Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: so when will the doomsday files be released?  (Read 2339 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
so when will the doomsday files be released?
« on: December 08, 2010, 03:02:22 AM »

Share/Bookmark

Fort Wood Hotel

Boards

Devils Elbow

Attractions

Sports

St. Robert

Waynesville

PC Daily

Dixon

Menu Guide

Fun Links

Homework

Crocker

Fort Wood

Swedeborg

Big Piney

Laquey

Classifieds

Restaurants

Richland

Fort  Hotels

   
  WikiLeaks: British Police Arrest Assange

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been arrested by British police over sexual assault claims in Sweden, according to Sky sources.

A fresh European arrest warrant has been received by Mr Assange's lawyer - as anger grows in the US over the latest leaked embassy cables by the whistleblowing website.

Sky sources have said officers from Scotland Yard detained the 39-year-old Australian at around 9.30am. Labelling the move as a "political stunt", Mr Assange's solicitor Mark Stephens said his client wants to find out what allegations he faces so he can clear his name.

Two women in Sweden have claimed they were sexually attacked when Mr Assange visited the country in August. He denies the claims.

Sky News' Rhiannon Mills said: "Authorities in the UK are involved because it is believed Julian Assange has been living in the south east of England.

"They are now obliged to detain or arrest him."   

 
(Excerpt) Read more at news.sky.com ...
 


Offline Chas

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1856
  • Karma: +11629/-2363
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2010, 03:14:55 AM »
Now this a guy that should be shot in the head he is no better then a foreign spy. If they find the Americans that are releasing this info to wilileaks should found guilty of treason and shot in the head. Any paper that prints it, the editor and the reporter that writes it up should be shot in the head.

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2010, 03:23:04 AM »
I am guessing this subject would be a real hot potato for dtm. I would be interested in his take.

I will be surprised if this guy makes it alive to trial though.

Offline Lepard LLC

  • Activist
  • Administrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 6215
  • Karma: +2241359/-8
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2010, 07:34:51 AM »
LIGHTEN UP CHAS FARNHAM OR YOU MIGHT GET "SHOT IN THE HEAD"
 
 
Now this a guy that should be shot in the head he is no better then a foreign spy. If they find the Americans that are releasing this info to wilileaks should found guilty of treason and shot in the head. Any paper that prints it, the editor and the reporter that writes it up should be shot in the head.

Offline darrellmaurina

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5716
  • Karma: +376322/-7230
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #4 on: December 08, 2010, 12:48:05 PM »
I am guessing this subject would be a real hot potato for dtm. I would be interested in his take. I will be surprised if this guy makes it alive to trial though.

You're right -- this is a hot potato. It puts me in the position of defending an important constitutional principle of press freedom, while simultaneously decrying the abuse of that freedom by irreponsible media who obviously don't care if our soldiers get killed.
 
The statement I've been making since 9/11 is basically this: "I am a reporter who believes in the freedom of the press. I am also an American reporter. That means I am a citizen of a country at war with people who hate many American freedoms, including the free press. Patriotism is a virtue, and not just for conservatives -- Jefferson and Franklin were not what we today would call right-wingers. We must defend America, but we cannot defend America by means which lose our constitutional freedoms or we won't have an America left worth defending."
 
Now this a guy that should be shot in the head he is no better then a foreign spy. If they find the Americans that are releasing this info to wilileaks should found guilty of treason and shot in the head. Any paper that prints it, the editor and the reporter that writes it up should be shot in the head.

I agree with some of what you say -- the focus in this case needs to be on prosecuting not only the idiot E-4 who apparently did this leaking but also on improving security procedures so a junior enlisted intelligence analyst can't do this type of damage ever again. (And by the way, let's not forget that he is an open and out homosexual who was protected by very loose enforcement of Don't Ask, Don't Tell -- apparently a number of people knew he was involved with a group of flamboyant gay computer hackers but did nothing. At the very least, his behavior should have raised a yellow flag for further investigation into his computer activities that might have detected the security breach, which he exploited for about eight months apparently completely undetected by anyone.)

However, you do understand that you're advocating a legal change that would make not just the Wikileaks founder but also me eligible for being shot in the head, don't you?

Under existing law, releasing classified information is a crime. Reporting information that someone else has released is not.

