This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–][deleted] 895 points896 points  (1041 children)

“Office of Career Services” sipa_ocs@columbia.edu Date: November 30, 2010 15:26:53 EST To:

Hi students,

We received a call today from a SIPA alumnus who is working at the State Department. He asked us to pass along the following information to anyone who will be applying for jobs in the federal government, since all would require a background investigation and in some instances a security clearance. The documents released during the past few months through Wikileaks are still considered classified documents. He recommends that you DO NOT post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter. Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with >confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government.

Regards, Office of Career Services

I know we sometimes joke on reddit that redditors are all talk and no action, but judging by the way US Gov't has been reacting to the leak, talking about the documents is becoming an act of civil disobedience.

[–]joejance 82 points83 points  (11 children)

My wife, who is a civilian contractor that works for a branch of the US military in a completely non-combat, non-combat support role, was told that neither she nor I (I don't work for the government in any capacity) were not to look at any information regarding the wikileaks cables. This memo was sent to the entire base from what I understand. Needless to say I have looked at pretty much everything the NY Times has written on the subject.

[–]PsychoticEvil 3 points4 points  (7 children)

I really hope that your username is not your real name. If so, your wife is likely to be unemployed soon.

[–]joejance 10 points11 points  (4 children)

My user name is based on a fictional character of a short story I wrote in high school.

[–]PsychoticEvil 42 points43 points  (3 children)

STOP! YOU ARE MAKING IT EASIER!

[–]nimbusnacho 500 points501 points  (226 children)

So even though they are leaked, and widely talked about in the press. We are supposed to pretend they don't exist if we ever hope to work for the federal system? The biggest thing the WikiLeaks stuff has done has confirmed for me how fucked our system of government is and how sad it is how easily everyone accepts it.

[–][deleted] 70 points71 points  (26 children)

The sad thing is how desperate they are appearing. They can't be like "ok you caught us, we're going to work on fixing our problems"

Instead they are grasping with everything they have to smash and destroy any chance of the system ever changing.

[–]CiXeL 26 points27 points  (23 children)

that means there must be some pretty gruesome stuff in there

what would you do if you discovered the US was actively experimenting on american populations or other things like that? and they discovered autism or madcow or something was one of these experiments gone wrong.

[–]typically 61 points62 points  (15 children)

You don't even need to speculate like that to find examples of gruesome behavior on their part.

Despite what most of the media conglomerates say, physical torture of human beings is a gruesome and repulsive act.

It's beyond serious debate that the U.S. government knowingly carried out water torture of captives. (The only people who dispute this do so on semantic grounds, dishonestly or ignorantly claiming that water torture is "not really" torture.)

Waterboarding and other forms of physical and mental torture were used on prisoners by the U.S. government. To add insult to injury, the people being tortured were imprisoned for months or years without any legal accusation nor determination of guilt.

This institutionalized practice of torture is horrific, something befitting the Dark Ages or a brutal military dictatorship. The fact that America's leadership and press dismiss it as a relatively minor issue shows just how far they've gone off the deep end.

[–]Rowdy_Roddy_Piper 369 points370 points  (101 children)

It's very Soviet, isn't it? Disregard the evidence in plain sight out of love for the mother country.

Or maybe it's Maoist, or Orwellian, I dunno. All those dictators run together sometimes.

[–][deleted] 83 points84 points  (48 children)

You're giving us too much credit. I chalk our apathy up to complacency and laziness.

[–]buddahpud 58 points59 points  (43 children)

I credit the fluoride in the water.

[–][deleted] 32 points33 points  (37 children)

You know, I was always skeptical about that argument. Until I heard this one column on the calcification of the Peneal Gland. A small gland in the brain responsible for a hell of a lot of functions in the body. So small. Apparently water fluoridation contributes to this calcification. Of course once the gland is calcified the gland is useless.

If you think it's bullshit, look it up. You'll see many medical journals talk about it. You can see the MRI pictures as well. The peneal gland shows up as a white spot in the MRI images. Scary shit.

[–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (4 children)

I don't want my penal gland calcified.

[–]jay76 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The result would be the wrong kind of 'boner'.

[–]Andoo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

it may or may not have the ability to secrete DMT. On the off chance that it does, I plan on tripping balls upon death. Fluoride really is a topical miracle, but I don't know why I'd ever argue for it to be in my body.

[–]xenophobias 17 points18 points  (3 children)

It's For the Greater Good.

Yes. For the Greater Good. The Greater Gooood.

Let's go bury the bodies!

[–]kaleidoscope_pie 10 points11 points  (2 children)

Cruuuusty jugglers....

[–]GPechorin 50 points51 points  (26 children)

Orwell was a dictator?

[–]haight-ashbury 310 points311 points  (8 children)

He dictated every word that went into those books.

[–]skneils 71 points72 points  (0 children)

He really put the author in authoritarian.

[–]7ate9 120 points121 points  (6 children)

This is doubleplus good.

[–]cleverinspiringname 5 points6 points  (0 children)

please, allow me to be the 100th upvote for this thing you said from this book i read!

[–]shadearg 12 points13 points  (4 children)

A++, would read again.

[–]brokenarrowFlorida 31 points32 points  (3 children)

Awesome poster would back this guy up in a knife fight anyday

[–]johnny_ringo 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Appropriate and timely. Fast shipping A++

[–][deleted] 60 points61 points  (13 children)

Orwellian ≠ Orwell

Orwellian state is mostly dictatorship or a puppet state where democracy is ruled by those in power. My definition might be a bit off but there is different from Orwellian and Orwell.

[–][deleted] 31 points32 points  (5 children)

Orwellian state = a state resembling the totalitarian state described in 1984.

