Pages: 1 2 3 4

 

2010-06-10 12:34:17
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

M.O.A.B wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:


Implication in a few thousand counts of sedition or treason (or whatever term they'd pick).  I'm thinking that's enough to get a quiet warrant for the FBI, CIA, NSA to crawl all over every aspect of their operation, overtly or covertly.
Over here they'd be protected by the Public Interest Disclosure act.

Employees of GCHQ, MI5 or MI6 are not covered by this for national security reasons. Anyone else can release any of this sort of information and be protected by this act.

It's freedom of speech.


I suspect Wikileaks is based somewhere which has laws to protect them. I think it is unlikely Wikileaks will have any significant problems due to this.
I thought stuff like the army was excluded from the PID and that everyone who takes up a career where they work with potentially sensistive material was bound by the OS act?
Yes, everyone working with this sort of information has to sign the Official Secrets act. Which is pretty much exactly what I said (regular army are not mentioned in the exceptions clauses in the act, so I assume are covered).

Wikileaks are not an employee of any sort of national security organisation and so would be protected by it.
2010-06-10 12:37:30
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6508|Escea

Bertster7 wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


Over here they'd be protected by the Public Interest Disclosure act.

Employees of GCHQ, MI5 or MI6 are not covered by this for national security reasons. Anyone else can release any of this sort of information and be protected by this act.

It's freedom of speech.


I suspect Wikileaks is based somewhere which has laws to protect them. I think it is unlikely Wikileaks will have any significant problems due to this.
I thought stuff like the army was excluded from the PID and that everyone who takes up a career where they work with potentially sensistive material was bound by the OS act?
Yes, everyone working with this sort of information has to sign the Official Secrets act. Which is pretty much exactly what I said (regular army are not mentioned in the exceptions clauses in the act, so I assume are covered).

Wikileaks are not an employee of any sort of national security organisation and so would be protected by it.
Ah right. Misread some of your post.
2010-06-10 13:43:22
rdx-fx
...
+955|6877

Bertster7 wrote:

I suspect Wikileaks is based somewhere which has laws to protect them. I think it is unlikely Wikileaks will have any significant problems due to this.
Most likely they do have such protections.

But they've also potentially started trading in information considered of national security importance, hence they might have the eyes of various US agencies keeping a closer eye on them from now on. 

Would be an unfortunate thing, to be under the microscope of the CIA and NSA.

Just be sure not to trip over your wang in any way

Last edited by rdx-fx (2010-06-10 13:43:45)

2010-06-10 18:14:13
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX

rdx-fx wrote:

Would be an unfortunate thing, to be under the microscope of the CIA and NSA.
Didn't slow Bin Laden down at all.
Fuck Israel
2010-06-10 19:05:46
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6690|North Carolina
War is hell.... and hell is other people.

But seriously, the OP raises a good question.

On the one hand, this guy did release confidential information to the public in an action that can be seen as sedition.

On the other hand, what we were doing was fucked up.

On yet another hand...  the people we're fighting are more fucked up than us....  a lot more.

We're fighting hellish battles in hellish countries, and Pakistan looks like it's next.
2010-06-10 20:19:19
rdx-fx
...
+955|6877

Dilbert_X wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

Would be an unfortunate thing, to be under the microscope of the CIA and NSA.
Didn't slow Bin Laden down at all.
Yeah, it did.

He got real cautious around about 12 December 2001, and thereafter.
I'd love to get ahold of his famous "I'm sorry, I've failed you my brothers" radio speech.

Unless Osama Bin Hidin' Abu Ali Babba Bin Laden is currently playing the role of Iranian President Ahckmed Ahmadamnnutjob's presidential advisor (Osama as Karl Rove to Ahmagonnahavenukes' GWB?)  - his quality of life has taken a serious turn for the less opulent.
Multi-billionaire sheik to living in a cave, too afraid to turn on a cell phone less a predator drone shove a missile someplace unpleasant.

But.. enough about Ali Babba's father....


