Slashdot Mirror
Graduate Students Being Warned Away From Leaked Cables
IamTheRealMike writes "The US State Department has started to warn potential recruits from universities not to read leaked cables, lest it jeopardize their chances of getting a job. They're also showing warnings to troops who access news websites and the Library of Congress and Department of Education have blocked WikiLeaks on their own networks. Quite what happens when these employees go home is an open question." Update: 12/04 17:48 GMT by T : The friendly warning to students specifically cautioned them not to comment online or otherwise indicate that they'd read any of the leaked information; reading them quietly wasn't specifically named as a deal-breaker.
Honestly, if there is nothing to hide, why all the panic? Its like... Well, I'd think of an analogy but I'm hungry.
"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers. "
Seriously treat the problem, don't go shooting the messenger.
Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
Now I want all of these cables specifically because I read the summary. Where can I find them? Are they on The Pirate Bay yet?
I would have been faster but i was busy killing innocent terrorists because I'm American and thus inherently evil
Seems like the cables might be a good excuse to implement full legal media censorship.
Where reading newspapers can jeopardize your job prospects.
one step in the direction of china, yay!
In soviet America, government threaten you! No, err, that seems wrong...
A latent existence
What I'm trying to figure out is how a "potential employer" or whoever will know what I have and have not read.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
The mail doesn't say anything about not reading them, just not posting about them.
I guess they're saying "Don't leave any evidence that you read them"...
Nothing to see here, move along.
Back to the pidgeon stack...
This is getting creepier by the second. And whatever happened to the ever-so-popular "if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide"??
The email (from an alum acting in a non-official role) warns not to make posts about this on Facebook, Twitter, etc. It didn't say "Don't read them." It's really nowhere near as crazy or interesting as the submitter wishes it were.
I saw a weird Outer Limits on that... Oh well, another shot at knowledge and curiosity... Ignorance is strength and bliss...bla bla bla
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Leaked cables are double-plus ungood.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
All they are doing is giving everyone a clothes roller now that the cat is out of the bag. The hair of the dog will still come back to haunt them.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I just look at them from the free wifi at the coffee shop.
Before we all blow up, the warning was from one alum to their alma mater, and was suggesting not to post links to cables and WL on facebook, twitter, etc. because "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" which, honestly, is pretty reasonable. If the State Department is deciding between equally-qualified five candidates, and three have indicated they sympathize with WL, well then the choice is down to two. Just like companies looking at your pictures on facebook before hiring. It sucks but it's true - be responsible with what you say about yourself.
I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
So the state department wants to hire people who are not motivated to seek out information? Oh wait, that's not what TFA says. The state department wants to hire people who know better than to _comment_ on the documents. This is just a special case of what should be common sense: if you want to work for a given company or agency, don't be seen publicly discussing that entity's dirty laundry.
if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide
Then by corollary, they done something wrong. Read harder...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I learned from Benito Mussolini?! Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 21st Century translation... don't pollute your mind or we will find out!
What a dumb thing to do. They just end up looking pathetic. If they try to forbid people to look at this stuff all it does is encourage people to do the exact opposite. Mind you, this still isn't as embarrassing as that "freedom fires" & "patriot toast" episode which was almost as bad as Sarah Palin.
They are deliberately seeking out uncurious and deliberately ignorant people to work for them, as being uncurious and maintaining deliberate ignorance is considered a sign of loyalty.
When you deliberately avoid the best and brightest because you don't trust them to be loyal to you, and deliberately make your institutions stupid, you are a dead country walking.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
I don't live in other countries nor do I really care what they do to their people. I do, however, live in the US and believe that we are a free nation which based in our past history should be held to a much higher standard than Arab countries and North Korea (per your chosen examples).
The people of this country have the power and we should be the ones standing up to the government when they do things that are NOT aligned with what this country is supposed to stand for. Honestly the documents provided by WikiLeaks are nothing exciting to me. All countries do shady shit behind closed doors but what is shocking is the bullshit response to it.
I'm sorry but the reaction is not acceptable and all congressmen and senators who are condemning this by suggesting death should be put to death themselves.
...FUCK YOU and your jack booted, Waco killing, gate raping, false rape/drug accusing setups to get your own way, THUGS!!
Other than that, I love my country and wouldn't trade it for anyplace else.
