Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2013 9:10:12 GMT 10
And Johnnie Howard walks around free with all the perks of a ex PM when he should be charged for war crimes for spreading disinformation.....sucks dun it.
|
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Mar 1, 2013 9:14:15 GMT 10
And Johnnie Howard walks around free with all the perks of a ex PM when he should be charged for war crimes for spreading disinformation.....sucks dun it. It does... The thing is... you can go to websites and download everything their government utters because they have a disclosure clause. ... anyone can do it if you want to bother yourself with 700 trillion pieces of useless information! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2013 9:35:51 GMT 10
Bradley Manning did not release any top secret information that was not available on websites, he did filter what he released though....spitefull bastards is the USA.
|
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Mar 1, 2013 9:41:20 GMT 10
so... when is the New York Times going to be brought in front of the courts for publishing the big government secrets?
|
|
|
|
Post by bender on Mar 1, 2013 16:25:13 GMT 10
There is a significant difference between the media or press releasing something, and an individual doing the same.
Daniel Ellsburg did it during the Vietnam War. He was a part of a study group looking at the war and as such was given access to pretty much everything the Government and Military had.
In the course of his work he discovered that the Government was lying in pretty much every facet of its involvement in the War, and the Military was doing the same. These weren't small lies either, there were strategic decisions being made on the basis of false information because the Military was lying to the Government, the Government to the Military and both sides were also lying to themselves.
Ellsberg made a decision after listening to a speech by a draft dodger who was prepared to go to Jail for his beliefs, he released what was then known as the Pentagon Papers to the Press (he gave it to the New York times, and when the Nixon Administration quickly filed an injunction to force the Times to stop their presses (which was the first time such an order had been given since the Civil War) the New York Times simply refused and as a safety measure Ellsberg rapidly released the Papers to 17 other publications) when the Government initially succeeded and had the New York Times shut down for a couple of weeks. The Government lost the suit when it got to the Courts because of the First Amendment rights concerning the Freedom of the Press and indeed that case is considered the standing case law on 1st Amendment/Press issues.
The impact of the Pentagon Papers on the American public was the final nail in the coffin for US Involvement in the Vietnam War. It's hard to say if it would have had the same impact in 1965 as it did in 1971 (and Ellsberg actually had accessed the papers as part of the Study in 1968), but by 71 the American Public had simply had enough of the Government lying to them to try and maintain support for an unpopular war that they couldn't win.
Nixon rapidly announced that the US would be withdrawing nearly all of its forces.
One of the strange ironies of the situation was that Daniel Ellsberg was the Pentagon Duty Officer on the day that the Gulf of Tomkin incident occurred, (a naval incident that turned out to be a case of misidentification along with jumpy nerves by American Naval Officers that most people consider to be the instigating incident that brought the Americans into the War). Ellsbeg was the man who reported the erroneous information to Defence Secretary Robert McNamara.
Now the differences between that case and the Mannng/Assange/Wikileaks case are distinct, though that distinction does raise the question of whether the First Ammendment Freedoms in the US are capable of keeping up with developing technology.
Wikileaks was not considered a Press Agency, (even though they sought to get around that by releasing their information through the New York Times and other media outlets, Wikileaks did ensure that the entire world was aware that the Media only had the information due to their work). By their own actions they had essentially stated that they knew they were not a news agency, yet then went ahead and published the entire take of the information Manning had supplied on their website. (The Media had had a joint team working on the Wikileaks material for months before they actually went to the presses to ensure that they did not release classified information, nor did the information they release endanger any person by revealing that they had given information to the American Military). Traditionally the major US News Organisations if they have material concerning the Intelligence Services or Sensitive Military Information will contact the Agency in Question and tell them what material they possess prior to it being published and give those Agencies a chance to argue (privately) why it shouldn't be. During the Reagan years the relationship between the Media and US Government (particularly the CIA) went downhill (because they got caught out time and time again lying when they asked the Press to sit on certain stories) so far that unless the Agencies can show material proof that releasing the information would be harmful to America the media gives them their chance to muster an argument and then publishes anyway. Even though a lot of claims were made by the Americans in the aftermath of the entire release of the material by Wikileaks, nobody has been able to show that any person was hurt or killed by the material exposing their identity or actions.
The reason behind that is fairly simple. The material that Manning (who held the second lowest rank in the active US Military) was able to access was material that had been rated as needing the lowest security classification. It eventuated that pretty much everyone in Iraq or Afghanistan who had a log in to the US's computer network could have accessed the information. That didn't just include lowly enlisted men like Manning but private military contractors who were largely South American or Eastern European by the time that this event happened (the Yanks , Brits and Aussies had bailed out by that time because the payrate had dropped substantially from the early days).
The Embassy Cables release (the bulk of the Wikileaks material) was essentially released out of vindictiveness by Assange, it didn't show the Americans actually lying or committing bad acts, it was more gossip by Embassy Personnel about their counterparts in their host countries and the main effect was embarrassment and in all honesty, it was not "secret material".
