Recently, Republican Rep. Ron Paul of Texas took to the floor of the House to talk about Wikileaks, transparency in government, and the case of Daniel Ellsberg, the 
Pentagon Papers, and the New York Times. He spoke about how the Iraq War was based on lies. He asked how the U. S. government should prosecute a citizen of Australia for publishing classified U. S. documents that he did not steal. Paul also said the following: “Revealing the real nature and goal of our presence in so many Muslim countries is a threat to our empire, and any revelation of this truth is highly resented by those in charge.”
Paul posed a number of questions at the end of his talk:
Number 1: Do the America People deserve know the truth regarding the ongoing wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen?
Number 2: Could a larger question be how can an army private access so much secret information?
Number 3: Why is the hostility mostly directed at Assange, the publisher, and not at our governments failure to protect classified information?
Number 4: Are we getting our moneys worth of the 80 Billion dollars per year spent on intelligence gathering?
Number 5: Which has resulted in the greatest number of deaths: lying us into war or Wikileaks revelations or the release of the Pentagon Papers?
Number 6: If Assange can be convicted of a crime for publishing information that he did not steal, what does this say about the future of the first amendment and the independence of the internet?
Number 7: Could it be that the real reason for the near universal attacks on Wikileaks is more about secretly maintaining a seriously flawed foreign policy of empire than it is about national security?
Number 8: Is there not a huge difference between releasing secret information to help the enemy in a time of declared war, which is treason, and the releasing of information to expose our government lies that promote secret wars, death and corruption?
Number 9: Was it not once considered patriotic to stand up to our government when it is wrong?
Thomas Jefferson had it right when he advised ‘Let the eyes of vigilance never be closed.’ I yield back the balance of my time.
Source: Huffington Post
– Elaine Magliaro
It’s a shame you don’t have a donate button! I’d most certainly donate to this fantastic blog!
I suppose for now i’ll settle for bookmarking and adding your RSS feed to my Google account.
I look forward to brand new updates and will talk about this site with my Facebook group.
Talk soon!
I am curious to find out what blog platform you’re utilizing?
I’m experiencing some small security issues with my latest site and I’d like
to find something more safeguarded. Do you have any suggestions?
http://www.hhmovie.net@Gb`
You’re welcome.
Buddha is Laughing:
” As infantile as Charlie and Kurt can be, they aren’t nearly as annoying a person as you are. And they’re paid to be annoying. Seriously, I feel sorry for the people you work with.”
Thank you very much, we think,
Kurt and Charlie
A Glenn Greenwald Post I wish I had written.
Daley is a reflection, not a cause.
@Slart: So, maybe the correlation between emotional immaturity / social incompetence and geekiness means nothing at all, but I can think of two possibilities:
(1) There is a tradeoff between them; perhaps the rationalism required by geekiness interferes with social competence, or makes a rationally dominant person question social norms and reject them.
(2) Emotional immaturity causes geekiness: Perhaps it is a failure at social interaction that drives some people to seek success elsewhere, and the technological trades are an obvious meritocratic venue where rationality can triumph even with a severe deficit of social skills.
Anyway, on a different topic; I am taking on a third project here with a friend (or possibly somebody that secretly hates me but wants my help anyway 🙂 ) who is going up for tenure this year and wants one more journal paper accepted before he does. We’ve got to get on it to make that happen, which will eat up much of my remaining idle time.
So if you do post, I will respond when able; or in segments.
@Slart: for all of your training and experience you have the emotional maturity of a 10-year old.
I recognize that as an insulting characterization; and accept your criticism anyway. I don’t claim to be the smartest person in the world (and do not think I am, even in my own specialty), and I do not claim to be a paragon of humanity in any way.
I will point out, however, without claiming equivalence, that Euler was a total jerk, Newton was a total jerk, and so were dozens of other stellar scientists. In fact it is so common, emotional immaturity has become stereotypical of geekhood in general. If you cannot get past my emotional immaturity in the course of a reasoned argument, perhaps that inability is a just a sign of your own.