Overuse of the word "Terrorist" akin to the use of the word "Communist" in the 50's?

[pprtgr]

Where's the threat of "force or violence" from the Wiki guy. It's really no different from Woodward and Bernstein. The press is allowed to publish whatever dirt they find. The government's not immune. Freedom of press, freedom of speech... Bouncer's argument was right the first time around. NO need to compromise it.
"if we were doing the right thing all the time, the wiki guy would have nothing to expose. "

[decadecadeca]

Where's the threat of "force or violence" from the Wiki guy. It's really no different from Woodward and Bernstein. The press is allowed to publish whatever dirt they find. The government's not immune. Freedom of press, freedom of speech... Bouncer's argument was right the first time around. NO need to compromise it.
"if we were doing the right thing all the time, the wiki guy would have nothing to expose. "

"....a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, in violation of the criminal laws of the United States, or of any state, to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

Those pushing for Wikileaks prosecution say their actions are a direct danger to human life.

And the first amendment has restrictions to protect against libel, slander, threats, coercion, menacing, etc...

[Bouncer]

What about freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and a nation for the people by the people?

[decadecadeca]

They all have restrictions.

Welcome to the real world.

[Bouncer]

They all have restrictions.

Welcome to the real world.

you give brief little answers and definitions that dont really solve any of the questions.

my issue is that i see both sides and there are wrongs and rights on both sides.

[decadecadeca]

Not sure how I can make it any clearer.

All of our rights come with restrictions, be it speech, defense, or suffrage.

And yes this is a huge gray area that may never have a clear right or wrong depending on the circumstance.

[Bouncer]

i like things black and white.

anything else to me is bullshit.

this is why i have no interest in politics. its all gray, no black and white.

[mofo]

i spoke to a CIA rep who worked on the osama bin laden unit post 9/11. he said that the government actually bans words from use based on the type of connotation that gets associated with them after the overuse. terrorist is no longer allowed to be used as well as "islamist" only because the media has tied them so close to one another that they were beginning to be used interchangeably.

[decadecadeca]

Newspeak.

Big Brother Is Watching.

[Bouncer]

newsflash

Deca is a cunt

[pprtgr]

"....a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, in violation of the criminal laws of the United States, or of any state, to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

Those pushing for Wikileaks prosecution say their actions are a direct danger to human life.

And the first amendment has restrictions to protect against libel, slander, threats, coercion, menacing, etc...

Sorry, those pushing for a Wikileaks prosecution can't win. Not after Watergate. Sorry. And in no way could publishing those cables be construed as "libel, slander, threats, coercion, menacing, etc..." They aren't telling lies about the government...there's no libel or slander. They are simply publishing government cables. I don't think anyone is disputing the authenticity of those files. And I don't get this "to intimidate or coerce a government" garbage. They are simply exposing the US for its attempts at intimidation, coercion, etc... Classic case of a bully crying foul when the victims fight back or in this case...publicize. C'mon boys.... you must know that our government routinely has Jodie Foster up on the pinball machine... They just don't like being exposed for being rapists. And the extent of the leaks is hardly toxic. I mean so what if cables about Berlusconi and Merkel are embarassing. Can't the US take a little embarassment?

[decadecadeca]

Like I said above if it's military intelligence in any form they should be prosecuted.

If it's an office memo about who has the smelliest balls then no problem.



And the answer is Rado.

Balls smell like a goat's ass.

[Bouncer]

Sorry, those pushing for a Wikileaks prosecution can't win. Not after Watergate. Sorry. And in no way could publishing those cables be construed as "libel, slander, threats, coercion, menacing, etc..." They aren't telling lies about the government...there's no libel or slander. They are simply publishing government cables. I don't think anyone is disputing the authenticity of those files. And I don't get this "to intimidate or coerce a government" garbage. They are simply exposing the US for its attempts at intimidation, coercion, etc... Classic case of a bully crying foul when the victims fight back or in this case...publicize. C'mon boys.... you must know that our government routinely has Jodie Foster up on the pinball machine... They just don't like being exposed for being rapists. And the extent of the leaks is hardly toxic. I mean so what if cables about Berlusconi and Merkel are embarassing. Can't the US take a little embarassment?

Well said my man, much better then I could say it.

Truth spoken.

[Scrumhalf]

I don't have a problem with the Wikileaks publication of the memos as long as nothing classified was divulged and nobody is going to get hurt/killed as a result.

However, diplomacy is ugly stuff, people. The pun about the ambassador being a person lying abroad for the benefit of their country is absolutely true. If you are in the foreign service, you are trying to get your country an advantage over the other. If it is by lying and subterfuge, so be it. Anyone who doesn't know it or expresses outrage about it like Wikileaks is doing, is either naive or disingenuous.

People should read a book called Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger. It goes over the machinations that various diplomats have done over the years. Very illuminating read...

[pprtgr]

I don't have a problem with the Wikileaks publication of the memos as long as nothing classified was divulged and nobody is going to get hurt/killed as a result.

However, diplomacy is ugly stuff, people. The pun about the ambassador being a person lying abroad for the benefit of their country is absolutely true. If you are in the foreign service, you are trying to get your country an advantage over the other. If it is by lying and subterfuge, so be it. Anyone who doesn't know it or expresses outrage about it like Wikileaks is doing, is either naive or disingenuous.

People should read a book called Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger. It goes over the machinations that various diplomats have done over the years. Very illuminating read...

You are describing why people should support the Wikileaks. If it's true that diplomacy is ugly stuff, then it's the job of the press to make sure the public knows this. Can't have the public believing stuff that isn't true. I know some people are very patriotic and don't like to see the US's image dragged through the mud, but it's much better than having people believe a whitewashed, squeaky clean version. It's much healthier to believe that politicians and govt. officials are corrupt because in fact this continues to be true. People should be happy when the government or Wall Street gets exposed. The politicans and bankers cry bloody murder simply because they are afraid no one will believe their con games anymore. You might think twice about buying mortgage backed CDO's from Goldman Sachs now that you know one of their "clients" was trying to find marks to dump less than grade AAA paper on. They need customers but customers don't like being easy marks and losing money. It's a good thing when they get known for having a bad reputation. It's the reputation they deserved in the first place.