Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I like Wikileaks. Does this make me anti-American?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I like Wikileaks. Does this make me anti-American?

    This whole Wikileaks thing has me thinking about what are our American values. What is it that this country stands for today? How has the American dream evolved?

    The reason Wikileaks has got me thinking about this is because I find myself wanting to live in a world where American citizens have a more clear picture of how our wars are being conducted. I find myself wanting to know how the leaders of the world really interact. It seems like this is all information that is desirable, as long as the benefit of having access to this information outweighs the risk.

    It seems that we are learning, in real time, that the world is capable of getting on with things, in spite of the increasing transparency that places like Wikileaks provide. So I guess the question that I have for anyone who cares is this -- if the information contributes to our being informed citizens, and if the harm of the transparency is fairly modest, then why not support the Wikileaks project? I find myself placing the value of being a better informed citizen over the risks that come with the transparency. To me it is sort of like gun rights, where the 'right to bear arms' comes with a huge risk to the family that owns weapons. We support the right in spite of its all-too-often tragic consequences. Why isn't the desire to understand how our government really works just as American a sentiment as the second amendment?

  • #2
    Originally posted by RobinFinderson View Post
    This whole Wikileaks thing has me thinking about what are our American values. What is it that this country stands for today? How has the American dream evolved?

    The reason Wikileaks has got me thinking about this is because I find myself wanting to live in a world where American citizens have a more clear picture of how our wars are being conducted. I find myself wanting to know how the leaders of the world really interact. It seems like this is all information that is desirable, as long as the benefit of having access to this information outweighs the risk.

    It seems that we are learning, in real time, that the world is capable of getting on with things, in spite of the increasing transparency that places like Wikileaks provide. So I guess the question that I have for anyone who cares is this -- if the information contributes to our being informed citizens, and if the harm of the transparency is fairly modest, then why not support the Wikileaks project? I find myself placing the value of being a better informed citizen over the risks that come with the transparency. To me it is sort of like gun rights, where the 'right to bear arms' comes with a huge risk to the family that owns weapons. We support the right in spite of its all-too-often tragic consequences. Why isn't the desire to understand how our government really works just as American a sentiment as the second amendment?

    I might agree if it was voluntary or at least equitable transparency. But it isn't.

    Your view does not make you anti-American. That's the beauty of being American. You are free to be completely wrong. Not that you are here, at least not necessarily.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by RobinFinderson View Post
      This whole Wikileaks thing has me thinking about what are our American values. What is it that this country stands for today? How has the American dream evolved?

      The reason Wikileaks has got me thinking about this is because I find myself wanting to live in a world where American citizens have a more clear picture of how our wars are being conducted. I find myself wanting to know how the leaders of the world really interact. It seems like this is all information that is desirable, as long as the benefit of having access to this information outweighs the risk.

      It seems that we are learning, in real time, that the world is capable of getting on with things, in spite of the increasing transparency that places like Wikileaks provide. So I guess the question that I have for anyone who cares is this -- if the information contributes to our being informed citizens, and if the harm of the transparency is fairly modest, then why not support the Wikileaks project? I find myself placing the value of being a better informed citizen over the risks that come with the transparency. To me it is sort of like gun rights, where the 'right to bear arms' comes with a huge risk to the family that owns weapons. We support the right in spite of its all-too-often tragic consequences. Why isn't the desire to understand how our government really works just as American a sentiment as the second amendment?
      [youtube]8hGvQtumNAY[/youtube]
      Te Occidere Possunt Sed Te Edere Non Possunt Nefas Est.

      Comment


      • #4
        We're spying on people. When we spy, we sometimes discover information that benefits our country. Everyone knows we are spying, but they don't necessarily know the who, what, when, where, why, and how. These leaks disclose that information (to whatever extent), making it harder for us to spy, and, therefore, undermining our efforts to protect and benefit America.

        Liking this doesn't making you anti-American, but it does make you an oblivious and undeserving liberal. To be honest, I find the leaks lamentable, but a part of me is amused. The same federal government that has recently made public certain emails to improperly vilify Wall Street firms in a shameless political witch hunt is now up in arms about its own dirty laundring being hung out. Karma is a bitch.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by creekster View Post
          I might agree if it was voluntary or at least equitable transparency. But it isn't.
          I think that the government's tendency to keep secrets from its citizens is like a Chinese finger trap... it only goes one direction. What the Wikileaks has shown is that there is a LOT of information about the wars and diplomatic relations that citizens could know without dire consequences, but which the government keeps from us. I think it is unrealistic to expect the government to provide this information as a service to the people, and since there is really no place above the government to which we can appeal, it seems reasonable that the shove toward transparency would come from some place other than the government. The internet is creating a drastically different diplomatic reality, and Wikileaks is just the tip of the iceberg.

          The emerging rumors that Wikileaks is going to expose massive levels of corruption in the Russian government is a big deal. There are other rumors that they are going to expose massive levels of corruption in some of the American Banks. This is important stuff.

          As for 'equitably transparent,' the equity will come in time. Wikileaks is bigger than Assange. This thing is part of the new paradigm. One benefit of the Wikileaks approach, no matter how much editorializing comes from the organizers, they offer the complete uncut documents, so those who care enough can view the material and come to their own informed conclusions.

          Comment


          • #6
            I'd also like to read your private emails. Please provide your email and password.
            I agree that I like to know this stuff. But there is a real privacy and secrecy concern. Some things are meant to be and should remain private. Assange isn't just giving us an insight into how our government works, he's also stealing private information from private citizens and businesses.

            I like to know about spy stuff, but I'd prefer that our spies are able to do their job. And if they can't keep secrets, they will have a much harder time doing their jobs.

