#31. To: Pinguinite (#30)
In cyberspace, the field is permanently slanted against those desiring to keep secrets and in favor of those who wish to share info.
#32. To: PnbC (#5)
I was raised (by my secular Jewish mom) to look at Germans with a jaundiced eye for what happened there under Hitler and the Nazis.
#33. To: Pinguinite (#30)
It is naive to think that people who would murder millions, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan, would hesitate a second to murder a flea that was biting them UNLESS he was their flea.
And since discussion here on 4um is generally anti-government (while still being pro-country) then I suppose 4um is presumed to be a covert op as well. After all, if they wanted to shut 4um down, they could.
While I do agree that there are people in this world who would not and have not hesitated to instigate the murder of 100's of thousands or even millions to further their interests, and that W Bush is one of those people as he demonstrated handily, I don't subscribe to the theory that the government is all powerful. It is, after all made of up of the same dumb-down public that passes for educated in the USA today.
And killing Assange wouldn't stop it. Nor would killing the whole crew. Hackers wouldn't accept that....
In cyberspace, the field is permanently slanted against those desiring to keep secrets and in favor of those who wish to share info. Hackers will win this war in the end. Mark my words.
#34. To: Original_Intent (#33)
Cyberspace can be shut down on a moment's notice. Sever the backbone and it is dead.
#35. To: Pinguinite (#34)
Cyberspace can be shut down on a moment's notice. Sever the backbone and it is dead.
#36. To: Original_Intent (#35)
You have to understand the logic of power.
#37. To: RickyJ (#32)
(Edited)
What happened there?
If you believe in small government, then you shouldn't be in the White House.
#38. To: Pinguinite (#36)
(Edited)
You have to understand the logic of power.
Bottom line, you really over estimate what they are capable of. Actions have consequences. It's true at all levels, small and great.
#39. To: Original_Intent, Christine (#38)
I want to be careful to not be insulting because that is not my intent, but quite frankly the naivete encapsulated in your statement surprises me. You are an intelligent man, of that I have no doubt, however your view of the capabilities of our opposition woefully underestimates them. There are so many evidences of their activity and the results of their actions that your statement bespeaks an unawareness of the scope of the problem.
#40. To: Original_Intent (#0)
Hillary Clinton has called WikiLeaks “an attack on the international community”. Coming from her,
"Satan / Cheney in "08" 
#41. To: tom007 (#40)
#42. To: tom007 (#40)
This is our SOS who claimed that the US had to build up a missile defense system in Poland to protect Poland from the Iranian missile menace.
#43. To: Pinguinite, Original_Intent (#39)
Evidence, like how WL must be a covert op because the info they released hurts Israel's enemies? Which is the same thing as saying "I didn't like what they published?" That is not evidence, OI, especially when they are supposedly only 1-2 % of the way through publishing the cables, but that is what some of the supposed patriot types are citing.
#44. To: buckeroo, Buckmonster Fullofit, Nostradumbass, Pinguinite, all (#43)
#45. To: Original_Intent (#44)
Uh, buck, we were at an impasse. He is well aware of the evidence and chain of reasoning as laid out.
.
.
.