The Collateral Murder video along with several other pieces of information that were released prior to the main release did show that the US Government and Military were actively misleading the US Public and as such Manning has a good argument for his actions. They weren't lying to protect a mission, or sources working undercover somewhere. They were lying because the Military had killed innocent people, had refused to sanction the individuals who had actually carried out the killings and had swept it all under the carpet because to let it out in the light made the Bush Whitehouse fear that public support for the war would drop even further and support for Bush would nosedive with it.
Manning due to the fact that he was a serving member of the Military cannot argue that he was attempting to serve a larger good. Military personnel don't have the right to act on their own conscience.
The US's position in going after Manning is one founded in logic. In this day and age nothing is as important in Warfare as information security. Being able to get the right information to the right person in a timely manner without the other side being able to find out will be the factor that decides who wins and who loses They cannot afford to have people thinking that they know better, that they are serving a greater good by leaking information.
And so, despite the fact that Manning was indeed serving a greater good in his actions they will go after him with everything they've got, and he will spend a substantial part of his life in Jail for his actions.
If the US cannot show that Assange actively sought the information that Manning provided (by offering inducements to Manning to get the information, or by saying words to the effect of "can you get this information and pass it on to us" then Assange should be alright. He's not a US Citizen and as such a lot of the Laws being used in this case simply don't apply to him.
However if they can get Manning to implicate Assange in the decision to actually access the system and download the material then Assange will probably spend a not insignificant part of his life in a US Jail.
That's life, in Hollywood you can guarantee a happy ending, but in the real world simply doing the right thing doesn't ensure that you ride off into the sunset with the girl. Indeed, as we can see in this case, doing the right thing can see you end up in a world of hurt. Probably the most surprising thing I found about this case is that the US Military/US State Dept IT Network didn't have active protections to prevent people from downloading material. Simply restricting computers with a function to allow downloads to those people with both an appropriate security clearance and a genuine need to be able to do so would have prevented Manning from ever doing this in the first place.
But just because the US was dreadfully lax in their own security won't be able to be used as a defence. Manning was a soldier and as I said earlier had willingly given up the right to be able to make decisions based on his own personal conscience. He chose a side that wasn't his own which is a terribly dangerous course to take when you're talking about the Military.
|
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 1, 2013 16:50:34 GMT 10
Just another case of the left wanting to get into bed with the terrorists, nothing new here, we all know thats their MO, Assange the rapist probably got all juiced up at the thought of a taliban rape any chick in the street you feel like society no problems at all and got on board with osamas global mass rape program and decided to give him a hand.
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Mar 1, 2013 16:57:49 GMT 10
You don't like the thought of "innocent till proven guilty", do you Garfy?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2013 17:01:52 GMT 10
"Bradley Manning did not release any top secret information that was not available on websites..." bit of a hurry when I posted that Earl....as in Benders missive none of what Mannning released with wikileaks was highly top secret information, while that info was not available on websites as Cascur implied, it still was not highly classifeid and sensitive material.
|
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 1, 2013 17:05:03 GMT 10
You don't like the thought of "innocent till proven guilty", do you Garfy? You don't like the thought of fighting against muslim extremism do you slarti? In fact like all lefties you would believe that we should just bring them all to Australia and pop them on centrelink. |
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 1, 2013 17:08:13 GMT 10
"Bradley Manning did not release any top secret information that was not available on websites..." bit of a hurry when I posted that Earl....as in Benders missive none of what Mannning released with wikileaks was highly top secret information, while that info was not available on websites as Cascur implied, it still was not highly classifeid and sensitive material. Probably not much in it for sure but the thing he did do was he said hey fuck youse I'm with the terrorists just like most of the left are, enough said, now just shoot the honey. |
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Mar 1, 2013 17:18:43 GMT 10
You don't like the thought of "innocent till proven guilty", do you Garfy? You don't like the thought of fighting against muslim extremism do you slarti? In fact like all lefties you would believe that we should just bring them all to Australia and pop them on centrelink. just how far do they think WA 90 billion dollars and Queensland 60 billion dollar mining investments will stretch? simply AMAZING. |
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 1, 2013 17:22:59 GMT 10
The labor partys biggest priority today is making sure the boat scammers are taken care of ahead of any Australian, they are even prepared to lose an election over it such is their idiocy.
|
|
|
|
Post by bender on Mar 1, 2013 17:32:38 GMT 10
Garfield, you are rapidly progressing from an unpleasant fart in an elevator to an unflushable turd left in the bowl over a hot weekend.
You are not funny, you are not even funny in a "hey check out the angry loner" way.
You are annoying for your off topic, innacurate and usually deliberately untrue posts which these days are your sole contribution to this board. You have become nothing more then an unpleasant personality to have around. If you do not moderate your behaviour immediatelyI will contact the Boards Operator and I hope others will join me in doing so to have you removed from the board due to your constant unashamed transgressions of the terms of service.