Please don't shoot me...thanks
your loyal citizen
They said to not post about it in Facebook and the like. The reason why is more self-protection for the students who may want or need a security clearance later on.
If you've ever had to get a higher-end security clearance (I've had them both in the military and as a civilian), you would know just how anal and frustratingly detailed the FBI and DSA can get when it comes to investigating your background (interesting tidbit - if you have a debt that's more than 180 days past due - for any reason, even if you didn't know about it, you get denied. I had a former co-worker get his clearance initially rejected because he never saw the $20.odd account closing fee sent by an old cell phone company to his old address).
As crazy as the investigations can get, coupled with the government's ability to dredge through your online presence over the years, it's common-sense to not go around spouting off about things that the government is obviously going to be sensitive about if you ever expect to work for them in a sensitive role at some point in the future.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
I grew up in Communist Poland from the 1950s to the 1970s. Censorship was a very prevalent phenomenon. But it was never as bad as what we're seeing today in America.
Rarely did we see the state-run libraries outright blocking access to controversial information. They would provide fabricated material, of course, but other content was easily available for those who dug a little bit.
It is completely absurd to see what should be the most prominent purveyors of information of all sorts, especially in a country that claims to value freedoms so much, putting so much effort towards blocking the spread of information!
If I studied political science, international relations or even history, I would definitely be all over these leaks. I can't think of a better source of lessons on how international politics really functions. It may be harder to read than a textbook, but it's real and raw and recent. In fact, if I were a professor of international politics, I'd consider throwing together a graduate seminar where the wikileaks are the primary assigned reading. The government warning would give me pause, and it would be a dealbreaker for my university. But that wouldn't make such a seminar any less good. Why deny American graduate students this understanding, and leave that treasure trove of information to foreign graduate students?
Growing up reading 1984, I always fantasized about being Winston Smith. I wondered what I would do if I were placed in that situation. Now thanks to my government I can finally live out my fantasies. I just want to give a hearty Thank You to Ms Clinton. You have helped make my dreams become a reality.
On a more somber tome, I would ask anyone living in the USA, to please turn off the Red socks game and study up on Rome in the second century A.D. The parallels are uncanny.
-Thanks
-It is not sufficient that I succeed — all others must fail.
-Mother Theressa.
Uhm, I am a grad student, and I will say it right now: I have sent links to articles about the cables, and even to Wikileaks' statement on the cables, to plenty of people. If sending a link to data that is already available to the world is cause to bar me from government work, then I guess I won't be working for the US government.
Palm trees and 8
Maybe it shouldn't be, but it is.
Allowing America's enemies access to the content, but not its own citizens, is madness.
That just says "Be ashamed, we certainly are".
OK, let's say something nice about America ...
"Selecting for the uncurious and deliberately ignorant will ensure continued world domination."
Is that enough? Oh, I forgot:
"U-S-A! U-S-A!"
There, never say I don't do anything for you. Special relationship, don't you know!
http://rocknerd.co.uk
we're screwed.
rj
I just heard the same story from someone who works in government; they've been warned not to discuss anything leaked by wikileaks, even to each other, because nonauthorized disclosure of classified or secret information doesn't make the information unclassified. (OR so they've been told--I don't have time to check the law at the moment. It would be an interesting court case.)
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
The warning very specifically says: "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".
It does NOT say "do not read".
It also gives a reason: "Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information".
Whether or not the documents are effectively no longer confidential is beside the point. The point is whether or not you will babble about information that has not been officially released.
For example: your younger sister told your cousin that she is pregnant; your cousin told you aunt and uncle; and your uncle told you. That doesn't mean that you should comment about the pregnancy to your sister, or to your parents.
If you have a job handling confidential information, you must be discreet in how you handle it, even if you think that it is common knowledge. If you do not have such discretion, you are not a good candidate for such a job.
It is well known that in China, people go to prison for many years for telling foreigners information that is widely and publicly-known. What is less well-known is that this is the case in many other countries, including some that would surprise you (e.g., the UK). Before you go badmouthing the USA, you ought to know what it is like elsewhere in the world.
"It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself--anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face...; was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime..." - George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 5
Fix a typo fer ya.
When the state department is threatening graduate students' free speech rights, yeah, it is time to bash America. We bash China for doing that sort of thing to its citizens, so why is America exempt?
