Tag Archives: wikileaks

Julian Assange is a false hero. No wonder why Libertarians like him.

Libertarians (who, like Assange, hate America), have been portraying Julian Assange as a hero, and his cause as the cause of free speech. They’re mistaken.

Free speech is the right to freely preach and publish YOUR OWN opinions, claims, products, and documents – not those of other people. Even if you discount laws protecting classified information (which was classified for good reasons), there is still copyright law. In no civilized country in the world are you allowed, under any circumstances, to publish other people’s products and documents without the express permission of the author, unless they’ve relinquished copyright or have themselves slated the speicfic products or documents to be published.

In no civilized country in the world are you allowed to publish someone else’s bills, checks, account balance sheets, or private documents. No one except the recipient of a letter is authorized to publish it. There are many people sitting in prisons around the world right now for violation of this legal principle.

As for “secrecy laws”, former SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld refuted this argument on Nov. 30th, 2010, when he wrote on FB: “I was an original co-sponsor of the FOIA in 1966. There is a legal, appropriate way for declassifying information. It is not Wikileaks.”

What Wikileaks, Julian Assange, and Bradley Manning have done is not “fight for free speech”, merely a casual crime, motivated by anti-Americanism, i.e. racism.

Also, I would like to note that:

1) Why the media hoopla about it? What is so extraordinary about these cable docs? The only thing I found out from them, and didn’t know earlier, was that much fewer people have died in Iraq and Afghanistan than what some leftist organizations claimed.

2) These documents are of dubious credibility. They’ve evidently been selected to fit a pre-established goal (to harm Western democracies, including the US), so why wouldn’t they have been doctored or even falsified? They cannot be compared with the original docs. Wikileaks has, to date, published NOTHING that would harm China, NK, Iran, Russia, Cuba, or Venezuela. Wikileaks clearly sympathizes with these countries, and is probably even financed by one of them.

3) Wikileaks is clearly a mere tool for some much more influential player. It has supposedly uploaded thousands of documents on the Net. Do you guys even realize how much time and bandwith it takes to upload any document onto the Net, even a simple picture? I once ran a primitive website about American military aircraft. Uploading a single large picture of a fighterplane took several minutes. Uploading thousands of documents onto the Net during a period of just 4-5 months is too big a task for a small band of crazy hackers. This had to be done by a much bigger, better-financed group.

4) Julian Assange is guilty. Unless he runs away like his fellow anti-American rapist Roman Polanski, he will be tried in Sweden by fair, impartial court, not by a kangaroo court in his beloved Russia, China, NK, or Iran.

5) The Army JAG Corps has charged Manning with “aiding the enemy” under Art. #104 of the UCMJ, but has requested only lifetime inprisonment, not the death penalty. It’s wrong. Manning has leaked thousands of cables to a foreign group led by a guy who hates the US, a group probably sponsored by countries hostile to the US. Thus, he deserves the death penalty.


The treasonous WikiLeaks website, the NYT, the Guardian and Der Spiegel

Once again, the treasonous WikiLeaks website (the website which falsely alleged that an American AH-64 killed civilians in Iraq, even though these “civilians” were armed with AK-47s and an RPG that could’ve shot this helicopter down) has stabbed America and its military, together with the NYT, the Guardian and Der Spiegel.

Yesterday, WikiLeaks harmed America and its military more severely than the Taleban have done during the last 8 years: it has published 500,000 secret files (including war reports) pertaining to the Afghan war. According to the NYT, WikiLeaks did not say where did it get that information from. Nonetheless, the NYT – along with two other extremely liberal publications, the Guardian (the extremely leftist propaganda tube of the British socialist party) and Der Spiegel (which, during the Bush era, claimed that America was not a democratic country) published the information so that their AQ pals and their Taleban friends can use it against the US military.

Even the Obama Administration harshly condemned these leaks (although the information might’ve been stoled by WikiLeaks editors, rather than leaked from the DOD).

Of course, these three publications (the NYT, the Guardian, and Der Spiegel) and the WikiLeaks website are irredeemably biased against America, its military, conservatives, the GOP and conservative policies. That’s why they recklessly published this top-secret information – to harm the US military.

But they’re not just biased – they constitute nat-sec threats to America. Already as early as 2006, one conservative columnist warned that:

“BY NOW IT’S UNDENIABLE: The New York Times is a national security threat. So drunk is it on its own power and so antagonistic to the Bush administration that it will expose every classified antiterror program it finds out about, no matter how legal the program, how carefully crafted to safeguard civil liberties, or how vital to protecting American lives.”

Just like their fellow extremely-liberal newspaper WaPo, these three publications actually threaten the US. The day they become bankrupt will be a day to celebrate.

Recommended articles: http://rightwingnews.com/#post16291;