 fatnesssubtleJanitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:13
Bright House Netwo..
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help
| reply to amigo_boy
Re: WikiLeaks and unrestrained freedom What would you think a Taliban leader would say? "We have no clue"? "There's nothing very helpful there"?
The US and the Taliban are at war. Not much credibility was assigned to what was said by the Japanese and Germans in WWII.
--
I don't have a problem! |
|
Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| said by fatness:Not much credibility was assigned to what was said by the Japanese and Germans in WWII. Well, according to your calculations, there's no reason to limit news access to war information because not much credibility is assigned to the news either. |
|
 Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1
 ·Bright House
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
| reply to fatness
said by fatness:What would you think a Taliban leader would say? "We have no clue"? "There's nothing very helpful there"? The US and the Taliban are at war. Not much credibility was assigned to what was said by the Japanese and Germans in WWII. That does strike me as an odd quote from the Taliban.
Their MO in the past usually involved kidnapping/beheading, public execution after family torture or something equally interesting.
I've never heard the "under surveillance" thing before.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| said by Noah Vail:I've never heard the "under surveillance" thing before. I don't understand how anyone can believe something like this is harmless:
»wardiary.wikileaks.org/afg/event···091.html
Not only does it name an individual who wished to give up on Taliban activities, the document doesn't add any value to war atrocities which may deserve "outing."
I only read three documents before finding that one. It's obvious why Assange defends himself by saying he invited the US government to vet the documents before they were released. He knew they had the potential to put people in jeopardy.
This was an irresponsible act. I knew it was just a matter of time until the entertainment nature of WikiLeaks would go too far, leading to (and justifying) calls for greater regulation of the Internet. Greater surveillance tools. Etc.
I wouldn't be surprised if Assange wasn't set up with fictitious data just so the government would have the "incident" it needs. But, either way, Assange showed how irresponsible he is. |
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| said by amigo_boy:said by Noah Vail:I've never heard the "under surveillance" thing before. I don't understand how anyone can believe something like this is harmless: Do I think it was harmless? Probably not.
Do I think it will save more US/US-invested lives than it cost?
Ah. That's the question that the jury is out on.
Looking at the unarmored Humvee debacle at the wars' beginning, tells me that sometimes our government has something other than our soldiers welfare in mind, when executing the fine details of war.
Sometimes our presidents, our DoD, our intelligence agencies and our allies; aren't the good guys. I don't think they're inherently evil. It's just that some days they need to be reminded to put the White Hat back on.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. |
|
| Regardless of your opinion about the integrity of our Armed Forces, the fact is Classified information was leaked. This will no doubt have negative consequences for everyone involved in that theatre. I only hope they find this clown, try him for the treasonous act it was, and then draw and quarter him. No mercy for sh*t like this!
--
BF69~~~Please stop suffocating gerbils! |
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| said by S_engineer:I only hope they find this clown, try him for the treasonous act it was, and then draw and quarter him. Is he a US citizen? If he wasn't I don't think it qualifies as treason. It'd be the same as if you did this to the Chinese.
said by S_engineer:Regardless of your opinion about the integrity of our Armed Forces, the fact is Classified information was leaked. This will no doubt have negative consequences for everyone involved in that theater. My opinion of our Armed Forces is high. I'm pretty sure you're right about short-to-medium term negative consequences.
The question is: Will this help bring about positive changes that will help in the long term; the time that has always been most uncertain?
I don't know the answer to that. I'm largely ignorant of specific details of the leaked docs, and wouldn't know how to plug raw intelligence data into the war.
The UK Independent, who initially coordinated the leak, talked him into holding back quite a few documents. Those docs were believed to be much higher risk, than what we have. That supports your negative opinion of the leaker.
Personally, I'm cryptome.org fan. I don't think they hold wikileaks in high regard either.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. |
|
|
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to Noah Vail
said by Noah Vail:Do I think it will save more US/US-invested lives than it cost? How does the example document I posted "save lives?"
If it was a document revealing or corroborating corruption, an atrocity, etc., I might understand the goal of leaking the document. (I know some say nothing should ever be leaked.).
But, it appears AssMange went way too far on this one. He posted documents that are revelatory to nobody except the Taliban.
He also sounds like a clinical narcissist. Imagine the ego, asking the federal government to participate with him, revealing top-secret documents obtained in violation of the law.
It was just a matter of time until his ego would cause him to go way too far. He has set the internet back two decades. This incident will be the basis of regulatory attempts for many years. And, AssMange will only think of himself. The internet exists for him to post whatever he wants. (That's how narcissists tick.). |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:This will no doubt have negative consequences for everyone involved in that theatre.
It's going to have consequences for everyone using the internet too. This will be example #1 why the government needs more oversight, more tools, more historic data to unravel crimes after they happen.