Wikileaks isn't playing with a few torrents of new Hollywood movies, they're screwing around with national security related info.
Y'know, NSA, CIA, DoD, FBI ...  serious-as-a-heart-attack types that haven't laughed since the Carter administration.
You don't just leak that kind of info unless you're;
  • Woodward & Bernstein, and have rock solid press credentials in your pocket clanging off your cast iron nuts
  • Know someone with serious suction in the White House or Congress
  • Are someone providing serious suction to someone important in the White House
  • Have the local DC madame on speed dial, so you can order up plenty of suction to every swinging Richard M. in the DC area once the story breaks
  • An incredibly short-sighted, criminally stupid, suicidally warped young kid with a security clearance above your IQ score
2010-06-10 20:34:13
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX

rdx-fx wrote:

[
He got real cautious around about 12 December 2001, and thereafter.
But not beforehand, thats the thing.

Multi-billionaire sheik to living in a cave, too afraid to turn on a cell phone less a predator drone shove a missile someplace unpleasant.
He was doing that already IIRC.
Wikileaks isn't playing with a few torrents of new Hollywood movies, they're screwing around with national security related info.
Y'know, NSA, CIA, DoD, FBI ...  serious-as-a-heart-attack types that haven't laughed since the Carter administration.
You don't just leak that kind of info unless you're;
  • Woodward & Bernstein, and have rock solid press credentials in your pocket clanging off your cast iron nuts
  • Know someone with serious suction in the White House or Congress
  • Are someone providing serious suction to someone important in the White House
  • Have the local DC madame on speed dial, so you can order up plenty of suction to every swinging Richard M. in the DC area once the story breaks
  • An incredibly short-sighted, criminally stupid, suicidally warped young kid with a security clearance above your IQ score
So at what point does public interest outweigh 'national security/govt political embarrassment'? And why should whistleblowers not be protected if they're acting in the public good.
I'd say Watergate did, Iran-Contra, a few others.
And don't forget Valerie Plame - the govt releasing classified info to suit their agenda.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-06-10 20:35:33)

Fuck Israel
2010-06-10 20:36:54
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6690|North Carolina

Dilbert_X wrote:

And don't forget Valerie Plame - the govt releasing classified info to suit their agenda.
Very good point...

Unfortunately, the rules regarding this are kind of like a casino.  The house always wins -- the house being the government.

They make the rules, and when it comes down to it...  they break them too.  It sucks, but basically every government is guilty of it.
2010-06-10 20:37:34
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7001
The kid isn't a whistleblower. That's the thing, he's an employee under the US Army and he still has to abide by his contract. Hell even after your contract is up if you leak any classified info you get sent to good old Leavenworth.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2010-06-10 22:03:20
rdx-fx
...
+955|6877

Dilbert_X wrote:

So at what point does public interest outweigh 'national security/govt political embarrassment'?
Depends. 
Not everyone who sticks it to Uncle Sam (the Man) is automatically a Hero of the Proletariat, either.

He's not Deep Throat, outing the corruption of Dick Nixon - he's a dumbass Specialist E-4 that thought he was too smart to get caught at his edgy and cool little game.  Military Intelligence is stuffed to the gills with kids like that.

FEOS could explain better, the distinctions between an officer's duties and a junior enlisted soldiers duties, particularly in regards to going outside the normal channels to report questionable activities.
(I don't think you particularly want to go to that class.  It's rather long and boring.)

I suppose if you were a married Sergeant, and had just sobered up from an epic 6 month long drunken stupor to find yourself in bed with a slightly pregnant Lynndie England, with nothing but pictures of naked men in various homo-erotic degrading poses on your cell-phone, in a cot in Abu Ghraib ... then yeah, flashing some pics to CNN, facing an eternity in Leavenworth, and/or a firing squad might be an appealing option to you.

For something less epic than the abovementioned colossal shit-storm of a personal life, one might take a more measured and cautious approach.

