Why is the U.S. calling Assange a terrorist?

[harborlady]

Originally Posted by Ynot

Everyone is a potential terrorist if you believe everything you read these days, especially if the US Government doesn't agree with you or you choose to fly.

I think the real terrorists are the politicians in DC that say one thing, then do another while holding the US spending bill hostage so they can tack on more wasteful government spending a/k/a pork barrel projects. Big business is running this country and there ain't nothin' you can do about it!

Personnaly, I can't wait to hear what gets released about Bank of America. I'm sure it'll be a crowd pleaser.

Correct. Those defending the Patriot Act do not appear to intend to keep our constitution. Why are both sides defending it? When I have 2 candidates offering me a choice of NAFTA or NAFTA, I've got to say no to both. When I have 2 candidates offering me a choice between 1st amendment defense or 2nd amendment defense, neither are qualified for the job.

[Willsson]

Any agent of information who exposes mis-deeds of governments should be regarded as an international hero. I suspect his accusers wouldn't want to be regarded as terrorists, either.

[robbobobbo]

Originally Posted by LuckyGem

As I said, not all terrorists directly kill and blow themselves up. Terrorists also assist with strategic planning which is indirect. And he absolutely has done that by making classified documents available to the public.

Period.

So all spies are terrorists? Was Aldrich Ames a terrorist?

What about whistleblowers?

Was Seymour Hersh a terrorist when he broke the My Lai story to the world? And Daniel Ellsberg -- terrorist?

What we're seeing is a word misused for political purposes.

[ergohead]

Originally Posted by robbobobbo

So all spies are terrorists? Was Aldrich Ames a terrorist?

What about whistleblowers?

Was Seymour Hersh a terrorist when he broke the My Lai story to the world? And Daniel Ellsberg -- terrorist?

What we're seeing is a word misused for political purposes.

"Another instance will underscore the difficulty of fashioning definitions that fit the intricacies of actual circumstances. Boisjoly's colleague, Allan MacDonald, Morton Thiokol's liaison for the Solid Rocket Booster project at the Kennedy Space Center is not widely known as a whistleblower. Absent from the fateful caucus in Utah, he was on the job at the Kennedy Space Center. However, after the managers in Utah made the recommendation to launch, he continued to argue for delay, saying that if the mission failed, he would not want to have to explain to a board of inquiry the decision to launch. Did he violate procedures or go outside approved channels? It would seem so, but his action did not result in his being labeled a whistleblower."

"If it is a distinguishing mark of actions labeled whistleblowing that the agent intends to force attention to a serious moral problem, both Boisjoly's and MacDonald's responses qualify. This feature is the foundation of the public's interest in whistleblowing. By bringing such serious problems to light, whistleblowers contribute to protecting the public's welfare. There have been instances of serious moral problems that were well known inside companies but did not get exposed for lack of a whistleblower. An example is the DC-10 cargo door problem that was implicated in the crash near Paris which took 346 lives in 1974. Organizations offer settings in which problems with potential for catastrophe can slowly ripen and somehow remain unattended to and unexposed even though many people in those settings are aware of the problems."

Whistleblowing