WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

What "some judges had in mind" does not constitute a precedent. Look, I am not categorically stating that the feds can't prosecute newspapers under the Espionage act. I don't think they'd have a good case, but I have clearly said I don' t know how the case would change if the government sought to punish the newspapers after the fact. I'm perfectly open to changing my mind in response to new information about constitutional law. But why care about "what some judges had in mind" when they wrote their concurrences?

Actually, I take that back. Justice White's concurrence offers a detailed and insightful analysis of how the case might have turned if prior restraint had not been an issue.

Voluble ole Finn is shut up.

Can you say smoke and mirrors, Finn?

What a piece of **** you are. Constantly making excuses for war crimes and war criminals. Pretending that you possess a measure of morality when the sum total of what is inside you is the desire to further the criminal actions of your country and government.

I'm still working out what I think re wikileaks et al.

- I have known nearly forever that secrecy is oft a refuge of scoundrels, that that refuge is possibly most often the reason for secrecy.

- Leaving scoundrels out of all this, I see a need for the governed to know what the government is up to, if not every detail.

- I think the number of justifiable state secrets should be very limited, as mentioned early by a poster or a link on this thread, such as matters of planning of troop movement, and so on. The 'and so on' is the hard part for me.

- It seems to me that numbers of secrets have catapulted into the stratosphere, re US secrets, in recent decades. I saw some data on that, perhaps in this thread, but I thought that before I read the data, not least from the change in war news dispatches we see over decades.

- I'm for what wikilinks is doing, in large part to monkey wrench the whole secrecy metropolis the world is becoming now, including us. I think we all need a re-set on that, although some secrecy will be always with us and, at best, rightfully so.

- My qualms re the leaking and the publishing are that some collateral harm may come from exposure of information re .. our own collateral harming, to the extent that is part of the disclosures. I'm for our and others' collateral damage being known, but easily see the need for redactions (and who does them, now there's the rub).

- I can understand comments re Assange re making wikilinks an available place for leakers to post as a kind of abetting, but have not been able to work up disapproval.

- I can understand conscientious leaking and linking, depending on the situations.

- I can understand laws about traitors, depending. One person's traitor can be another's patriot.

- I think the chase on Assange is a witch hunt combined with martyr making, martyr making that he himself has been part of.

- edit to say I also agree that what I've read is old news and old shoes. Or, patently obvious.

That's it so far.

Wandel,
that's not really the point. The important factor here is that Assange made
himself available for questioning for 4 weeks after the accusations in August 2010 and with permission of the public prosecutor's office he then left the country.

Why does Sweden issue a red notice for Interpol all of a sudden now, hm?

Big hmmmmmm, CJ.

Maybe Ikea, Volvo, ... have read between the lines or read the lines.

I think I agree with you for the most part, osso.

I'm keeping in mind that nothing above a certain clearance level was leaked -- no top secret or... I don't recall the classifications that weren't accessed. Beyond pulling some of the names of the civilian informants, I'm fine with the stuff that's out there. I'm also fine that there's stuff that isn't out there and that this wide-scale sharing of intranet info had at least some level of access control that wasn't breached - at least not by our own citizens.

I thought this as well, which is why I was taken aback with Firefly's claim that the swiss had had no opportunity to question him. In fact I thought I read someplace that Assange was actually questioned for 5 hours at some point, but after a search I did not come up with the documentation.

Nods.

You mean the Sweds, not the Swiss. Where does Firefly claim that? I haven't
read anything here...

How would you feel about leaked government documents that described the numerous war crimes that the USA has engaged in, JPB? Documents that included names, no one no matter how high up protected.

This is what I was recalling...

I think I read that too.

How do I feel about them? I can't honestly answer that. I think public knowledge is a good thing, overall. I don't subscribe to the "Greatest Country on Earth" opinion of America, but I benefit from many of the freedoms we have here. Unfortunately, those freedoms come all too often on the backs of others. We're spoiled, and many of us have no idea how spoiled we are. And, yes, there are those who know and don't care, or don't know and don't want to know.

I have no problem with our actions being exposed for what they are. You use the words "war crimes" continuously. I don't think every action taken in the last 60 years falls under the heading of a war crime, but I don't have any objections for them to be brought out in the open and charges leveled where appropriate.

Great thread, JPB. It is difficult to know the right balance between freedom of the press and privacy rights (or national security).

When I use the words "war crimes", I, of course, refer to those things that are war crimes.

That's reassuring to hear, JPB. I wonder what Finn would think of such an event.

This page is a mirror of an original at wikileaks website - http://wikileaks.ch/mirrors.html It will be updated each day as new mirror website are established.

Wikileaks Mirrors

Wikileaks is currently under heavy attack.

In order to make it impossible to ever fully remove Wikileaks from the Internet, you will find below a list of mirrors of Wikileaks website and CableGate pages.

If you want to add your mirror to the list, see our Mass Mirroring Wikileaks page

Mirror List

Wikileaks is currently mirrored on 507 sites

[for the list, see,]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27007.htm

This made me laugh out loud...

In response to the article on the charges against Assange which states, Source

One of the comments reads, "I understand how these women feel. As an American Taxpayer, I get the same treatment from Congress."