Chelsea Manning arrested

Dec 2018
2,140
680
New England
#21
One can easily argue that this thinking is a circular and self-rationalizing argument that has been the justification for many government crimes and shameful activities. Secrecy is a fundamental requirement whenever the government is acting in ways that undermine the illusion that the government wants to create.
So often conservatives are willing to trade liberty for illusion of security. Any fabricated "threat" becomes a justification for an opaque government of plutocrats and special interests. "Secrecy" is the reflex excuse and universal rationalization that allows American government to act like a dictatorship.
Consider the Pentagon Papers, the Reynolds Case (United States v. Reynolds - Wikipedia), the "Patriot Act", FISA courts, etc. etc.
So what's your plan, Biff, allow Google to index the NSA's document library?
 
Nov 2018
3,641
1,781
Inner Space
#22
So what's your plan, Biff, allow Google to index the NSA's document library?
The first step is to recognize that extreme defense of state secrecy is the beginning of a dictatorship or autocracy and stop reflexively defending every government action against whistle-blowers or those that disclose state secrets. If we didn't have a government involved in foreign sponsored insurrection and dirty tricks, manipulation of foreign (and our own) media, and development of electronic surveillance in pursuit of American cultural imperialism, then leaks like the Manning stuff would not be an issue. You do realize that the US has more military installations around the world than any other country... we are the new empire nation and that requires secrecy.
 
Apr 2013
36,694
24,946
La La Land North
#23
It is essential that a nation with many enemies in the world maintain the ability -- with proper internal oversight -- to run clandestine operations. To believe that detailed information on our national security apparatus be open to public scrutiny requires a level of foolish naivete that can be fairly labeled as stupidity. We have agents this very minute risking their lives in hostile countries in an effort to keep us safe. Manning's actions could have easily exposed -- and perhaps did expose -- hundreds of them; he ought still to be in jail for his actions.
And what, pray tell, is proper internal oversight in your opinion?
 
Dec 2018
2,140
680
New England
#24
The first step is to recognize that extreme defense of state secrecy is the beginning of a dictatorship or autocracy and stop reflexively defending every government action against whistle-blowers or those that disclose state secrets. If we didn't have a government involved in foreign sponsored insurrection and dirty tricks, manipulation of foreign (and our own) media, and development of electronic surveillance in pursuit of American cultural imperialism, then leaks like the Manning stuff would not be an issue. You do realize that the US has more military installations around the world than any other country... we are the new empire nation and that requires secrecy.
Utter garbage. The mass dumping of sensitive information, as Manning did, is reckless behavior. There are other ways to blow the whistle that don't risk lives.
 
Nov 2018
3,641
1,781
Inner Space
#26
Utter garbage. The mass dumping of sensitive information, as Manning did, is reckless behavior. There are other ways to blow the whistle that don't risk lives.
Of course, there is no better way to justify state secrecy than to claim "lives are at risk". The problem is that the absolute secrecy itself puts lives at risk. They may not be American lives and therefore are not quite as valuable, of course, but lives nevertheless. Any state secret should have a life of no more than 20 years. In that way, there is still time to resolve any wrongdoing. The ultimate rule for bureaucrats to invoke to protect government actions from citizen review is to claim "national security". Really, the entire function of government can be excluded from citizen review under the claim of "national security". The irony of "state secrets" in the fight against tyranny or dictatorships or autocracies is that it makes us just like the governments we oppose.
 
Dec 2018
2,140
680
New England
#28
Of course, there is no better way to justify state secrecy than to claim "lives are at risk". The problem is that the absolute secrecy itself puts lives at risk. They may not be American lives and therefore are not quite as valuable, of course, but lives nevertheless. Any state secret should have a life of no more than 20 years. In that way, there is still time to resolve any wrongdoing. The ultimate rule for bureaucrats to invoke to protect government actions from citizen review is to claim "national security". Really, the entire function of government can be excluded from citizen review under the claim of "national security". The irony of "state secrets" in the fight against tyranny or dictatorships or autocracies is that it makes us just like the governments we oppose.
Biff, I agree with you that there needs to be oversight and that eventually all things should be made public at a time when there isn't a risk of the kind of collateral damage I mention here. But anyway you slice it, a careful, deliberative disclosure of sensitive information is not what Manning did, which is my point.
 
Dec 2018
2,140
680
New England
#29
Like what was happening before Jan, 2019? No thanks.
Are you seriously arguing for immediate, unrestricted access to any government document by any person requesting it? If not, what is the form of oversight you would support?
 
Dec 2016
4,974
2,553
Canada
#30
Are you seriously arguing for immediate, unrestricted access to any government document by any person requesting it? If not, what is the form of oversight you would support?
And what if classified videos are posted showing war crimes being committed? Just look for "Collateral Murder" and you'll know which one got Chelsea Manning in prison/while the killers...as usual go free and actually are all back in the US for many years now. Wonder what they're doing now!
 

Similar Discussions