Dropping 286,000 classified documents on a high-profile public internet site..  not so much of a measured approach, not a legitimate whistleblower.
Dropping those same 286,000 classified documents on your Senator's doorstep, local federal courthouse, or local branch FBI office - then you might be able to claim a whistleblower defense.  But you're still in for an international grade shit-storm.

Last edited by rdx-fx (2010-06-10 22:17:06)

2010-06-10 22:18:48
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX
I agree, just making the point that sometimes it does make sense - the gunship vid maybe, the 286,000 docs probably not.

Seasoned and responsible (and free) journalists are important in a democratic society, in this case a good one would probably have slapped this kid down.
Fuck Israel
2010-06-10 22:27:11
tazz.
oz.
+1,339|6460|Sydney | ♥

mafia996630 wrote:

I think people should know the truth.
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥
2010-06-11 10:13:27
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

rdx-fx wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

I suspect Wikileaks is based somewhere which has laws to protect them. I think it is unlikely Wikileaks will have any significant problems due to this.
Most likely they do have such protections.

But they've also potentially started trading in information considered of national security importance, hence they might have the eyes of various US agencies keeping a closer eye on them from now on. 

Would be an unfortunate thing, to be under the microscope of the CIA and NSA.

Just be sure not to trip over your wang in any way
I can't imagine that being a very big deal. If it were ever to develop into any sort of pressure on them, they'd have a lovely article that would be very popular with their vast audience and would paint US intelligence agencies in a very negative light. I'm sure these agencies will be very aware of the potential PR rammifications of that sort of activity fucking up.
2010-06-11 10:25:18
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5643|London, England

Bertster7 wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

I suspect Wikileaks is based somewhere which has laws to protect them. I think it is unlikely Wikileaks will have any significant problems due to this.
Most likely they do have such protections.

But they've also potentially started trading in information considered of national security importance, hence they might have the eyes of various US agencies keeping a closer eye on them from now on. 

Would be an unfortunate thing, to be under the microscope of the CIA and NSA.

Just be sure not to trip over your wang in any way
I can't imagine that being a very big deal. If it were ever to develop into any sort of pressure on them, they'd have a lovely article that would be very popular with their vast audience and would paint US intelligence agencies in a very negative light. I'm sure these agencies will be very aware of the potential PR rammifications of that sort of activity fucking up.
What would it matter? The people who are in wikileaks' audience are already the people that bash America at every opportunity anyway. Fuck 'em.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-06-11 10:37:19
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

JohnG@lt wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:


Most likely they do have such protections.

But they've also potentially started trading in information considered of national security importance, hence they might have the eyes of various US agencies keeping a closer eye on them from now on. 

Would be an unfortunate thing, to be under the microscope of the CIA and NSA.

Just be sure not to trip over your wang in any way
I can't imagine that being a very big deal. If it were ever to develop into any sort of pressure on them, they'd have a lovely article that would be very popular with their vast audience and would paint US intelligence agencies in a very negative light. I'm sure these agencies will be very aware of the potential PR rammifications of that sort of activity fucking up.
What would it matter? The people who are in wikileaks' audience are already the people that bash America at every opportunity anyway. Fuck 'em.
The wikileaks audience is made up of most of the worlds media outlets.

Even if you're too short sighted to see the potential damage stories like that could do, I am sure these agencies are not so foolhardy.
2010-06-11 10:38:24
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5643|London, England

Bertster7 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


I can't imagine that being a very big deal. If it were ever to develop into any sort of pressure on them, they'd have a lovely article that would be very popular with their vast audience and would paint US intelligence agencies in a very negative light. I'm sure these agencies will be very aware of the potential PR rammifications of that sort of activity fucking up.
What would it matter? The people who are in wikileaks' audience are already the people that bash America at every opportunity anyway. Fuck 'em.
The wikileaks audience is made up of most of the worlds media outlets.