Palm trees and 8
Probably because the US Government, of the people, for the people, and by the people, has no reasonable expectation of privacy. The 4th Amendment protects us from the government, not the government from us.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I don't see any US bashing here. I see a little bashing of idiots within the government of the united states. Totally separate, like how I can say that I disagree with many things Bush did and disagree with many things Obama is doing, but that doesn't make me racist against white and black people.
This is exactly the time to bash "America". For starters, fucking learn what country you in. You are in the United States of America, not America. Now that your Geography lesson of the day is out of the way, let's continue:
If you do not respect the sacrifices made by your ancestors for the freedom you enjoy today, you will lose it. You don't deserve it, you are scum.
Since you do not respect the freedom of speech so many people died for, tomorrow you live in a fascist state. Get used to being called a supporter of fascism, because that's what you are.
Finally, there are any number of legal precedents that you and yours, your lovely ignorant kin, pressed onto this country, losing hundreds of years of gained ground since Britain had a king that could do whatever the fuck he wanted to, to anyone he fucking wanted to do it to. Now you want a dictator, you want your Congress burned to the ground, and guess what you're fucking going to get.
Just keep shoving the toothpaste back into the tube
Ah, just another beautiful blue sky day in China. Wait, where am I?
O my god, the US is turning into a China type country.
No big surprize, but the DoD is doing this as well. Ironically, I don't think it's having the effect they wanted; at least one of my coworkers asked me if I knew what wikileaks was, and I told her it was the digital equivalent of the Pentagon Papers.. Needless to say, I can almost guarantee she looked up wikileaks at home that night. All I can say is, if they want to turn away job applicants who are curious, inquisitive and willing to do research on their own time, they will reap what they sow.
It sound like to CIA, FBI and friends won't be around for much longer, since there is probably not a potential young adult in the US who hasn't been tweeting and posting plenty of stuff they themselves will be embarrassed by in a few years. (obviously I am being facetious; they aren't going to go away, but they will have to evolve and change their criteria to survive)
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
There are a lot of fucked up places in the world. Your might not be the worst of them, but as of lately it's far from ideal.
People used to be very proud of that America is the "Land of the Free", not that "It's better than North Korea". If that's what it's supposed to be, why do you keep trying to divert the attention by pointing to some hole like North Korea? Shouldn't you be working tirelessly to uphold that ideal, no matter how much shittier some other place might be?
You're in the US (I assume from your message), and you're in the position to make it less fucked up. So your dirty laundry suddenly got exposed. Don't whine about people noticing the stains, don't point to your neighbour's, but do the proper thing and clean it up.
Why are you even at a computer posting this stuff? You're wasting valuable time when you could be worshipping the flag and thanking God for honest politicians to do all your thinking for you. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.
I'm not sure you've thought this through.
Does this mean that anybody that reads the cables is ineligible for the draft? Where do I get my copies?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
wikileaks
I mean, after all the f*cking around that has been exposed, they may have trouble recruiting. They may even have to institute a draft.
And then we can add another verse to Alice's Restaurant.
Have gnu, will travel.
America, as far as at least one of the founders would be concerned, no longer exists.
"[If a book were] very innocent, and one which might be confided to the reason of any man; not likely to be much read if let alone, but if persecuted, it will be generally read. Every man in the United States will think it a duty to buy a copy, in vindication of his right to buy and to read what he pleases."
--
"The liberty of speaking and writing guards our other liberties."
--
"No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues to truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions."
--
"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."
-– Thomas Jefferson
Remember - the bastard in the government WORK FOR US. I agree - we have an obligation to know what they are doing.
Unless it is really a mater of protecting immediate risk to life, then we should know what is going on.
Couldn't agree with ya more.
..........FULL STOP.
De-jure government gave the documents to Julian to sanitize into a culture-acceptable medium for reading, while the de-facto government is trying to accuse everyone of being a pirate.
The real question is, do you know the difference?
Government isn't a party to the Constitution.
and I have been specifically told by our gov't security folks that if I access Wikileaks (either via my work computer or my home computer) I will lose my security clearance. I can understand them making a rule not to view it at work and taking away someone's clearance if they do it anyway, but I really don't see how they can legally take away someone's clearance for looking at a website on their home computer that basically ever major news outlet has shown screenshots of.