            Comment


            • #7
              The funny thing about this is perhaps Hillary Clinton's profile with the right has been raised. State department officials spying on foreign diplomats? Eff yeah. It seems like a few other countries have been blessed with some kick ass female leaders that wouldn't pull punches, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher. Maybe Hillary's cut from the same cloth.
              Part of it is based on academic grounds. Among major conferences, the Pac-10 is the best academically, largely because of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. “Colorado is on a par with Oregon,” he said. “Utah isn’t even in the picture.”

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by RobinFinderson View Post
                This whole Wikileaks thing has me thinking about what are our American values. What is it that this country stands for today? How has the American dream evolved?

                The reason Wikileaks has got me thinking about this is because I find myself wanting to live in a world where American citizens have a more clear picture of how our wars are being conducted. I find myself wanting to know how the leaders of the world really interact. It seems like this is all information that is desirable, as long as the benefit of having access to this information outweighs the risk.

                It seems that we are learning, in real time, that the world is capable of getting on with things, in spite of the increasing transparency that places like Wikileaks provide. So I guess the question that I have for anyone who cares is this -- if the information contributes to our being informed citizens, and if the harm of the transparency is fairly modest, then why not support the Wikileaks project? I find myself placing the value of being a better informed citizen over the risks that come with the transparency. To me it is sort of like gun rights, where the 'right to bear arms' comes with a huge risk to the family that owns weapons. We support the right in spite of its all-too-often tragic consequences. Why isn't the desire to understand how our government really works just as American a sentiment as the second amendment?
                It just makes you pro-rapist and pro-guy who is willing to recklessly endanger Afghans and others who have cooperated with the US against the Taliban because they want their daughters to get educations.

                That's all.
                Ute-ī sunt fīmī differtī

                It can't all be wedding cake.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I like it too. I especially liked how the fascists were trying to call WikiLeaks a terrorist organization.
                  Just try it once. One beer or one cigarette or one porno movie won't hurt. - Dallin H. Oaks

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by BlueHair View Post
                    I like it too. I especially liked how the fascists were trying to call WikiLeaks a terrorist organization.
                    Yeah. I totally hate it when the facists engage in name calling hyperbole.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by EuropeanFootballMale View Post
                      Yeah. I totally hate it when the facists engage in name calling hyperbole.
                      Not me. I like it.
                      Just try it once. One beer or one cigarette or one porno movie won't hurt. - Dallin H. Oaks

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by oxcoug View Post
                        It just makes you pro-rapist and pro-guy who is willing to recklessly endanger Afghans and others who have cooperated with the US against the Taliban because they want their daughters to get educations.

                        That's all.
                        But by golly that's a small price to pay to titillate Finderson.

                        He is the kind of liberal that makes Glenn Beck look like a wise sage.
                        "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                        "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                        "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                          But by golly that's a small price to pay to titillate Finderson.

                          He is the kind of liberal that makes Glenn Beck look like a wise sage.
                          Look, Dude, every single freedom that we enjoy as Americans can be made to look trivial, yet those are the very freedoms that our men and women in the military are dying to preserve. I would think that understanding how our government conducts diplomacy and war would be of interest to every person who wants to be an informed citizen. Would being a more transparent country possibly make it more difficult to protect our country? Possibly. But we also have men and women dying to protect Larry Flynt's right to make heaps of money by making smut. How many lives would it be worth to have a government that allowed its citizens to really understand the cost of war and the way we conduct our diplomacy? I can't say how many lives that would be worth, but I guess I can say that it would be worth some. Look at what has been released. Can we live with the consequences? I think so. Perhaps our government has become so opaque that regular citizens can't understand our real place in the world. These revelations give us the chance to evaluate that possibility. This has nothing to do with titillation.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by RobinFinderson View Post
                            Look, Dude, every single freedom that we enjoy as Americans can be made to look trivial, yet those are the very freedoms that our men and women in the military are dying to preserve. I would think that understanding how our government conducts diplomacy and war would be of interest to every person who wants to be an informed citizen. Would being a more transparent country possibly make it more difficult to protect our country? Possibly. But we also have men and women dying to protect Larry Flynt's right to make heaps of money by making smut. How many lives would it be worth to have a government that allowed its citizens to really understand the cost of war and the way we conduct our diplomacy? I can't say how many lives that would be worth, but I guess I can say that it would be worth some. Look at what has been released. Can we live with the consequences? I think so. Perhaps our government has become so opaque that regular citizens can't understand our real place in the world. These revelations give us the chance to evaluate that possibility. This has nothing to do with titillation.
                            if little robin ever decided to join a special forces unit, say the rangers, and was involved with some of the intelligence gathering operations and was put at a materially greater risk of being targeted by insurgence groups as a result of the release of classified documents with the goal of making people "more informed citizens," would you feel the same way?

                            for u.s. soldiers, allies, even citizens to be put at a higher risk of harm for a group of people completely insulated from the horrors of war to engage in some game of playing the informed citizen seems really jacked. i honestly am not sure what the body count calculus is for the wikileaks crew, but there is blood on their hands.
                            Te Occidere Possunt Sed Te Edere Non Possunt Nefas Est.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by oxcoug View Post
                              It just makes you pro-rapist
                              Well, RF does equate Valerie Plame to Katelyn Faber here:

                              http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...0&postcount=18

                              Or is a spy outed by Dick Cheney different than a spy outed by wikileaks?


                              I agree in the theoretical sense that wikileaks may be beneficial sunshine cast upon our government's inner sanctum confessions, but I don't think our government is that corrupt, at least not yet. So we should consider the collateral damage this is doing, both now and in the future.

                              I think this is the true danger of wikileaks: it's wholesale release of information without a discerning ability to excise information that may harm someone's life or livelihood, or our government's ability to work with other nation states.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X