That's a settled part of press law that dates back at least to World War I, was clearly confirmed in the New York Times "Pentagon Papers" case four decades ago, and is based on principles that date back to the earliest days of the United States.

Here's a practical example of why that distinction is needed.

I have a story in today's Pulaski County Daily News that about $1,500 has been stolen from the Pulaski County Sewer District. I get leaks all the time. Sometimes the information I get has been leaked illegally. Often it has been leaked in violation of company or government agency policies.

If the government agency or company can find the person who leaked me the information, they have the right to fire the leaker and sometimes even to prosecute him/her. However, the media are essentially immune to prosecution for reporting the leak except in the rare cases that it can be proven that the reporter actually entered a government office to physically take a document or other item. (Probably the same would be true of illegally breaking into a secured computer system, as opposed to receiving a document that someone else downloaded from a secured computer system.)

Furthermore, I have procedures in place that make it virtually impossible to subpoena anything in my files to help identify a leaker -- I do not create or keep written records that identify the source of things leaked to me, and on important leaks, I usually take steps to make sure there's at least one degree of separation between me and the leaker so that while I may have a very good idea who is doing the leaking, I can't testify in a court of law that I know with sufficient certainty to make what I might say anything other than hearsay evidence. The result is that while I may have a "smoking gun" document, I deliberately avoid having a legally admissable chain of custody to prove where it came from.

All of these are pretty standard tactics used in investigative reporting, and when things get more serious, the steps taken by leakers to protect their identies can get even more creative.

A decade and a half ago when I was investigating a $400-million-plus Ponzi scheme and a case of clergy sexual misconduct, I was getting anonymous phone calls from phone booths in other cities telling me to go to designated locations in public places to pick up documents where they literally could have been left by anyone. I'd then call up people quoted in the document and ask for comment on the leaked document, which had the effect of confirming its authenticity -- and often resulted in the people I was calling starting to swear loud and long about "where did you get that &@@@$!!!!!"

Once one side started leaking, the other side did too, and before too long I turned into the recipient of leaks from both sides in a war to control public opinion.

That's the way things work on a regular basis in Washington, D.C., and to some extent in other large agencies of state and city government.

Similar but much stricter security steps are routinely taken by larger media operations to handle leaks. That means if someone is going to go after the leaker, they're almost always going to have to find him/her without help from the media.

We can all agree that leaking classified information that could get our soldiers killed is tremendously worse than leaking information about missing money. There are reasons I focus my attention on things other than military security lapses; as a reporter who is well-known for being conservative and a supporter of the military, someone with a grudge against the Army isn't going to come to me with leaks that breach national security. If that idiot E-4 had come to me, I probably would have called the MPs to arrest him no matter how fascinating the stuff might be that he was offering for me to publish. (On the other hand, I have received leaks in the past about military corruption, and if someone is violating the military's own standards, I can and will do what's needed to bring enough public attention to the case to get them prosecuted.)

However, if legal steps were put in place to make it possible to prosecute media that publish leaks that breach national security, there is no way to avoid shutting down the types of leaks that are often essential to whistleblowing coverage of corruption in government.
Darrell Todd Maurina
Check out the Pulaski County Daily News online newspaper at
http://www.pulaskicountyweb.com
Cell: (573) 433.6733 * FAX: (573) 774-2349
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/darrellmaurina/
Follow me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/darrellmaurina/

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #5 on: December 08, 2010, 02:00:52 PM »
Execution of all involved is the answer.  I don't care if they are members of the press.  Treason clear and simple for all involved.  this involves National Security. 

Offline Chas

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1856
  • Karma: +11629/-2363
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #6 on: December 08, 2010, 02:23:32 PM »
Yes Iím aware that you could be shot in the head. Donít care.  If you  printed classified material that could endanger lives or cause hostiles between countries. You need shot in the head. Your ponzi and clergy scheme wasnít a matter of national security.  That is what Iím talking about. 

Offline Hi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 903
  • Karma: +13281/-13254
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #7 on: December 08, 2010, 05:21:14 PM »
I think some of the info he has released is pretty pertinent info that the American People have a right to know about.  I also think its a little strange that after he posted this stuff, and visa and mastercard freezing portions of his revenue, that all of the sudden he has a double rape allegation to deal with........Wouldnt it just be ironic if his site is the one that posts about the frame job the governement pulled to get him arrested?

