part of what i've been trying to get at is summarized quite well here. even though it is about a quote from an australian parliament member, it applies just as well to people here. with so many people either calling for assange's head, or at best ambivalent about it all, i wonder who is minding the store.

i do not consider the u.s. constitution beyond reproach. lest we forget it allowed slaves and said they were worth 0.6 of a person for electoral college purposes, but oh yeah, you can't vote. however, i do think that freedom of the press is necessary for a thriving, open society. the key word there, i guess, is "open," and apparently not many people care about that qualifier.

many argue that what wikileaks has done should not be considered an action of the press, and therefore not protectable, or that even if they are worthy of press credit, that what they did is still beyond sanction.

the first argument -- that wikileaks is not = the press -- would be a great argument if it were true, but it lacks substance. the people in power saying who is and who is not it is a little rich, no? if wikileaks had a cable from russia to france where the two countries were secretly gushing over how much they loved the u.s. and how much they wanted to be our friends, oh we'd print that on our money, make t-shirts, tattoo calfs so we could skin them and make leather jackets out of that malarkey.

go figure that when the information isn't rosy then the government gets reactionary. what do you think the declaration of independence was, but an airing of problems with the previous government.

so even if they can be cobbled in with the proper press, what they are doing is not protectable as it is secret. ooh. it is secret because the government (which purportedly answers to the people) decided to keep things secret. so then this group comes along, has this information, and a large portion of society (majority?) says, "nope, we don't want to see it. also, we want you dead."

while i was only alive for the last 20% or so of the cold war, i remember how big it was when a rogue news outlet in a communist or dictatorial country would send out reports of how it really was or when iraqi insurgents wanted our help to topple saddam back in 1990-91. i'm not saying we need to overthrow the government, what i'm saying is that when all the press in a country has rolled over, and a new breed of fact-finding "journalists" comes along with actual facts to share, we should be at least willing to hear what they've found, press pass or not.



< << < : : >> > >
number 9.. .   .? andy andy andy, get your adverbs here

we've got no future