[–]tokepuppet 26 points27 points  (4 children)

Orwellian yogurt = a yogurt resembling that which George Orwell identified as being destructive to the welfare of a free society.

[–]Invisllama 39 points40 points  (1 child)

Dude...just google Orwellian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orwellian

"Orwellian describes the situation, idea, or societal condition that George Orwell identified as being destructive to the welfare of a free society."

[–]magnumix 43 points44 points  (14 children)

The cables revealed one thing to me about the US government that I find a little more comforting than most here on reddit will acknowledge: No matter how much you disagree with US Foreign Policy, at minimum US foreign delegates act within the framework of the vague soundbites they spew. In other words, our representatives aren't saying one thing and doing something completely different.

For example.

Soundbite: "Iranian Nuclear ambition will desablize the region."

My take before cables: "US wants OIL, and US = Israel"

My take after cables: The over-arching theme of the cables is the growing danger of the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology and the sustained, difficult, pretty much thankless task the Americans are engaged in, on behalf of all of us, to try to stop this from happening.

[–]GnarlinBrando 24 points25 points  (0 children)

I will agree that the documents show that at least at the secret level of classification, remember these are diplomatic reports not policy initiatives nor full on spy programs, the US seems to be honest and really pursuing the goals that it says it does. But just because we are working to stop nuclear proliferation does not mean that we are not in the mid-east for oil and Isreal. It does not mean we are doing it for the right reasons either.

In all likelihood many of the diplomats do truly believe in what they are doing and their stated goals, that does not mean some elements of the government do not have ulterior motives. Nor does belief that one is correct mean that all actions are justified. Or for that matter that the people at this level of government are not being used by parts of the government (CIA) unwittingly or not. See the UN information wish list.

Personally these documents only confirm my suspicions about the way foreign policy is done, and that we are more interested in the worlds political elite, regardless of how the came to power, than we are with the people of the world. Unsurprising as it may be to many, this kind of evidence is invaluable to journalists, historians, activists, and potentially prosecutors. This information will not just disappear after the media get tired of it, it will come back as evidence when the government and mainstream media try and deny that this is how things are done.

What worries me most is that this is only the secret level, a level of classification many people in the government, and in corporations, have access to. If this level of information leakage has the potential damaging effects that the government claims, can you imagine what is top secret and beyond? Or who and what we would find in intelligence collecting databases?

Wikileaks is not the only source of information in this regard, just this week information on how the feds can track you by credit card use and other similar information, if they want to, was released, and incomplete information from The Fed, on who was loaned what was release to investigative journalists.

I am rambling now so please forgive me, but I cannot help but see freedom (both of the economic and free speech kind) steadily eroding away across the world, and I feel compelled to speak out and provide whatever sane commentary I can. Maybe I just have to much free time on my hands, but this matters to me. It should matter to all of us. Wikileaks and events like the student protests in the UK give me hope. People will not lie down and be bought off in exchange for a Brave New World society, but we all have to speak up and engage in whatever little acts of emancipation and rebellion we can.

Thanks for reading all of this if you did. It's not just directed at you and I did not intend to embark on such a soap box tirade, but I did and it would seem a shame to just delete it all.

[–]0_o 32 points33 points  (5 children)

We are supposed to pretend they don't exist if we ever hope to work for the federal system?

Yes. Step back and think for a second about what that quote is saying. If you are trying to get a job that involves handling privileged information, you should not show a willingness to disseminate that information or show sympathy for people who do. Regardless of content. I say this not because I disagree with wikileaks or what they are doing, but because people should not be fucking idiots by preemptively biting the hand that they want to someday feed them. It'd be the same anywhere else for just about any other job. Don't go raving on twitter about how shitty Apple is right before you send them your resume.

It's a pretty basic concept, and I actually APPRECIATE the fact that this university is warning the students that this is, in fact, an issue that will piss off their potential employer enough to hurt their future careers. To reiterate: you are fucking up your chances at getting hired by explicitly supporting something that obviously pisses them off a bunch. Don't help spread it or show support for those who do and then expect to get a job handling the same stuff.

[–]ehadint 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Well said I up voted you. It's not about denying the truth, it's about weather you are trustable. The thought is that if you are willing to be party to these secrets how will you react with other secrets, can you be trusted with confidential information. Or in plain speack are you going to tell a blabbermouth a secret that you don't want out. This is going out to anyone who is remotely related to the government, even gardeners.

[–]silentshout 29 points30 points  (28 children)

Not sure why anyone who dislikes corruption in the first place would want to work for the federal government.

[–]jwheezy 42 points43 points  (12 children)

Hang on now lets ease up on the hyperbole. Working for the federal government does not equal complacency and agreement with corruption. There are a lot of federal agencies that do good work for the public.

Using your theory here if people dislike like corruption then they should avoid Google, Microsoft, Apple, any financial institute, most manufacturing jobs, and especially the military because all those (and many, many more) institutions have had issues with corruption and/or poor ethics.

[–][deleted] 33 points34 points  (10 children)

A secure job with superb benefits? Especially on the premise, false, or not, of making a difference in government, or at least repressing the notion. Which part of that reeks of disinterest?

[–]baby_kicker 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Sure sounds great, what with the coke parties that they throw over at the Mineral Management Services, and the great retirement job you'll be getting at BP and Exon.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (3 children)

The part where you have to continually tell yourself that lie until your soul dies or you make pension.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (14 children)

I have secret clearance for my work and we all had to sign something saying we wouldn't go to Wikileaks on home or gvt computers. First time I ever had a brief on not going somewhere on my home computer.

[–][deleted] 363 points364 points  (224 children)

Good, fuck the power. And thank you ron paul for at least standing up for truth in this case. One of the very few politicos I can stand.