Everyone who argued against warrentless wiretaps and NSA data mining just lost a lot of ground. It was just a matter of time until it happened. There's always some clown like Assange who goes too far, ruining it for everyone.
said by S_engineer:I only hope they find this clown, try him for the treasonous act it was, and then draw and quarter him. No mercy for sh*t like this! Given the nature of intelligence, and the stakes involved in wartime intelligence, it wouldn't surprise me if Assange is found floating face down in 2 inches of water, "in what police suspect to be an accidental drowning."
I doubt too many people will care. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to Noah Vail
said by Noah Vail:said by S_engineer:I only hope they find this clown, try him for the treasonous act it was, and then draw and quarter him. Is he a US citizen? If he wasn't I don't think it qualifies as treason. quote:
Art. 3, Sect. 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Nothing in that language specifically limits the charge to US citizens.
I'm sure there are dozens of other charges that could be applied, such as conspiracy.
But, I doubt the government would want a long drawn out trial. I'm sure they're pleased to have the perfect argument for expanded surveillance abilities, ability to take down sites, etc.
And, as noted in an earlier post, intelligence (and counter-intelligence) activities usually don't go through such legal formalities. Especially during a time of war. He'll just drive off a bridge one day in a Toyota which "apparently had a throttle problem." |
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| said by amigo_boy: quote:
Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Nothing in that language specifically limits the charge to US citizens. That's the Constitutional Limit of Treason, which has the distinction of being the only crime specifically delimited by the constitution. It's intention was to prevent British style penalties such as Corruption of Blood/Attainder.
The qualification for treason are laid out in the the United States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 2381.
said by 18 U.S.C. § 2381 :Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. WikiLeaker doesn't seem to be owing any allegiance to the United States.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | said by Noah Vail:WikiLeaker doesn't seem to be owing any allegiance to the United States. Thanks. But, if the activity would be "treason" when committed by a US citizen, then what is it when committed by a non-citizen? Spying? Sedition? Conspiring to commit seditious libel or uprising?
Those things are treated just as severely as treason. And, if committed by a citizen of an allied country, it seems like that country may have a cause of treason (if harming the ally also harms the country).
Certainly, the country (England?) wouldn't have any problem extraditing Assange on a charge like the following:
quote:
§ 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war
(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or
Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).
(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.
-- »www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/us···00-.html
There's also an applicable law at Section 2387.
Not being treason, either of those two laws take the death penalty off the table. But, it's still a Assange could be charged with a serious offense resulting in 10-20 years in prison. An offense of the character of Treason, lacking only the element of disloyalty. |
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:said by Noah Vail:Do I think it will save more US/US-invested lives than it cost? How does the example document I posted "save lives?" The unit of measure isn't a single document, it's the long term effect of the entire release.
As to what that effect will be, the answer is I don't know.
I don't have the ability
to plug countless thousands of pages of raw intelligence
into a highly dynamic war
and know whether their public release
will have an overall positive/negative effect,
years from now.
That would be most meaningful measurement of the value of the release. I don't know who has the ability to puzzle out the answer to that. Time will tell us one way or the other.
Here's what I'm pitting the leak up against.
1) My US Government; who for all their good intentions and well made plans occasionally makes tremendous and inexcusable mistakes regarding the well being our those under it's care.
Examples are
_a)Needlessly under-equipping soldiers in a war,
_b)Fighting a pulled-punches war that puts our troops in danger but saves political careers and power,
_c)Promises to indigenous people that are broken as soon as it's politically convenient
and
_d)Failing to appropriately support our returned military people who've paid a tremendous price in the service of their country.
2) A Press that is - on balance - far more concerned with ideology, manipulation and cost structure than with journalism.
3) Allies who owe allegiance to the United States but are actually immersed in treasonous acts with our enemies.
There are reports that the WikiLeak exposed #3.
If you have a solution to issue #'s 1,2 & 3; that is historically effective; I'd be interested in hearing it.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to Noah Vail
said by Noah Vail:WikiLeaker doesn't seem to be owing any allegiance to the United States. BTW: From this news article, it appears US citizens involved with WikiLeaks could find themselves charged with treasonous activities such as seditious libel or either of the two laws I posted previously.
quote:
Adrian Lamo, the Sacramento, Calif.-based computer hacker who turned in Bradley to military authorities in May, claimed in a telephone interview Saturday he had firsthand knowledge that someone helped Manning set up encryption software to send classified information to WikiLeaks.
Lamo, who's cooperating with investigators, wouldn't name the person but said the man was among a group of people in the Boston area who work with WikiLeaks. He said the man told him "he actually helped Private Manning set up the encryption software he used."
Lamo said the software enabled Manning to send classified data in small bits so that it would seem innocuous.
"It wouldn't look too much different from your average guy doing his banking on line," Lamo said.
-- »news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_afghanistan_wikileaks
|
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:Thanks. But, if the activity would be "treason" when committed by a US citizen, then what is it when committed by a non-citizen? Spying? Sedition? Conspiring to commit seditious libel or uprising? It's Crappy.