I don't want to live in China. Whether wikileaks is good, bad, right, wrong, or ugly, if we endorse the self-protectionist nature of the PRC govornment domestically and internationally, if we deny the truth in intellectualism in our graduate schools, then we have ourselves fearfully denied the truth of human nature to seek improvement through understanding and expansion through creativity.
That societies and the global community will have difficulty digesting the recent events does not mean that we shouldn't learn to cope with what is merely a more true revelation of where our mutual interests exist and where our relationships are perhaps thinner than we believe ourselves capable of addressing.
"There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell them." ~ Louis Armstrong
The State Dept's privacy goals are not to maintain secrecy against its citizens per se, but to ultimately keep things secret from other countries and their govts, who
Suppose WW2 was going on, and you were threatening to leak the D-Day plans to the other country. Does everybody on this side of the ocean have a right to get mad at you and string you up on the nearest lamp-post? Of course they do.
Suppose you were Klaus Fuchs, and you were going to leak the secrets of the atomic bomb to another country. Does everybody over here have a justification to get mad at you for it? Sure they do. Stealing from the public and defending it as mere theft from the "big, bad state" doesn't change the fact that the public has been shortchanged.
Nobody has automatic right to credibility, and if you are seen by others as being against society, then they have a right to kick you out. Freedom of dissociation is a freedom as well.
Your government grew, and became hugely inefficient at serving anyone but itself. How can this not be clear when it is actively working to deny me and you access to information that paints it in a negative light?
Whether you believe it's a threat to national security that this sort of information gets leaked or not, actions like this one show that corruption runs deep, and it won't just stop by itself. Corruption is much like cancer: it doesn't retreat on it's own, and as history has shown many times over, there's hardly a way to remove it without collateral damage.
That unfortunate truth is what corrupt politicians cling on, so to make it look like the people fighting corruption are actually the villains, and divert our attention from the fact that the reason why Wikileaks (and other groups) came to be in the first place was because they're the response to an existing problem. One that won't go away without a fight, and that will ultimately destroy your country from the inside, because that's what corruption does. Read on the history of Rome for an example.
I have spent the last week running searches trying to figure out WTF a cable is or how it could possibly describe a document. Any one?
So, there's a way to responsibly participate in US politics and also guarantee that I can't get a government job later? Sounds like a great deal, but what's the catch?
To talk about the illegal activities of the United States government is illegal. It could cost you your job and your freedom.
Exactly how is this different from what China does with material it deems inappropriate for public consumption?
If there really is an immediate risk to life, then it was probably built on the wrong foundation to start with if it requires secrecy. While maintaining said secrecy may save a life or few, what is the long term cost? Could it very likely cause more harm or death?
Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
Sounds a lot like the Church of Scientology's warnings against it's low level parishoners against listening to leaked CoS documents, lest it corrupt their unconditioned minds.
Slashdot is not a game, Slashdot is not a game. Crap, I just lost points.
The last thing they want for a government job is someone well-informed. Let all the outsiders, within your borders and beyond, read all the cables they want. Just so long as your young prospective employees have no clue, you're okay!
How would this work in the tech world?
``We can't hire you because you know too much about our technology from leaked documents. Please send your resume to our nearest competitor.'' :)
If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. – Thomas Jefferson
Yeah, forget the man who wrote the declaration of idependence, the words he used and intended are not being followed, this is obvious to anyone who studies history. This great "free" nation lost the notion that they were of the people when Adams was in office and has since never regained it.
The military industrial establishment is not just contra to the constitution, but contra to the very fundamentals it was created to protect. Don't pretend this isn't the case, it just makes you seem foolish. Besides, who's law are you referring to? If you mean international law, by recent history it seems they want people who will wantonly ignore it, not comply with it... or do you mean the laws they patently refuse to interpret with the same meaning the men who wrote the majority of the constitution instilled it with? It's somewhat asinine to think a group of men who just fought against a police state would have wanted the people of their nation unaware of their diplomatic dealings. It is completely counter to what an open society needs, openness.
These cables are going back as far as 1966, the Iranian position paper was incredibly insightful for anyone interested in middle east politics. Why would that not be something graduate students who are looking to enter the diplomatic service would read?
Your quoting makes it look like he is threatening his own self. Which could be true unless he is not a senator or congressman.