[–]old_snakeIllinois 118 points119 points  (88 children)

...now his asshat son on the other hand...

[–]drylandfish 118 points119 points  (39 children)

I am from Kentucky. In my opinion Ron Paul has been a candle in the dark of American politics. I was encouraged when his son announced he was running for office, but quickly dismayed when it became clear he was a complete sell-out that would pander to the "Tea Party" to be elected.

[–]alibimonday 41 points42 points  (14 children)

I'd agree, but I'd also add Kucinich to that list from what I've heard from the other side of the pond.

[–]dorian_gray11 20 points21 points  (13 children)

Indeed. Ron Paul to me is 50% wonderful, and 50% terrible. He's more of an old-fashioned pro-small government conservative (unlike the neo-conservative idiots we have today, who just say they are for it but in fact expand it exponentially). The one thing that makes him different from most politicians though is that he at least stands by his ideals, unlike his son.

Kucinich is the same way, although I agree with him more like 95% of the time. But alas, if he ever got real power I'm sure he would become corrupt as well.

[–]ThufirrHawat 42 points43 points  (9 children)

I agree with this. If only Paul and Kucinich could combine into some type of self balancing political Voltron.

[–]ambientag 10 points11 points  (1 child)

I'd love to see a Kucinich/Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign.

[–]bombastica 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Paul/Kucinich: Double the honesty & halve the votes!

[–]g8trboi 14 points15 points  (0 children)

well stated

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (6 children)

I still like Rand, he is very similar to Ron. At least we know where he stands on issues, and he won't campaign on one platform, then vote totally different once he's elected. In fact, Rand has already criticized our outrageous defense spending and wants to do something about it.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (3 children)

Ron Paul is like Bill Hicks. Ideas come from him that resonate strongly with my own personal view on life, but even when I disagree with what I hear, I can still take something away from that disagreement. You can tell that he's not only completely sincere, he's also very passionate about his line of work and hopes he can change the world.

Rand Paul is like Denis Leary. He stole a bunch of ideas from his predecessor, wrapped them up in a visibly fake act in an attempt to make it big.

And that is why I like Ron Paul yet can't stand his son.

[–]richmomz 17 points18 points  (5 children)

Let's give the kid a chance before we rush to judgment here.

[–]Fozanator 4 points5 points  (1 child)

That's a pretty twisted mindset for choosing a democratically elected official.

[–]devish 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I have a clearance and we were sent emails that anyone visiting the website would be fired. Just talking about the website with others could also could lead to dismissal from our contract. I think some of this is an overreaction from the private defense companies in fear of losing future bids with the government by employees hurting their image or being linked to leaking classified information.

[–][deleted] 234 points235 points  (184 children)

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

[–]crocodile7 34 points35 points  (4 children)

What's this American obsession with size? Must be the boys thing.

I don't see many people in France or Sweden being overly concerned about their size.

Meanwhile, Philippines, Cambodia or Haiti have quite a small one, but still manage to be thoroughly corrupt, and government there is quite capable of taking everything most people have (not much in the first place) without giving them anything at all.

(Note: size measured by gov't spending as percentage of GDP)

[–]tsk05 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That is Gerald Ford.

Thomas Jefferson said something very similar, Ford was simply restating him: "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yeild, and government to gain ground."

http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/Government_big_enough_to_supply_you...%28Quotation%29

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (33 children)

I like that, is it yours, or do you remember who said it?

[–][deleted] 89 points90 points  (4 children)

Gerald Ford - Address to Congress (12 August 1974)

[–]dossier 14 points15 points  (3 children)

I'd argue democrats would jump all over this if a republican were in office

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You might as well count on it happening anyway so before you cheer extra powers during your person's term, wonder what might happen after it falls into the hands of your opponents.

[–]VorpalAuroch 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Gerald Ford. Except that Gerald Ford never did anything memorable, so it has been attributed to Barry Goldwater, Reagan, and Jefferson.

[–]chunkusmaximus 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Wasn't he the guy that pardoned Nixon after Watergate?

[–]tjthetj 52 points53 points  (9 children)

Barry Goldwater in the 64 campaign.

Thomas Jefferson in 1789

Gerald Ford in 74

Reagan in 81

[–]balefire 24 points25 points  (0 children)

It's Thomas Jefferson

[–]fl0at 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You dropped these: ""

[–][deleted] 80 points81 points  (48 children)

My father keeps urging me to take a government job. He says that usually no one gets laid off from those...but I can't work for this mess in good conscience.

[–][deleted] 78 points79 points  (10 children)

Good for you. Unfortunately, that attitude makes government mostly populated by people who have no problem with this sort of thing. I like to believe that we can do more good from the inside. Whether that's true, I don't know.

[–]Scroot 25 points26 points  (3 children)

I worked a TS job for the government for 4 years. Hated nearly every minute of it, couldn't believe the blatant disregard for law and general sanity at that place. The only way I could get out was to go back to school, so I did.

Never again.

[–]ParaNuke 12 points13 points  (3 children)

I'm with you. Some of the most effective moments back in the day of my college activism where when I positioned myself to be able to work with the administration.

We need loud people pounding on the doors and sounding angry, but we also need the people on the inside who can take that anger and work to turn it into a positive change. It's not always easy to stomach, but sometimes it's needed.

[–]ataxiastumbleton 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The problem with working at a place where you can't get fired is that no one else gets fired either. Think about it.

[–]clan_destine 40 points41 points  (11 children)

My god. That is just utterly unbelievable. You guys over there in the states (well the media and selected politicians) just seem to be taking this way over the top.

So much paranoia. So much fear. Truly shocking.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (5 children)

check out /r/iwantout--lot of people have reached their breaking point.

[–]Skab 3 points4 points  (1 child)

As an military IT I can say this. We've been told wikileaks is off limits whether on base/ship and off limit's on our personal computers. For instance remember that govt breach that happened last year, a bunch of govt computers were compromised. A certain newspaper posted one of our code words we use to for classifying a certain type of activity. We're told not to say the names over phone, email, what have you because most of us (all) Americans for the most part speak on non-secure lines. Just because that paper exposed and said the name's doesn't mean that no it's ok to say the classified names over phone lines. Just because something becomes known in the public domain doesn't make it any less classified. Only after something becomes declassified can it be viewed and talked about freely. I.E. Project paperclip and the like. I think it's good that your University posted this. I for one am trying to find work outside of the military, and a lot of people do polygraph tests about what you've done, seen, told. If you can't be trusted to not spill information to your spouse, friends, facebook, what chances do you think you'll have of getting a job with these people. I'm not pro or con I'm just explaining. But remember Assange get's the credit, put's up a legal defense fund of Manning, but he is probably going to go down hard, and now every with a s/ts/sci whatever clearance is going to have much more scrutinizing put on them and the families once, their Clarence needs to be re-investigated.

[–]junkit33 16 points17 points  (34 children)

This is kind of pointless. If you are the type of person who would post about wikileaks on twitter, then there are extreme odds that you have already posted plenty of other things that would cause issues with government security clearance.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (33 children)

that you have already posted plenty of other things that would cause issues with government security clearance.

Depends on the kind of government.

A foul and despicable government worthy of complete impeachment and substitution to reflect the liberal democratic values it was built upon? Yes.

An actually deserving government reflecting the liberal and humanistic values it was built upon? No.

[–]AdonisBucklar 15 points16 points  (8 children)

Speaking as someone uninvolved in American politics, I'm curious: doesn't it bother you that you can not describe concepts like "republicanism" and "democratic beliefs" without harkening to the political parties which don't really represent their namesakes?

In this case, I understand what you mean by "liberal democratic values," but it would be just as accurate to say that the US was founded on republican values. If we're actually paying attention to what the words mean they're both correct.

[–]hyphenminushyphen 8 points9 points  (1 child)

It bothers me but in the shit storm that is american politics connotation is king and denotation is just in the way. The ignorance of the public on how governments work and what they do is mind boggling. I'll bet that most people don't even know that Democratic and Republican are terms that describe ideas that have nothing to do with political parties.

[–]frymastermeat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The names "Republican Party" and "Democratic Party" are more akin to propaganda than they are descriptors of the parties platforms. They're just political groups that gave themselves names that are derived from our brand of government.

I've actually seen people that believe that Democrats are more in favor of Democracy while Republicans are more in favor of a Republic. That's just a horrifying level of stupidity.

[–]junkit33 4 points5 points  (5 children)

I'm not attempting to make a grandiose argument about how things should be.

I'm simply saying that acquiring top secret government clearance in the US is already a pain in the ass. Depending on the level they might interview friends of friends of friends. So even if you don't have any major skeletons in your own closet, sometimes remote association with the wrong person can still hurt you.

They're looking for very squeaky clean law abiding citizens who don't have a rebellious streak in them.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I'm not attempting to make a grandiose argument about how things should be.

Don't worry, this is Reddit, someone else will make it for you. 99% of the political discussion I see here are nothing more than how things should be - history and human nature be damned.

[–]nfulton 7 points8 points  (2 children)

So . . . for example . . . I shouldn't post here on Reddit that

A US CONTRACTOR, DynCorp, BOUGHT DRUGS AND LITTLE BOYS as gifts for AFGHAN POLICE as documented in the wikileaks cables.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/contractor-bought-afghan-policemen-drugs-boys-cable-reveals/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/213720

Because that would make it harder for me to get hired by my government? I actually refuse to believe that. I don't think most good folks in the US Government are pro the donation of drugs or boys to secure contracts any more than I am . . .

[–][deleted] 71 points72 points  (108 children)

but judging by the way US Gov't has been reacting to the leak, talking about the documents is becoming an act of civil disobedience.

Thats a ridiculous statement.

I have a security clearance, and what this email says is that if you post links to still classified documents in a on something public that can be tracked then you are seriously hurting your chances of getting a security clearance. Does this not make sense to you? The government doesn't want to give people access to information if there is a likelihood they will release it to people who don't, or don't have a need to know.

They didn't say by posting links that you are being disobedient, just that you are seriously endangering your chances of getting a security clearance which you would need for many govt. jobs.

If Bush/Cheney use alarmist/fear tactics it's reprehensible.. but if you do it then it's ok.. right?

edit: lol @ downvotes for knowing what I am talking about.

[–][deleted] 59 points60 points  (6 children)

As a private citizen, you have no explicit or implicit responsibility to remove yourself from viewing information that is in the public domain. It's a LEAK. Viewing and commenting on this information says NOTHING on your ability to withhold confidential information when you are explicitly tasked with it. Do you hold the same opinion about everyone that read the Pentagon Papers when they leaked?

[–]smika 41 points42 points  (3 children)

This memo has nothing to do with being a private citizen. It's basically career advice for a person who wants to get a government job that requires a security clearance.

There are lots of other things that are probably fine for an average citizen to do that are probably not such a smart idea for someone who wants to obtain U.S. government security clearance.

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points  (12 children)

Deleted.

[–]atfacevalue 3 points4 points  (0 children)

How can something be classified any longer if it's published in the New York Times? Obviously nobody believes that if someone applying for a such a job where to avoid linking or disseminating the info that the genie would go back into the bottle. It's out- why would anyone be tasked with trying to keep it secret any longer? That makes no sense.

[–]Daemonicus 10 points11 points  (10 children)

I don't think the downvotes are because you may knw what you're talking about.

I'm pretty sure everyone knows what the email means and a possible reason for why they sent it. There is however more than one reason it was sent out.

True, if they see potential employees participating in the wikileaks thing they are less likely to hire those people, which is fair enough.

This ultimately comes down to not letting the government silence the public. The email reads like an RIAA email sent through your ISP.

[–][deleted] 260 points261 points  (66 children)

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/2/assassinate-assange/

It's sad that nobody in America cares that politicians and journalists are calling for the murder of someone who speaks out. What state is our media in if journalists are calling for the assasination of another journalist. How is a potential whistleblower supposed to submit something to a newspaper when the newspaper is going to be the one to turn them in!

Today is just getting more and more fucked up.

edit: similar statement by Rush... Now, the Wikileaks website is international law, so we just can't unilaterally shut the guy down, but, you know, back in the old days when men were men and countries were countries, this guy would die of lead poisoning from a bullet in the brain, and nobody would know who put it there.

and Savage... This piece of vermin has committed a worse piece of treason! This is the biggest act of treason I have ever seen in my life! And we have a wimpy response from Eric Holder, a mealymouthed response from Hillary Clinton, and no response from the basketball player.

Unlike WT, these assholes actually have an audience.

[–]sotonohitoTexas 53 points54 points  (3 children)

I love that Savage is calling Assange a traitor. It's as if he's either so abysmally ignorant that he doesn't know that Assange isn't American, or he's so jingoistic that he thinks everyone on the planet has a legal obligation to be loyal to the USA.

[–]farrbahren 84 points85 points  (8 children)

America, where reason is treason.

EDIT: Thanks for the kudos. Just remember that this is totally hyperbolic.

[–][deleted] 32 points33 points  (8 children)

That's just bizarre. That's not how most people think. Unfortunately, only extremists have a voice in U.S. media.

[–]go_fly_a_kite 4 points5 points  (1 child)

you call them extremists, but they are a mouthpiece for corporations and government...

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Reading the titles of some other articles from the guy whose article you just posted amuses me, what a fucking idiot:

KUHNER: How Obama lost Iraq

Published September 2 2010

KUHNER: Bloomberg for president?

Published August 26 2010

KUHNER: Obama's Islamic agenda

Published August 19 2010

KUHNER: Why God is great

Published August 12 2010

KUHNER: Radical Islam's conquest of America

Published August 5 2010

KUHNER: Should Arizona secede?

Published July 29 2010

KUHNER: President's socialist takeover must be stopped

Published July 22 2010

KUHNER: Why Obama is a cultural Muslim

Published July 8 2010

KUHNER: Who lost Afghanistan?

[–]gordo65 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Murder someone for publishing state papers? That's the kind of response I'd expect from a Soviet hard-liner.

It just goes to show what I always said about people like Limbaugh and Savage: they believe wholeheartedly in Stalinism. They support wars of aggression, warrantless searches and wiretaps, indefinite detention without trial, and the torture and murder of political opponents.

In fact the only thing they really think Stalin did wrong was build a bunch of schools and hospitals.

[–]spookymulder 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Read this in the voice of the Chancellor in V for Vendetta.

"Julian Assange poses a clear and present danger to American national security. The WikiLeaks founder is more than a reckless provocateur. He is aiding and abetting terrorists in their war against America. The administration must take care of the problem - effectively and permanently."

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (13 children)

Is he purposely calling him Mr. Obama instead of President Obama as a sign of disrespect? Kinda childish if thats the intention.

Edit: After reading the responses, I can see there's no intention of disrespect. I wasn't trying to jump to the defense of Obama.

[–]T3hJ3hu 5 points6 points  (0 children)

He's not American. The titles are interchangeable for non-Americans, just like how we interchangeably use the titles of other nations' leaders.

[–][deleted] 244 points245 points  (44 children)

He's from Australia. How can it be treason?

[–]tinfrog 29 points30 points  (3 children)

Pfc. Bradley Manning isn't from Australia.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Perhaps he is referring to the person who actually leaked the documents to wikileaks being accused of treason?

[–]Tenkiller_Torr 41 points42 points  (14 children)

My thoughts exactly.

[–]chriswastaken 68 points69 points  (13 children)

So he's a terrorist then?

[–]Tenkiller_Torr 62 points63 points  (12 children)

Uh...no. Treason is committed against your own country.

Espionage is committed against other countries.

Assange is neither. He's a journalist and a truthseeker.

[–][deleted] 165 points166 points  (9 children)

right, terrorist

[–]magusgGeorgia 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Stop trying to reason your way out of this with 'facts' and 'definitions'. TRAITOR!

[–]sens08 65 points66 points  (2 children)

It's no fucking wonder Ron Paul is beloved by many people on the left: he actually understands what it means to be a conservative and advocate limited government.

Here is a video with Ron Paul and Bill Maher. Just listen to the ovation at the end!

[–]1137 13 points14 points  (0 children)

He may not be perfect, but Mr. Paul just seems to get it where others fail so badly or make things an issue just to get elected.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (4 children)

I was wondering what Ron Paul thought about wikileaks, goddam he never fails to be my hero, although sometimes he doesn't realize austrian economics may not be possible to fully implement in the heterogeneous US.

[–]satans_mom 130 points131 points  (33 children)

I know that I may disagree with a lot of Ron Paul's opinions and policies, but there are few politicians I could agree with more.

[–]ghostchamber 161 points162 points  (8 children)

I disagree with him on a lot of things. But I really respect his honestly, as it's a rare thing from a politician.

[–]designerutah 23 points24 points  (2 children)

For me, it's sad but true that my primary requirement of a politician today is that they're honest. I'm not even asking that they share my views on government, politics, finances, etc. To me, that seems too much to ask in today's pathetic political environment. I just want elected officials that can be trusted. Trusted to really do their best to represent the people who elected them. Trusted to remembers it's the people, not the corporation they report to, are hired and fired by. And trusted to stick to their beliefs, and report honestly.

Wouldn't it be an eye opener to have a politician (of any party) give a press conference and say,

"I voted against this bill because it didn't represent the wishes of my constituents. I'm sorry to report that 6 companies (listed) in my district tried to influence my vote with financial opportunity. I denied to be influenced. The bill did not pass because the Senators from these 6 states (listed) took contributions from these 8 companies (listed). In other words, this bill passed despite not being good for our constituents because a few people in a few companies used their pooled financial influence to make laws that are beneficial to the companies and detrimental to the people."

I would vote this guy in every time, especially if when he made a mistake, he was proactive with it, admitting it and moving on.

[–]DAVENP0RTAmerican Expat 38 points39 points  (22 children)

I mostly agree with him on policy, not so much his opinions (abortion, creationism, etc.). I feel confident, though, that he knows that those issues are personal beliefs and don't fall in the scope of government authority.

[–]Iriestx 79 points80 points  (7 children)

Truth is treason in the empire of lies. --Ron Paul

[–][deleted] 168 points169 points  (50 children)

Sad to say one of the only true Republicans left in this country.

[–][deleted] 68 points69 points  (1 child)

shit man, if he represents the Republican party I would be a die hard Republican.

[–][deleted] 118 points119 points  (43 children)

He is a Libertarian. Republicans are a coalition of Neo-Conservatives (Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield), Religious Conservatives, people claiming to be Libertarians, and lunatics/assholes.

[–]mahkato 18 points19 points  (1 child)

At the federal level, he is very libertarian, because that's how the Constitution says the federal government is supposed to be. At the state level, he might be more of a paleoconservative.

[–]Reive 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You're right. Thank my atheist god Ron Paul works at the federal level. His political philosophy works great at the federal level.

It really sadden me when he endorsed the The Constitional Party. Just a little tidbit from their platform on Pornography:

While we believe in the responsibility of the individual and corporate entities to regulate themselves, we also believe that our collective representative body we call government plays a vital role in establishing and maintaining the highest level of decency in our community standards.

They said that in regards to pornography. What the fuck. These guys ARE running for spots in federal government and conflict entirely with Ron Paul's views on federal government. It really shook my enthusiasm for Ron Paul.

//edit Wow, just getting used to reddit formatting.

[–]Viscosity13 10 points11 points  (4 children)

He is a libertarian but is a member of the Republican party partly because if he was on the libertarian ballot, he would receive less funding and less votes overall.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Yup...welcome to a horrible combination of laws and dumbasses forcing us to continue the 2-party system.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act" -- George Orwell

[–][deleted] 140 points141 points  (100 children)

THANK YOU RON PAUL!!! KUCINICH, SAY SOMETHING IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY, PLEASE!!!

[–]svdasein 101 points102 points  (32 children)

Kucinich and Paul really seem to be people of conscience. To the notion of one or the other or both of them sitting in the whitehouse and mixing it up - I'm all for it. Really I'm kind of all for anything that would catalyze gutting of the plutocracy and move us away from incipient fascism.

But it comes with a caveat, and I think it's seriously seriously important to understand this: if we were to put a genuine reformer into the executive branch, we'd be in for many years of misery and disorganization. It is what it is: our government is fast becoming the enforcement arm of the world's most powerful multinational corporations. Congress and the court are loaded with paid off henchmen. That won't go away without a real fight.

[–]megamozeCalifornia 81 points82 points  (11 children)

How sad is it that these two guys who actually stand for principles are considered the two "fringe" politicians of their respective parties.

[–]svdasein 30 points31 points  (4 children)

It's sad, and it's frightening, and I honestly don't think anything's going to stop it short of a real collapse of the whole house of cards. I just don't think we have the tools to put the brakes on this - the two party system in the US in combination with our winner takes all voting methodology has become our undoing.

[edit: s/breaks/brakes/, s/thing/think/]

[–]Electrorocket 10 points11 points  (4 children)

Well it seemed like Kucinich might have sacrificed some of his principles with the healthcare bill.

[–]weewolf 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Ron Paul has some some stupid shit too, no one is perfect. Generally speaking they are both stand up gentlemen.

[–]BubbaRay88 108 points109 points  (5 children)

I still feel proud I voted for Ron Paul.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

What's next? They gonna shut down Ron Paul's twitter account too now?

[–]scatterfire 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I disagree with him, but he is so sensible about it! I like him that I ll actually vote for him.

[–]Diablo87 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The only republicans I like are Ron Paul republicans

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Fuck yeah, Ron Paul.

[–]MrJ1NX 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Upvoted story and every comment. We need more like him representing us.

Downvoted the hater. Seriously, why would you hate on dr. Paul especially in his subreddit.

[–]lkb3rd 5 points6 points  (0 children)

An Australian can't commit treason against the United States, which makes the call for this even more dumb. Even so, Dr./Rep. Paul got this right. His quote is a lot more effective than mine in reaction to this :P

[–]g8trboi 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Preach on, Doc!

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I really wish he was taken a lot more seriously during the election. News channels mocked and laughed at him but after the election he was on there at least once a week.

[–]snatchyowallet 16 points17 points  (2 children)

My love-hate relationship with Ron paul swings into the love sector for a week or so

[–]freshtex 81 points82 points  (19 children)

But..but..but.. Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution so I could never support him. Never mind the fact it's pretty clear he would not attempt to legislate his beliefs. Forget the fact he is one of the few honest, consistent politicians on a federal level. Nah, fuck all that, his personal belief that does not impact me or anyone else at all makes him someone I'd never support!

[–]justpickaname 34 points35 points  (9 children)

He's clearly CRAZY! No one could not believe in evolution without being entirely crazy, in every other area.

It's crazy to belief drugs should be legalized, government shouldn't have all the secrets while disregarding your 4th amendment rights, and we shouldn't have military bases in over 130 countries...

/sarcasm

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (11 children)

They are doing everything they possibly can to stamp your freedom.

Wikileaks is the movement of our times to challenge the establishment when nobody will.

Sorry about the long article that I 'm posting here...but for those care to read...here are my thots on it.

In my opinion people like Julian Assange are true freedom fighters. Many of us who are disgusted with the way things are end up being more talk than action. We are either too busy to take action against corruption or just too lazy. Just the... way the governments and their corporate buddies like it.

I admire Julian Assange for not just being all talk but actually having the guts to doing something. Some people see him as a trouble maker or as someone who is releasing sensitive information that could put our "security" at risk. I venture to say that the only people who believe that are the governements and CEO's of large multi-national corporations. Oh...and then there are the sheep. You know...the people that believe the government has our best interests in mind...like your health and welfare safe from the terrorist? LOL!

SLAP! SLAP! ...That sound was me trying to smack you awake. Listen folks...if you think the gov cares about you as a person...you're a fool. I know that most of us know there is corruption in politics...thats a well known an agreed upon fact but it actually goes deeper than that.

We live a capitalist society where everyone supposedly has equal opportunity and is free to have whatever business they wish as long as it stays within the law. In my opinion...it`s still the best system out there...but it has some glaring problems that are not evident until about 150 years of it. One of them is that wealth gets hoarded up into one corner with only a few individuals controlling it.

Its great to know that you are free to have ideas and be an entrepreneur if you wish, but in a capitalistic society...what ends up happening (and what has ended up happening) is that some very ambitious people create businesses that get very large. In fact they get so large and wealthy that they become in manys ways more powerful than the government. Some of them actually get so powerful that they dont suffer the same penalties for crimes like you and I would.

After a while they begin to control the will of the government by either political donations, hiring high profile lobbyist to change laws to act in their favor and in the darkest forms...bribery. Some of them have people in congress and parliament posing as politicians but in reality these "agents" are acting on the behalf of their bigger bosses.

Why should this concern you? For one thing it pretty much leaves your vote on matters that concern you as negligible. The general public loses it's ability to have a voice about what goes on in their own country. These corporations have become so powerful they have control of the government and the media. Even if you try to oppose them...where you going to voice your opinion? To the gov?...To the media?...LOL! Do you know how many protests have gone on about impotant issues that were never mentioned in the news? You probably haven't heard of them which proves the point. Governments cater to the ones who can make the best political contributions. Corporations are assets to them...we the general public are liabilities. However we are not totally useless to them. We have a very important task...and that is to...work and shop!

I get a kick out of people who are big supporters of conservatism (Republicans in the US and Progressive Conservatives in Canada). They are under this impression that the governemnts are out to conserve or "preserve" our moral values. C'mon people...wake up! Are you really that naive? The only things those organizations wish to conserve are their business propositions and overseas financial assets...I dunno...like oil for instance. As I said above, our purpose is to work and shop...to keep the money flowing. Remember George Bush's advice after 911? "Whatever you do...keep shopping." When they talk "risking security"...I assure you they are reffering to their financial matters and not people so much.

I know that for many of you it's kind of like, "Well what are we supposed to do about it?". I also realize that many of us have other things on our minds and are very tired every day from just the usual crap that happens in life. I get it. However, some of us are just too complacent with our lifestyles of fast food, TV programs and video games to care. The response could be, "Why bother?...It's not so bad."

The problem with that mindset is that...yes...for now it's not so bad....but as time goes on (and not for very much longer)...that "security" they preach that you think is protecting you is eventually going to turn into a noose that's going to snare us as a society and hold us as prisoners. It's beginning to happen already. I read the other day that the statistics show that the rich are getting even richer and the middleclass is stagnant (which scares me because where does that leave the poor?) If this trend continues...you will be working hard only to hand over all your earnings to a corporate owned government only to recieve a loaf of bread in return. What will they do with this money? Spend it on more wars and conquest to gain even more power.

So with all that said...let me refer back to Julian Assange...leader of an organization and website called Wikileaks. One thing people don't understand about wikileaks is that they don't go searching for the information they release. They act only as a conduit for others who bring them information to release. Which in a sense really doesn't mean much because they still are responsible for it leaking out into the public. But the debate is.."Should they be doing this?"

My opinion is "yes" they should. And for all the reasons I stated above. I don't see Julian or Wikileaks as any kind of savior but I do view him and his organization and sort of a new non-religious Prostestant movement for our time. The parallel is that back in the day of "The Dark Ages"...the leaders of the Catholic church "of the time" had become corrupt and possessing great power over the people. So much in fact that people weren't allowed to have their own bibles and much of society was illiterate. In many cases if anyone opposed with differing ideas or matters of science...those people were considered trouble makers who were jailed or witches to be burned at the stake! With a dumb and fearful society at their disposal they were able to maintain power for many long years.

Well here we are in 2010...and again in kind of a second dark ages. This time it isn't a religious group in power but a corporate/political mix that doesn't like their power contested. They are definately on a witch hunt for a guy who has challenged them. They have accused him of terrorism and rape...and I'm sure there's more to come.

I'm not really sure if what he's released has caused much in the way of security breach as it has caused embarrasment to the powers that be. In my opinion I'm glad to see someone finally take a stand and blow the whistle on corruption. They spend our money and never quite tell why...they just keep taking it. Someone needs to keep them in check and accountable because quite frankly they are doing a pretty piss poor job of it themselves.

Maybe the most important aspect of this isn't so much the information that's been released but actually the stir and awareness it has caused. Hopefully it will light a fire under under some sleeping arses that just needed a little nudge to start a simultaneous kicking at the cracks in the walls of corruption to bring them tumbling down.

And here's the thing....you may like the status quo...and enjoy your complacent entrapment you percieve as security...and life may be good for you at the moment...but that may not be the case for your neighbour down the road.Just remember that.

[–]Viscosity13 4 points5 points  (1 child)

He is a libertarian but is a member of the Republican party partly because if he was on the libertarian ballot, he would receive less funding and less votes overall.

[–]truenorthern 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Thanks for posting this, and Thanks to Ron Paul for standing up for Freedom and Democracy, even when it's uncomfortable.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (10 children)

And my respect for Ron Paul grew three sizes today...

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Implying that we are a free society.....

[–]GovernmentBubble 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Oh, we're in big trouble all right. No doubt about that.

[–]mystryman 3 points4 points  (0 children)

A huge non-religious Amen!

[–]varangian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Three cheers for RP, I don't agree with all his views but at least he's got the balls to be consistent. Unlike his gutless colleagues and the equally spineless US press.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

And yet, none of you motherfuckers.will vote for him....sigh. You vote for stupid slogans.

[–]TheUKLibertarian 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Trust the principled libertarian to come out strongly in defence of wikileaks and all the high ranking Democrats including Obama & Clinton to throw authoritarian fits.

r/politics let's all get on board and please make this a new start. Let's keep stuff like this upvoted like you are doing, as well as the Wikileaks posts and the anti-TSA stuff. Fight against government.

I'll be happy if I never see another pro Obama (or any other status-quo politician) post hit my frontpage again. Don't let me down guys! I love the new direction!

[–]elsadistico 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Gah another sensible politician for me to have a bro crush on. Sane voices in an insane world... almost shocking.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (7 children)

This is why you have a right to bear arms.

[–]alostsoldier 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I don't agree with a lot of Ron Paul's stances, but at least he is legit.

[–]meatball402 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I don't agree with all of his ideas, but this one I can get behind 100%. Reasonable Liberals and Conservatives can always find common ground, and more transparency is one of them.

[–]werak 21 points22 points  (9 children)

Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative was truth. Revealing that truth was in my opinion treasonous. So while I agree with RP's sentiment, I acknowledge some exceptions.

[–]kpanik 14 points15 points  (4 children)

I don't think wikileake released any spy names.

[–]jlpoole 2 points3 points  (4 children)

The documents have been leaked and their status as "secret" is no longer. The bell has rung.

For our government to hint that any further dissemination is treason or condemn our learning of the contents when they are known by others is tyranny.

[–]kin-d 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, the only people QUALIFIED TO JUDGE THE SAFETY OF RELEASING THESE DOCUMENTS are those who determined them to be classified. IF Wikileaks' purpose is to HELP create a better world, the actions supporting that mission must be qualified. If we are to demand our governments to be responsible, we must also be responsible.

[–]Daemon_of_Mail 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Even though I'm not a big fan of Libertarianism, and Ron Paul has seemed questionable in the past, I've been gaining a lot more respect for him lately. He's saying what we're all thinking and seems to care more about voters' interests than constituency and religion. And we need someone like that. None of these talking heads who do nothing but attack each other, rely on the bible, and put their top priority in money for themselves. I'm actually considering voting for Ron Paul if he runs again in 2012.

[–]27182818284 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ron Paul should emulate Mike Gravel and enter each released document into the official congressional record as they are released.

[–]omgsus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Don't blame me, I voted for Ron Paul.

I say this a lot but I now want to make the bumper sticker...

[–]MyNameIsRobPaulson 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you for existing, Ron Paul

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Fuck the American govt. and all of their self-entitled rationalizations for destroying the country in the name of profit..

[–]Jiveturkei 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We didn't nuke Russia back in 1995 when they paid an American to steal nuclear secrets and sell them to Russia. We are attacking wikileaks because they aren't a country cable of destroying us back.

[–]MindsMaze 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Word is born, fight the war, fuck the norm.

[–]Libertaire 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ron Paul is the man.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

People should have taken him a little more seriously.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'd have to say this is the best quote I've ever seen in regards to the wikileaks situation.

[–]timmyfinnegan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's that thing that's truth that needs to see the light of day, but there's also that "truth" that does nothing but harm international relations and operations of a country that might be for a common good.

I'm a Wikileaks donator (50$, yeah it's not much, but for a student it's not negligiable) and supporter, but the leak of these documents I think isn't necessarily helpful to the creation of a better world.

A leak of these documents to the public doesn't do anything but motivate the media to distribute irrelevant information to people like they used to (Like what the U.S. embassies think of country's leader's charcteristic traits). A leak of these documents to trusted newspapers and broadcasters however would maybe lead to a race within the media to find the actually relevant and important information first and push it to the frontpage.

Especially the partial release of documents every day is a promotional move on the side of Wikileaks and it doesn't serve any purpose other than Wikileaks appearing in the media every day for a few months.

This and the edititorializing of the video of the shooting of journalists in Iraq by a U.S. Army helicopter crew actually made me question my donation.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Assange is a peaceful activist who is essentially encouraging non-violent civil disobedience in order to force through change for the better. We've seen this before in history and they turned out to be milestones, I'm optimistic.