Freedom of speech

[798686]

^^Mebbe it took em 5 days to find the image? Or perhaps they had to discuss it internally first?!

well as a UK citizen, following the rule you
suggest that lying and cheating and any underhand measure is fine, I should be delighted that wikileaks has embarassed one of our rivals.

Lol...I suggested lying and cheating is fine?!...

I suspect many nations are less than honest in dealing with other countries where they deem it prudent to do so. I'm not condoning it, but I shouldn't think the US are alone in doing this.

And they're a rival now are they, rather than an ally?!

I'm not sure the leaker thought it exposed them as corrupt - I'd understand that more if what was posted on wikileaks was specific information, rather than just slapping up 250,000 random classified documents.

 

[b.c.]

I may surprise some here by saying this, but I personally think that some information is sensitive enough to be deemed "taboo" and I don't believe it the right for everyone to know everything, or the right of the media to disclose anything they want.

I shudder to think, for example, what would've happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis if there was a Wikileaks spilling of the beans on all the backroom negotiations -play by play on who said what and all. We'd all probably been blown to hell.

Or what if news got out in advance about the feds recent involvement in nabbing this asshole out to blow something up? How does one determine to what extent the release of sensitive information negatively affects the outcome of diplomatic efforts to resolve a crisis? How does it affect confidentiality? At what point does it cost the lives of soldiers or citizens at home or abroad? Or undermines a battle plan or a political strategy?

I'm not talking direct lies to a people, like the ones Bush told about so-called "weapons of mass destruction". I'm speaking of the wholesale disclosure of the nuances of everyday diplomacy, the revelation of which may or may not bring us closer to an armed conflict, or cost someone somewhere their life.

In instances when the divulgence of sensitive information is so detrimental to the national interest that it results in the above - yes, I agree, it should be considered treasonous.

 

[D_Fiona_Farvel]

Whilst I hate what these protesters were doing I support their right to do so. Not doing so is the thin edge of the wedge IMHO.

I agree, and tend to be very protective of these rights, perhaps overly so, where political/social protests and private opinion are involved.

While I do not condone violence and personally prefer respectful discourse, as a mouthy, protest loving broad, I respect their moment of action.

 

[popgoestheweasle]

national security is very important issue ... but we our being striped more and more of our rights....we our getting more bs laws to nickel and dime the people to fund them in a issue that will never end...in texas they want to try and pass sobriety checkpoints bill...yea thats right ....probable cause is not enough to follow someone who maybe DUI..so we need to make it convenient for them now...makesure everyone is checked...cause stupid people care more about catching someone then there freedom rights ....now drinking or not you have to get in line while they check you out...just another way to over reach delay and harass people....
Texas Lawmakers To Renew Sobriety Checkpoint Push