Even if you're too short sighted to see the potential damage stories like that could do, I am sure these agencies are not so foolhardy.
It's not short sighted, I just don't care what the rest of the world thinks about my country.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-06-11 10:45:18
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

JohnG@lt wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


What would it matter? The people who are in wikileaks' audience are already the people that bash America at every opportunity anyway. Fuck 'em.
The wikileaks audience is made up of most of the worlds media outlets.

Even if you're too short sighted to see the potential damage stories like that could do, I am sure these agencies are not so foolhardy.
It's not short sighted, I just don't care what the rest of the world thinks about my country.
You might not. The country as a whole should.

Political image is a very powerful tool. For governments and their agencies to ignore that would be idiotic.


In that sort of scenario it is not only other countries that would be an issue. Negative publicity could easily lead to all sorts of undesirable consequences domestically. Additional internal scrutiny, investigations, inquiries - all the sorts of things everyone tries to avoid.
2010-06-11 18:42:13
13rin
Member
+977|6764
Let the hunt begin!
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2010-06-11 19:21:25
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX
an attempt to pressure him not to publish thousands of confidential and potentially hugely embarrassing diplomatic cables that offer unfiltered assessments of Middle East governments and leaders
This should be fun.
It's not short sighted, I just don't care what the rest of the world thinks about my country.
Blinkered self-interest FTW.
Fuck Israel
2010-06-11 19:35:36
13rin
Member
+977|6764

Dilbert_X wrote:

an attempt to pressure him not to publish thousands of confidential and potentially hugely embarrassing diplomatic cables that offer unfiltered assessments of Middle East governments and leaders
This should be fun.
It's not short sighted, I just don't care what the rest of the world thinks about my country.
Blinkered self-interest FTW.
Send in a SEAL team and get the footage & people responsible.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2010-06-11 19:47:58
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6438|what

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Send in a SEAL team and get the footage & people responsible.
Deploy navy seals to the internet?
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2010-06-11 19:56:15
13rin
Member
+977|6764

AussieReaper wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Send in a SEAL team and get the footage & people responsible.
Deploy navy seals to the internet?
Gore knows how to do it.  We've got loopholes.  Slight sarcasm my friend.  Go get those responsible and nail em.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2010-06-12 01:51:22
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6391|eXtreme to the maX

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

an attempt to pressure him not to publish thousands of confidential and potentially hugely embarrassing diplomatic cables that offer unfiltered assessments of Middle East governments and leaders
This should be fun.
It's not short sighted, I just don't care what the rest of the world thinks about my country.
Blinkered self-interest FTW.
Send in a SEAL team and get the footage & people responsible.
Pretty sure military aren't allowed to do Police work.

Seems a little harsh to throw away your system of democracy over a few memos.
Fuck Israel
2010-06-12 07:28:47
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Let the hunt begin!
Although it is likely that WikiLeaks has broken US laws in de-encrypting the video from Baghdad and publishing secret documents, the tone of an American official who spoke to the Daily Beast sounded more desperate than threatening. "We'd like to know where he is; we'd like his cooperation in this," the official said.

It is, in any case, not clear what legal measures US officials could use to stop publication of the cables. Assange has created an elaborate web of protection – with servers in several countries, notably Sweden, which has strong laws protecting whisteblowers.

WikiLeaks' response to the news that the Americans are trying to track down Assange came on Twitter. "Any signs of unacceptable behaviour by the Pentagon or its agents towards this press will be viewed dimly," it said.
Sounding very ineffective.

The media are already making the military seem vaguely silly and "desperate".
2010-06-12 08:01:39
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6696|'Murka

Bertster7 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


I can't imagine that being a very big deal. If it were ever to develop into any sort of pressure on them, they'd have a lovely article that would be very popular with their vast audience and would paint US intelligence agencies in a very negative light. I'm sure these agencies will be very aware of the potential PR rammifications of that sort of activity fucking up.
What would it matter? The people who are in wikileaks' audience are already the people that bash America at every opportunity anyway. Fuck 'em.
The wikileaks audience is made up of most of the worlds media outlets.
Like he said...
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard