[Vision2020] ''Oh what a tangled web we weave when firstwepractice to deceive''

[Sue Hovey]

Does anyone know just what sort of info has been leaked that would seriously 
jeopardize someone's life?  Personally, it's difficult for me to believe 
anyone would post an Internet message that would result in that sort of 
danger.  If these are actual hard copy  records, such as Ellsburg had access 
to with The Pentagon Papers then maybe; but in a historical retrospect 
Ellsburg's deed is now viewed as patriotic and important--it may well be 
that Assange's acts are really no different.

Sue H.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Paul Rumelhart
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 10:37 PM
To: lfalen
Cc: vision2020 ; Dave
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ''Oh what a tangled web we weave when 
firstwepractice to deceive''

The private that leaked the information did break the law and deserves
to be locked up for it.  Julian Assange, rape charges aside, did nothing
but post the material online.  Think of him as a professional redacting
service.  I'm not even sure that what he did was illegal.

I agree that information that could jeopardize national security (truly
jeopardize it - not just have that used as a convenient excuse) should
not be posted on Wikileaks.  Assange and his group do try to redact that
information from the documents before posting them.  The documents
related to Iraq were even sent to the government to have them redact
them, but they refused to do so.

Wikileaks has a certain legendary mystique status to it, but what they
are doing is not much different than what the NY Times does when they
publish the same info.  What they've mainly done is scare the pants off
of the US government.  There's always been an avenue to publish this
kind of stuff through the normal media, but they can be pressured into
silence.  See the first few years of the Iraq war for an example.  The
people behind Wikileaks don't look as thought they'll be so easily
intimidated - they don't have a business to lose and they have an agenda
that involves transparency.  If you mention the word "transparency" in
certain governmental circles right now, I bet people flinch.

Paul

lfalen wrote:
> I Don't think that there is a bigger advocate of transparency in 
> government than I am. With the help of Gary Schroeder and Tom Trial I 
> tried to get legislation passed to strengthen both the Open Meeting Law 
> and the Public records Law.I also had Gary introduce legislation that 
> would have required all public meetings to be taped and keep as part of 
> the public record for 7 years. But there is a limit as to what should be 
> made public. That limit is when it evolves National Security. Some of what 
> has been on wilileaks may be embarrassing but does not jeopardize National 
> Security. Other information does and also may put the lives of those 
> working in covert operations in jeopardy . This information should not be 
> leaked. Those that do so should be prosecuted. The  Pvt. that gave the 
> information to wikileaks is in jail and should stay there. Julian Assange 
> is wanted on rape charges in Sweden. He should answer those charges and be 
> extradited to the U.S. and charged with jeopardizing!
  National
> Security. The U. S. government should also tighten up regulations on who 
> has access to sensitive data. This is not to say that secret information 
> should never be released. For historical purposes such information could 
> be released after a lengthy period of time, say 40 to 50 years.
> Roger
> -----Original message-----
> From: Paul Rumelhart godshatter at yahoo.com
> Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 20:16:30 -0800
> To: Dave tiedye at turbonet.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ''Oh what a tangled web we weave when firstwe 
> practice to deceive''
>
>
>> I'm a big fan of wikileaks and what they are trying to do.  Transparency
>> is sorely lacking in government today.  I can see why those in power are
>> running scared and spinning these leaks as the worst kind of terrorism.
>>
>> This latest leak of diplomatic documents may have the effect of causing
>> those who write such documents not to give their honest assessments of
>> situations for fear of them being leaked, though.  I still say it's a
>> small price to pay for bringing some long-needed accountability to
>> government.
>>
>> I did like the comment one of Clinton's fellow counterparts told her (I
>> don't remember who), "You should see what we say about you".
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Dave wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know about you all, but being a news junkie I just love this
>>> latest Wikileaks stuff.
>>>
>>> Although, for a change, the official line that they "are putting
>>> people in danger", is probably correct.  I think a lot of leaders will
>>> be "in danger" as the news about how they lied to their people comes 
>>> out.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> =======================================================
>>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>                http://www.fsr.net
>>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>                http://www.fsr.net
>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>
>


=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================