Nothing much more to say about that. The US government is panicking, and while their at it, they mimic the worst enemies of freedom of speech.
which is affiliated with SLAC, an academic research DOE lab that is run by my university. We were just warned about accessing wikileaks using government resources. I wonder why they haven't warned against accessing news sources who have published the cables? The email follows:
To: SLAC Staff and Community
Subject: Do Not Access wikileaks.org Using Government Resources
The Department of Energy has determined that anyone using a DOE resource to access wikileaks.org poses a serious security risk. An extract from an official DOE communication is included here:
-----
Any users navigating to wikileaks.org will pose a serious risk of introducing classified information to an unclassified machine. Clem Boylston, CISO for the Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence sent out a note to the community stating, “Any document that is on an Internet web site that is purported to be classified cannot be downloaded to an unclassified computer system without contaminating the unclassified computer system (i.e., a spill).” In this case, “downloaded” would not only mean the actual process of saving it to the hard drive, but also the simple case of viewing it as the information is cached on the local machine when doing so.
Anyone using their DOE computer to view the purported classified information posted on the website would merit involvement to the appropriate DOE authorities for a full review and analysis of severity
-----
Accordingly, no SLAC resource (i.e., computer, network, VPN, SLAC wireless) may be used to access or assist in accessing wikileaks.org by any SLAC staff member or visitor.
When leading politicians in the worlds only remaining superpower calls for fatwas against people they disagree with, then yeah, you do begin to worry.
Besides, Bush isn't president anymore, Obama is. He was elected on a platform to increase government transparency. But the way his government has handled the wikileaks situation pretty much proves nothing has changed.
Football Odds
its like china censoring their Tienanmen square thing. now our government is trying to censor the truth.. this isnt even a freedom of speech issue now, its a freedom of thought issue..
when are we going to stop calling ourselves a republic? (i guess we already did)
From: DOECAST [mailto:DOECAST@hq.doe.gov]
Sent: Fri 12/3/2010 14:13
To: undisclosed-recipients
Subject: NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES AND CONTRACTORS CONCERNING SAFEGUARDING OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND USE OF GOVERNMENT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES AND CONTRACTORS
CONCERNING SAFEGUARDING OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION
AND USE OF GOVERNMENT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS
The recent disclosure of U.S. Government documents by WikiLeaks has resulted in damage to our national security. Each federal employee and contractor is obligated to protect classified information pursuant to all applicable laws, and to use government information technology systems in accordance with agency procedures so that the integrity of such systems is not compromised.
Unauthorized disclosures of classified documents (whether in print, on a blog, or on websites) do not alter the documents' classified status or automatically result in declassification of the documents. To the contrary, classified information, whether or not already posted on public websites or disclosed to the media, remains classified, and must be treated as such by federal employees and contractors, until it is declassified by an appropriate U.S. Government authority.[[1] Executive Order 13526, Classified National Security Information (December 29, 2009), Section 1.1.(c) states, "Classified Information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information."1]
Federal employees and contractors therefore are reminded of the following obligations with respect to the treatment of classified information and the use of non-classified government information technology systems:
Except as authorized by their agencies and pursuant to agency procedures, federal employees or contractors shall not, while using computers or other devices (such as Blackberries or Smart Phones) that access the web on non-classified government systems, access documents that are marked classified (including classified documents publicly available on the WikiLeaks and other websites), as doing so risks that material still classified will be placed onto non-classified systems. This requirement applies to access that occurs either through agency or contractor computers, or through employees’ or contractors’ personally owned computers that access non-classified government systems. This requirement does not restrict employee or contractor access to non-classified, publicly available news reports (and other non-classified material) that may in turn discuss classified material, as distinguished from access to underlying documents that themselves are marked classified (including if the underlying classified documents are available on public websites or otherwise in the public domain).
Federal employees or contractors shall not access classified material unless a favorable determination of the person's eligibility for access has been made by an agency head or the agency head's designee, the person has signed and approved non-disclosure agreement, the person has a need to know the information, and the person has received contemporaneous training on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be imposed on an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure.
Classified information shall not be removed from official premises or disclosed without proper authorization.
Federal employees and contractors who believe they may have inadvertently accessed or downloaded classified or sensitive information on computers that access the web via non-classified government systems, or without prior authorization, should contact their information security offices for assistance.