I'm not saying that you have to agree with anyone elses point of view Garfield, what I am demanding of you is that you act as part of a community instead of some deranged outsider that managed to crawl in under the fence.
|
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 1, 2013 17:38:02 GMT 10
LOL ... the NTB communist party is at work, geez I bet bender wishes he was born in North Korea ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by bender on Mar 1, 2013 17:41:51 GMT 10
No Garfield, I simply thought the right thing to do was give you fair warning and an opportunity to moderate your own behaviour.
You are obviously incapable of controlling yourself so it's up to someone else to do the job for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 1, 2013 17:50:08 GMT 10
Lets face it, you and earl are in a tag team suck each others cocks and get rid of NTB and Garfield whatever it takes because you are so sick of Garfield kicking your lame arses.
Man up ya pair of poofs, grow some nuts and come at me fair and square instead of taking the slimey slugs route of underhanded board closures and bannings.
Jodys probably sick to death of your daily pathetic whining and begging to get rid of me, give her a break, not to mention Proboards management that probably hope by now you whining c***s get hit by a bus to spare them the fifty complaint posts they know they are going to get today.
|
|
|
|
Post by pim on Mar 1, 2013 17:53:51 GMT 10
Garfield seems to have decided that his role on the board is to be the troll who puts up flame posts. I think that Bender's characterisation of him as having progressed from the fart in a lift to unflushable turd in a dunny bowl is spot on. Nobody's asking you to agree with anybody else, just cut the bullshit.
|
|
|
|
Post by pim on Mar 1, 2013 18:00:20 GMT 10
Lets face it, you and earl are in a tag team suck each others cocks and get rid of NTB and Garfield whatever it takes because you are so sick of Garfield kicking your lame arses. That's a lie Garfield and you know it. The remark about earl and bender is so absurd that it isn't even worth bothering with, but the "get rid of NTB" is a complete fabrication. You're a liar, Garfield. Anyone who makes an effort to "come at you fair & square" is wasting his time because you refuse to play fair & square yourself. I've seen that for myself. What makes you think you speak for Jody? Nobody else does except Jody herself. Don't come the dishonest bullshit line of pretending to be some advocate for Jody with your "give her a break". YOU give her a break you hypocritical arsehole and cut the troll stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 1, 2013 18:02:52 GMT 10
Come on Pim see this for what it is, I've kicked the board fuckwits arses from pillar to post and they are finally fed up with it and want me banned because they can't fight me fair and square, I'd hope you would at least have a more balanced view of the situation, then again I expect so much more from you yet get so much less so there ya go ;D
Tag team up poofter lefties and bring it on, would take ten of you wankers to bring little old me down.
|
|
|
|
Post by pim on Mar 1, 2013 18:22:15 GMT 10
Rubbish. Nobody is calling for you to be banned. Look up "troll". Then look in the mirror.
|
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 1, 2013 18:37:40 GMT 10
Rubbish. Nobody is calling for you to be banned. Look up "troll". Then look in the mirror. Where have you been lately?, its not like the education department here you know where you can just have lunch from nine to five and hope for the best for the students. Sure its in the best interests of the teachers unions to make the kiddies look like fuckin spastics sorely in need of a teachers pay rise to lift intelligence on a par with asian students who's teachers get paid $2.50 an hour but thats not the point. A real troll is someone that sucks on the public purse at the expense of private enterprise and then gives nothing in return except a bill for un provided services. |
|
|
|
Post by bender on Mar 1, 2013 18:47:22 GMT 10
I think this thread is illustrating very clearly that the education system failed one of it's "contributors" to such a degree that we should all be a little bit outraged.
I suppose the education system could mount a defence by making the point that obviously there's a just as serious failure in the Mental Health Services that needs to take its share of the blame for this personality.
Nature, nurture, it'd take a village of shrinks to get to the bottom of that warped psyche......
|
|
|
|
Post by geopol on Mar 2, 2013 6:34:28 GMT 10
I would like to think, given my realtively liberal view of the world, that I would be against suspensions, bannings warnings etc but Garfield has presented himself as such a bullying shithead, without even the slightly redeeming features of humour, wit, style or a sense of fun, that the place would be better off if he were banned:destructivbe shit can only be tolerated for so long!
|
|
|
|
Post by garfield on Mar 2, 2013 8:47:28 GMT 10
I think your Depends are overflowing again ... Nurse ... NURSE ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Mar 2, 2013 12:24:56 GMT 10
Rubbish. Nobody is calling for you to be banned. Look up "troll". Then look in the mirror. Where have you been lately?, its not like the education department here you know where you can just have lunch from nine to five and hope for the best for the students. Sure its in the best interests of the teachers unions to make the kiddies look like f***in spastics sorely in need of a teachers pay rise to lift intelligence on a par with asian students who's teachers get paid $2.50 an hour but thats not the point. A real troll is someone that sucks on the public purse at the expense of private enterprise and then gives nothing in return except a bill for un provided services. see... now that is ironic and VERY FUNNY because it's also very true..... they don''t get your sense of humour at all. 10/10 for hitting where it hurts. |
|
