U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should C-D posters be arrested for re-posting Wikileaks info?
Darn tootin'. Lock up the cyber terrorists. 15 15.15%
No way. Let freedom ring. 80 80.81%
Diggedy. Oh, still not sure. 4 4.04%
Voters: 99. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:11 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,556 posts, read 20,562,758 times
Reputation: 2508

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
If the information is STOLEN any news media outlet airing it SHOULD be held accountable. It is a completely different story if it is GIVEN to the media from a person who has LEGAL access to the information and LEGALLY is allowed to have it.

The media is purposely trying to muddy this up. Wikileaks is IN POSSESSION of STOLEN Classified US Federal property and they know it. End of story.
The Pentagon Papers were classified at the time,giving them to someone else would have been a crime.

Would you have been in favor of charging Ellsberg?

What about Abu Ghraib,better it have stayed classified rather than see the light of day?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:12 AM
 
Location: Lyons, France, Whidbey Island WA
17,370 posts, read 13,797,171 times
Reputation: 9277
Wins the Idiot of the Year Award.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:13 AM
 
19,215 posts, read 14,163,656 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
The Abu Ghraib abuses becoming public was not in the national interest of the USA.

My Lai massacre was not either.

Something to remember when you get all hot and heavy about classified documents and secrecy.

Where did you come up with your conclusions?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:13 AM
 
69,360 posts, read 59,804,454 times
Reputation: 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
I wouldn't call this intellectual property. It is CLASSIFIED GOVERNMENT PROPERTY! Big, big difference there. Intellectual property is like a song or movie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ergohead View Post
What Wikileaks "has", is not "real" property.

1011000000101011101011

Legal Definition of Real Property
Sour didnt claim it was "real" property, they said it was property.. this includes personal property, which is still illegal to steal..

Everything that is the subject of ownership that does not come under the denomination of real property; any right or interest that an individual has in movable things.

Personal property can be divided into two major categories: (1) corporeal personal property, including such items as animals, merchandise, and jewelry; and (2) incorporeal personal property, comprised of such rights as stocks, bonds, Patents, and copyrights.

This would include documents
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:15 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,556 posts, read 20,562,758 times
Reputation: 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by ergohead View Post
Where did you come up with your conclusions?
Because embarassing the USA by showing it in a poor light is not in the nation's interest,or so would go the wisdom of the fedgov.

To keep wearing the white hat,the USA can't be seen to do bad things.

So best we make everything that makes the USA look bad illegal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:15 AM
 
69,360 posts, read 59,804,454 times
Reputation: 9374
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
The Pentagon Papers were classified at the time,giving them to someone else would have been a crime.

Would you have been in favor of charging Ellsberg?

What about Abu Ghraib,better it have stayed classified rather than see the light of day?
The subject isnt if its better or worse, its if its illegal.

For example, if we were to go out and start killing drug dealers and child pedophiles, some would argue society becomes better. That doesnt mean its not illegal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:16 AM
 
16,546 posts, read 12,514,268 times
Reputation: 4234
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
The Pentagon Papers were classified at the time,giving them to someone else would have been a crime.

Would you have been in favor of charging Ellsberg?

What about Abu Ghraib,better it have stayed classified rather than see the light of day?
I'm not saying that this stuff shouldn't be available to the public, but NOT if it is stolen. Where does the rule of law fit into this? What if I stole some of your documents and aired them. Would you call the police and report me for stealing your docs? This is what I mean. If they set a precedence that it is OK to steal documents and put them on the web, then what is going to stop me from doing it to you or anyone else and get away with it? Where does it stop? It's illegal to have an illegal copy of an MP3 but not classified docs? That makes as much sense as BO becoming POTUS.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:18 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,556 posts, read 20,562,758 times
Reputation: 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
The subject isnt if its better or worse, its if its illegal.

For example, if we were to go out and start killing drug dealers and child pedophiles, some would argue society becomes better. That doesnt mean its not illegal.
It is illegal for the individual releasing the classified material,it is not illegal to the person reading it or broadcasting it.

What if the fedgov. started illegally acquiring secret on private individuals in order to coerce them into doing what it wanted,should such information be made known to the people of the USA?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:20 AM
 
16,546 posts, read 12,514,268 times
Reputation: 4234
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
Because embarassing the USA by showing it in a poor light is not in the nation's interest,or so would go the wisdom of the fedgov.

To keep wearing the white hat,the USA can't be seen to do bad things.

So best we make everything that makes the USA look bad illegal.
I think you need to go brush up on LAW 101. You can not have stolen property in your possession. Nobody is making that a new law, that has been the law for as long as I can remember.

Put aside the actual information contained in the docs, HOW wikileaks came into possession of them is illegal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2010, 11:21 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,556 posts, read 20,562,758 times
Reputation: 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
I'm not saying that this stuff shouldn't be available to the public, but NOT if it is stolen. Where does the rule of law fit into this? What if I stole some of your documents and aired them. Would you call the police and report me for stealing your docs? This is what I mean. If they set a precedence that it is OK to steal documents and put them on the web, then what is going to stop me from doing it to you or anyone else and get away with it? Where does it stop? It's illegal to have an illegal copy of an MP3 but not classified docs? That makes as much sense as BO becoming POTUS.
Wikileaks stole nothing,it was given the documents.The individual who did so is being prosecuted.

Unless you think the media should be prosecuted for broadcasting anything it is not given permission to by the fedgov. you are on a slippery slope.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top