Offline Hi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 903
  • Karma: +13281/-13254
  • Go to your profile and put something here.
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #8 on: December 08, 2010, 05:23:31 PM »
And its not his fault when Soldiers die, its our own governments fault, because we shouldnt be there in the first place.   Look at the releases for just the Iraq war and look how many reports there are of American Soldiers slaughtering innocent civilians. I hope just following orders lets you sleep at night.

Offline darrellmaurina

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5716
  • Karma: +376322/-7230
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #9 on: December 08, 2010, 09:53:41 PM »
Yes I’m aware that you could be shot in the head. Don’t care.  If you  printed classified material that could endanger lives or cause hostiles between countries. You need shot in the head. Your ponzi and clergy scheme wasn’t a matter of national security.  That is what I’m talking about. 

Execution of all involved is the answer.  I don't care if they are members of the press.  Treason clear and simple for all involved.  this involves National Security. 

Let's make it crystal clear for **EVERYBODY** that I have major problems with what WikiLeaks has done. I've already said that if this idiot "intelligence specialist" had come to me with these documents, I probably would have called the MPs to arrest him no matter how interesting they were.

The question is whether the cure for WikiLeaks is worse than the disease.

Current American law is settled on this matter and has been for at least four decades since the Pentagon Papers, and probably long before that. The media have the legal right to be unpatriotic, idiotic a--holes. Espionage charges can legally be filed only against the "intelligence specialist" (who I just realized this morning is an E-3, not an E-4 -- unless he's recently been demoted, media I read earlier must have misread "specialist" as a rank rather than a job description).

I have zero problem with trying and convicting this idiot PFC for espionage, and giving him the death penalty unless he can figure out some way to strike a plea bargain. But doing more than that to prosecute a media organization for espionage for printing them would require passing new laws and spending years fighting them through the court system. That's not going to happen in the United States, though it could happen in Britain and some other countries which do not have the First Amendment and do have the legal right to censor the press for national security grounds.

Quite frankly, I don't trust Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama with whatever new national security provisions might get passed to address what is being called -- correctly -- the largest-ever release of currently classified documents in history. However, I'd say the same thing even if a president I trusted were in power, since laws are passed without regard to who might be exercising them down the road.

There are other and better ways to deal with WikiLeaks. Cutting off their access to finances, as is currently being done, seems like a good start, and is likely to be far more effective than a long trial which will be in open court and likely release even **MORE** stuff to the public about our intelligence gathering methods.

Realistically, however, we're probably just going to have to live with the fact that what happened with WikiLeaks cannot be undone, and try to make the best of it. If we continue to entrust very young PFCs with that level of access to national security secrets, it's going to happen again. We need to get out own house in order with access to classified information.

An article I read today in Time Magazine indicates that the leaks may actually have been helpful in warning the idiots who rule Iran and North Korea that they cannot count on backing from the Muslim world or from China. If, because of Wikileaks, an Iranian election thief and a North Korean tinpot dictator both realize their "friends" are not really friends, that's not necessarily a bad long-term outcome. Perhaps we'll avoid two major wars against Iran and North Korea, which is a good thing, but unfortunately, there will be a lot of **REALLY** bad short-term outcomes. Some of those are likely to incliude the deaths of our friends and perhaps our soldiers.
Darrell Todd Maurina
Check out the Pulaski County Daily News online newspaper at
http://www.pulaskicountyweb.com
Cell: (573) 433.6733 * FAX: (573) 774-2349
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/darrellmaurina/
Follow me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/darrellmaurina/

Offline Chas

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 1856
  • Karma: +11629/-2363
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2010, 10:31:50 PM »
I really donít think anyone had you in mind when they call for execute all involved or whatever phrase they used.  You were clear that you would probably call the MPs.   This is a tricky situation, but the first amendment does not protect all speech and I donít believe that reporters should receive extra protection under it.  If a person is printing stuff on the US intelligence then two things should happen if the person is American- trial for treason then shot in the head, or if like Assange a foreigner - trial for being a spy then shot the head.  I read one article where they may be able to try him as an accomplice. Furthermore as an Australian our first amendment right does not apply to him so send him to gitmo and try his butt in a military court then shoot him in the head.

Offline darrellmaurina

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 5716
  • Karma: +376322/-7230
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2010, 02:53:31 AM »
I really donít think anyone had you in mind when they call for execute all involved or whatever phrase they used.  You were clear that you would probably call the MPs.   This is a tricky situation, but the first amendment does not protect all speech and I donít believe that reporters should receive extra protection under it.  If a person is printing stuff on the US intelligence then two things should happen if the person is American- trial for treason then shot in the head, or if like Assange a foreigner - trial for being a spy then shot the head.  I read one article where they may be able to try him as an accomplice. Furthermore as an Australian our first amendment right does not apply to him so send him to gitmo and try his butt in a military court then shoot him in the head.

 
I appreciate the clarification that you don't want to shoot me.

This Wikileaks issue is difficult and nasty, for multiple reasons.

First off, the U.S. Supreme Court, in the Pentagon Papers case, has made quite clear that media cannot be prosecuted for espionage. Under that precedent, if the New York Times had done this, they would be free and clear, and nobody could do anything about it. That's been settled law for nearly four decades. We don't have to like it -- I happen to hate the Supreme Court decision on abortion from about the same time period, which unlike the Pentagon Papers case, has extremely thin constitutional precedent -- but there is no realistic way to overturn either court decision with our current composition of the Supreme Court and Congress.

Second, the problem with trying to curtail abuse of rights is that the enumerated rights in the Constitution really **ARE** as close as you can get to absolute. Just as the NRA pushes the limit -- correctly, in my view -- and refuses any compromise even when people are doing really stupid and idiotic things with guns out of concern that giving an inch will result in the gun-grabbers taking a mile, the various press freedom organizations in the United States will do the same with this case. If it's possible to prosecute media for using leaked documents that imperil national security, the slippery slope is very steep toward prosecuting media for other types of leaks.

Note something here that is **VERY** important. The media do **NOT** have the right to steal documents or to leak them. There is a court case involving an undercover television investigation in which producers lied on their resumes, got hired by a grocery store chain, and documented with hidden cameras that store personnel were re-labeling meat with new dates that was no longer safe to sell. My recollection of the details is a little fuzzy and since it's a side point I don't feel like looking them up right now, but the key point is that what the TV staff diid crossed a very important line -- the media could have used hidden camera footage taken by store employees or otherwise obtained, but they didn't have the right to do it themselves.

Let's go back to the key issue. The Pentagon Papers case had to do with whether the government, in time of war, had the right to restrict freedom of the press. There were precedents for that under Abraham Lincoln, who shut down newspapers that opposed him and did other extreme acts that virtually nobody would consider acceptable today, at least apart from civil war on our own soil.
 
However, the Supreme Court decided four decades ago that even in the extreme case of leaked information that could harm the war effort, the government does not have the right to prosecute media for espionage. Abraham Lincoln and FDR also used military tribunals (JB King has written a book noting that miltiary tribunals were used right here in Pulaski County during the Civil War, with Lincoln personally reviewing the verdicts), but the court system is also making it very difficult to use that precedent, and I don't think the current Supreme Court has any inclination to allow a return to pre-Vietnam military precedents of what we can do with either military tribunals or restrictions on media that the President believe imperil the national interest.

Whether we like the court actions or not, to go after WikiLeaks for espionage without changing the Supreme Court decision -- which realistically is not going to happen -- I can think of only two ways to do that.

One would be to declare that Julian the Ass-in-Chief is not subject to the protections of the United States Constitution because he is a foreigner, and then prosecute him as a foreign spy. Personally, I could live with that; there are reasons why Rupert Murdoch had to become a U.S. citizen before owning the number of broadcast media that he now owns. Print media and cable/satellite media have virtually no restrictions under the First Amendment; broadcast media, because they use the limited and therefore regulated resource of the airwaves, have some restrictions and used to have more. Remember the "Fairness Doctrine?" I personally would not have a problem with saying that owning or working for a news organizion in the United States is a privilege for non-citizens rather than a right, and that those who abuse the privilege can be prosecuted. (When I worked for a prior newspaper that periodically sent me to other countries for news coverage, I sometimes had to declare my intent to work as a reporter and I don't have a problem with that.)

The problem is that the Supreme Court has for many years extended most constitutional protections to foreigners, and in the case of Julian the Ass, that route wouldn't help much because he isn't in the United States and the offenses didn't take place on American soil. The most that could be done is that a warrant might be issued for his arrest if he ever showed up here, but a number of European countries would refuse to honor such an extradition request.