If you (A US Citizen on US Soil) publish secret Chinese government documents, that detail Chinese human rights abuse;
what should the Chinese government be able to do to you?
That's a pretty flexible question. You can make the documents War related if, it helps you answer it.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to Noah Vail
said by Noah Vail:said by amigo_boy:said by Noah Vail:Do I think it will save more US/US-invested lives than it cost? How does the example document I posted "save lives?" The unit of measure isn't a single document, it's the long term effect of the entire release. As to what that effect will be, the answer is I don't know. Which is why the government has the power to classify documents as top-secret, and those who publish them (knowing they don't have the ability to judge the harm they may cause) should be charged with treason, seditious libel or either of the two laws I posted before.
I could understand posting something like a video showing an atrocity of war. Or, documents showing how a corrupt procurement process led to ineffective property that cost lives (or taxpayer dollars). I know many who would say even that is inexcusable.
But, indiscriminately posting documents which name informants and enemy turncoats (not even in the context of some scandal of atrocity or corruption) is very different.
It's simply disingenuous to say "but, I didn't know which person might actually be harmed. And besides, I didn't have time to read each document individually. And, it's the 'big picture.' These documents might reveal something that I can't even contemplate."
Using your rationale, a person could act as recklessly as they wish and always have an "out." That's just another excuse for greater government control over the internet, expanded surveillance powers, etc. People can't exercise judicious restraint, so they need the government to do it for them. |
|
Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Bright House
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy:BTW: From this news article, it appears US citizens involved with WikiLeaks could find themselves charged with treasonous activities such as seditious libel or either of the two laws I posted previously.... I thought the Feds pegged Lamo as a criminal scumbag. Now he's a person of case building credibility.
Our government DOES change it's mind when it's convenient.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to Noah Vail
said by Noah Vail:If you (A US Citizen on US Soil) publish secret Chinese government documents, that detail Chinese human rights abuse; what should the Chinese government be able to do to you? I understand what you're saying. Terrorism or patriotism is usually defined by who's side your on (or, who won the war).
In this case, we're talking about a citizen of an ally of the US. And, US citizens who work with him (and, per published reports, may have actually facilitated this leak by a US citizen).
Very different than your China example simply based upon the expectations of US citizens, and citizens of allies. In the same way that the crime of "treason" has a different expectation of citizens than non-citizens (whose crimes are punishable under the two laws I already posted).
If you want to engage in a comparison with China or Russia, then you'd have to answer why those two countries aren't military allies.
The better comparison would be to a US citizen who publishes British military secrets concerning a war that the US is in, and which US troops will be harmed by in similar fashion to British troops.
As a military ally, I'd suspect that the US citizen would be charged with a US crime. At a bare minimum, it wouldn't surprise me if the US citizen were extradited on British charges.
That's the difference between allies and countries that have little ties except commerce. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| reply to Noah Vail
said by Noah Vail:said by amigo_boy:BTW: From this news article, it appears US citizens involved with WikiLeaks could find themselves charged with treasonous activities such as seditious libel or either of the two laws I posted previously.... I thought the Feds pegged Lamo as a criminal scumbag. Now he's a person of case building credibility. Our government DOES change it's mind when it's convenient. Or, maybe Lamo changed his mind due to convenience?
What has he said that substantially alters what we already and hasn't been disputed by Assange?
With American citizens undoubtedly supporting WikiLeaks, it wouldn't be surprising that one (or a few) facilitated the leak. Particularly if they remain involved in WikiLeaks after this debacle.
To me, that was the more interesting part of the news article. Assange may be able to distance himself from this, playing the "I'm British, and therefore beyond the reach of US law." US citizens will have a much harder time playing that game.
Even if they can't be directly implicated with the leak, their ongoing participation with WikiLeaks could be construed as seditious libel (or either of the two laws I already posted). Just by promoting an organization that has harmed US interests and violated either of the two laws I posted.
Assange really went too far this time. There's really no defense for it.
I could understand revealing a helicopter video of a massacre. But, the handful of documents I read were not revelatory except to the Taliban. |
|
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to Noah Vail
Earlier I said that it wouldn't surprise me if the US government leaked entirely false information to WikiLeaks just to have the "incident" they need to gain more control over the internet. The following supports that possibility:
quote:
In 2008, Wikileaks released a classified report of the United States Army Counterintelligence Center discussing ways to destroy WikiLeaks's reputation and efficacy.[15] The report said "successful identification, prosecution, termination of employment, and exposure of persons leaking the information by the governments and businesses affected by information posted to Wikileaks.org would damage and potentially destroy this center of gravity and deter others from taking similar actions".[20] Greenwald wrote about this: "exactly what the U.S. Government wanted to happen in order to destroy WikiLeaks has happened here [the Manning leak]".[15]
--»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrest_of_···eactions
Whether that's what happened or not, WikiLeaks went too far. If it was a setup, WikiLeaks played into it beautifully, showing how irresponsible they could be with real information.
However, the question of whether they were setup is interesting. |
|