Thank you for your cooperation, and for your vigilance to these responsibilities.
------------
[1] Executive Order 13526, Classified National Security Information (December 29, 2009), Section 1.1.(c) states, "Classified Information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information."
If you DONT have security clearance, you are allowed to do what is not proscribed. To view classified material, or to discuss such material, would not be a violation of any law, regulation, or policy of the United States government, or any subdivision thereof, for those without security clearance, or under the influence of some pretty ambiguous general orders for military personnel.
A person is only bound by these rules for classification AFTER they have security clearance, not before. This is obviously because these rules are an anathema to rights of the citizen, and can only be waived by the citizen, and until they are waived they are in full force.
This is a nation of laws, as set by Congress, implemented by the President, and interpreted by the Supreme Court, as well as their subordinate subdivisions. Denying someone security clearance for unauthorized purposes or incorrect reasons is likely against departmental policy, regulation, or law, and as such any attempt to do so consciously and willingly would be insubordination, or a crime or some other infraction. Insubordination, as you may well know, is a pretty big offense within defense circles.
We received the same warnings....
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Isn't it great, that threads like this can turn into open season on America and everyone can bash the shit out of the USA.
Whereas, even the contents of the Wikileaks (itself a very anti-American biased group) files show how fucked up the rest of the world is, and especially the Arab countries and North Korea.
But let's ignore that and continue to blame Bush. Err... I mean the US.
Nobody is blaming US, just the US govt.
You really think asking US diplomats to obtain card numbers and DNA sample of the UN personnel is ethical/moral/acceptable (as opposed to fucked up)?
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Not a reason, per-se, but the rationale behind not looking a potentially classified information that came through multiple channels is the same problem you have with urban myths. Suppose it is your job to try to figure out some problem and you have multiple sources of information which have various degrees of accuracy and multiple channels from which that information came. If you weighted the validity of the information by the number of channels you got that information from that wouldn't give you a very reliable estimate would it? The information needs to be judged on the source only, not the channel from which it came for several reasons. First, the channels may or may not be reliable (probably not the problem in this case), secondly, the channels may be selective (e.g., google cherry-picked wmd)...
Unfortunatly, it's very hard for human beings to weight the source w/o unintentionally weighting the channels. Deliberatly informing yourself with multiple channels of information might seem a good way to get a better read of the "unfiltered" truth, but in reality, it doesn't seem to be the case. This is somewhat analgous to not having jurors watch the news when they are sitting for a trial. You may ask, how does it hurt to get more information from other channels, esp when they are public, however, people aren't very good at sorting through this as a general rule, so it's best not to have them "polluted" with multiple channels of information.
As a very stupid example, say there was a person, lets call him John, who was in a situation where 8 out of 10 of his friends told him there were 5 lights, and a couple of his friends said there were 4 lights and John saw 4 lights. John may choose to make a judgement that that incorporates the fact that there were 5 lights despite having direct access to the source of the information himself that there are in fact 4 lights... ;^)
Sometimes information from multiple channels won't actually help... Sure this is a rationale, and not a reason, but it's my take on a reasonable rationale...
The real reason may be a primitive loyalty test (kind of like how you get into a gang), are you loyal enough to not look at wikileaks because "we" said so, well if so you aren't loyal enough, then you can't get into the "gang", but that doesn't make the rationale invalid (it just means it isn't the reason).
Wonder if all of this is legit, i mean it could be a good vehicle for misinformation, include some crucial yet manufactured info which would mean nothing to any but a crucial few that
may be looking for it
The information is out there. To tell some one to not read it is to put them at an informational disadvantage. I would want every one at Department of State to know whats in there, because every other countries equivalent of the Department of State will know whats in there.
All persons belonging to organizations are assumed to speak for the entire organization. Also, all quotes in blogs are assumed to reflect what the quoted person actually said, even when two blogs contradict each other on what the person said (both are true, cognitive dissonance be damned!!).
"I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
Only those with security clearances, or those in situations where they are under orders that say as much and they have implicitly agreed, can be proscribed from activities which are Constitutionally protected. Constitutionally protected meaning 1st Amendment activities. Military personnel likely fall under this. This likely aimed at those under such restrictions, which really could be quite prevalent for all I know, but I doubt it.