The second way to prosecute Julian the Ass and Wikileaks is to declare that the internet is not subject to the same constitutional protections as print media. That is a realistic possibiliity, but it is an extremely dangerous one.

Remember the "Net Neutrality" efforts not that long ago? Remember the claims of the FCC to have certain rights to regulate the Internet?

Believe me, there are many things that I would just **LOVE** to see banned from the Internet. But once the United States government gets in the business of deciding what is and what is not legitimate media -- especially as the printing press with its near-absolute protections under the First Amendment rapidly moves toward obsolescence -- we run into real constitutional problems.

I see no realistic way to prosecute Julian the Ass under current United States law. I am, however, very concerned that "great cases make bad law," and that a frustrated and angry coalition of conservative Republicans in Congress and Hillary Clinton's State Department will end up producing something that makes the Patriot Act look like a very minor step.
 
If the goal is to penalize Wikileaks for the damage it's already done, much of this is irrelevant because under current law, WikiLeaks has done nothing wrong, and ex post facto laws are not allowed by the Constitution. All we can do is pass a new law and prosecute WikiLeaks for future violations, not past acts.

Again, if the goal is to penalize Wikileaks for the damage it's already done, keep doing what's being done now, namely, making it difficult for anyone but the most dedicated supporters to give them money. Not only PayPal but also the major credit card companies are pulling the plug. Use diplomatic pressure to get WikiLeak's charitable contribution status revoked in those of our allies which have granted that to WikiLeaks; that is a privilege, not a constitutional right, and it can be revoked much more easily. Then at the same time, prosecute the idiot PFC to the fullest extent of the law, up to and including the death penalty if we can prove that his actions killed American soldiers or our allies, and consider televising the court-martial to make clear to every other soldier that you can't do this stuff and get away with it. Finally, tighten security so something like this can never happen again. It shouldn't have happened the first time, but when I read that this PFC was using erased DVDs with Lady Gaga labels to download hundreds of thousands of classified documents and nobody suspected a thing, I am shocked that it hasn't happened a hundred more times with our soldiers leaking stuff to other countries -- or maybe it has on a much smaller scale and we just don't know about it because the recipients of the leaks didn't want us to find out.

Between those three steps, a repetition of the WikiLeaks debacle can probably be prevented. The damage that's done cannot be undone, however, and people are quite likely going to die as a result.
 
My concern is that there will be an extreme reaction, Congress will pass some really bad laws to regulate the internet, and the news media will spend the next half-decade fighting in court to make sure the First Amendment still applies to the internet. Eventually the Supreme Court will strike down most if not all of what Congress might pass out of political frustration, but nobody needs to spend years fighting that battle.
 
I have another deeper concern, however.
 
I have no doubt that the goal of conservatives is to penalize Wikileaks for the damage it's already done and prevent future damage to national security. That's a good goal and there are existing ways to do that.
 
I have considerably more serious concerns about the motives of the Hillary Clinton State Department. This is the woman who, according to the leaked documents, directed our agencies to spy on the General Secretary of the United Nations who happens to be a South Korean citizen who was put in that job because he is an American ally. Even if it's legal and in accord with established procedures, is that really what we want our Secretary of State telling taxpayer-paid federal employees to do? She has at least a two-decades-long history of spying on people, beginning with her husband's affairs, and now apparently is using the federal government to do so.
 
The last thing we need is Hillary Clinton crafting legislation for her own reasons and getting angry Republicans to go along with her. I'm pretty confident that the Supreme Court will eventually rule the right way in conformity with longstanding precedents, but the political damage could be considerably greater than the judicial damage.
Darrell Todd Maurina
Check out the Pulaski County Daily News online newspaper at
http://www.pulaskicountyweb.com
Cell: (573) 433.6733 * FAX: (573) 774-2349
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/darrellmaurina/
Follow me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/darrellmaurina/

Offline fish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 8885
  • Karma: +349278/-349867
    • View Profile
Re: so when will the doomsday files be released?
« Reply #12 on: December 09, 2010, 04:38:23 AM »
I think you are right darrell. the  1st ammendment will be a casualty in this mess. you are in a lose lose position. you want to use free speech to report what has been released, but what has been released should not even be revealed.  julian should be held in general population in prison. that would be better than a quick bullet to the head.