The rules for security clearances have been implemented by the President of the United States and Congress and the Supreme Court. Any decision by those carrying out their duties that contradicts these rules are guilty of insubordination, if not crimes. If a person consciously or willingly denies or allows security clearance outside of the policy, this is likely insubordination. Any recommendation to commit insubordination is likely insubordination. So it really depends on what the policy is, and the law.
...with a more limited and distorted spun-for-the-public view of the intrigues of the world....
Uncle Sam wants you for the State Department!
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
The Slashdot headline is misleading. No one's warning them not to read the cables. The warning says: "DO NOT post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter."
Kind of a "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy?
The crimes of eBay are a disgrace to it's pig latin heritage!
I can't fathom why the government is spending so much effort trying to shove all this back into Pandora's Box. The info is out, will stay out, and there's nothing they can do about. Pursuing third parties like Wikileaks is of minimal use as well. At the root of it all is this: If a low-ranking intelligence analyst has easy access to a gigantic range of information that not in the slighted related to the task he was given, it's indicative of some pretty enormous opsec failures. I would have thought information like this would have been controlled and compartmentalized better than it apparently was.
No, I'm not an intelligence agent... but I do play EVE Online.
The message does not say "do not read". This is factually false.
The message does say "do not post links about".
In other words, on your facebook page, you should probably not post messages like: "LOL Mohammad, check out this SECRET NOFORN message about a bunch of crazy politicians from your country!" As the message says (and anyone should agree with), doing so does not signal a strong attitude of respecting confidentiality of information. And if there is a background check on you this will include your online activities.
I understand that some believe in openness and honesty at any 'cost' and that's a legitimate argument. But your argument is that it needed to happen because something dirty needed to be exposed and that's not true.
This isn't even a joke anymore.
.
Read your Red Pravda or your Blue Pravda, and like it, citizen
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Makes it seem more like damage control than vetting candidates.
Wouldn't the state department want to know if an individual has issues dealing with confidential information?
If something like that comes up in a background check - i.e, posted links on facebook - it would be a good clue that the candidate should not be hired, at least according to these terms. (Never mind whether commenting on a big news story really means anything about ability to keep stuff secret)
But if candidates are specifically told "Don't do this, or you won't get a job", then their compliance with the suggestion no longer reflects their attitude towards confidential information in any way, just their level of stupidity. Or defiance, I guess. But not how good they will keep secrets.
In any case, it's being presented almost as a vetting procedure to filter out unwanted candidates, but the goal seems to really be trying to stop people from talking about it in general. And who can blame them. Although I think that's a losing battle.
The first rule about Wikileaks is that you do not talk about WIkileaks. The second rule about Wikileaks is you do not talk about WIkileaks!
I won't bother reading the leaked cables, I'll just wait for the misleading headlines and form my opinions by scanning those...
Wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair and all the terrible things that happen to us, come because we actually dese
Welcome to America! We're slightly less shitty!
What are you talking about? There is plenty to hide ... it's a collection of classified documents after all, documenting things like secret back-door negotiations. This sort of thing is just a part of political maneuverings, e.g. making a secret deal with one nation that might upset another, or giving a concession in a trade agreement that might harm reelectability, or turning a blind eye to a minor violation of international law. Plenty to hide.
The issue of transparency is not an easy one. Wikileaks argues that there's too much happening behind closed doors and that much of it is unacceptable. The US Government obviously argues that it's merely the way things work, a means by which to save face and get real work done. The best solution is somewhere in the middle.
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
The summary says "The US State Dept has started to warn potential recruits from universities not to read leaked cables..." but this is not the case. Students applying for jobs in the federal government are simply warned not to post links to the information on social media/networking sites; the documents are still technically classified, so directing people to them won't look good when applying for a job in which you might be trusted with classified information. Not an unreasonable warning at all, as opposed to the ridiculous scenario implied by the misleading summary.
It occured to me just the other day, while reflecting on this recent wikileaks incedent and the previous one, on the gouvernments trying to stop the stuff from spreading and their futile attempts at doing so: Wikileaks and the socialogical processes tied to its concept are yet another big step forward into the age of cyberpunk.
National borders fuzzying up, borders between cultures tilting from the vertical lines between landscapes into the horizontal layers of societies stacked with the metropolitain areas of the world, the rapidly dimishing importance of a production society and the vastly growing importance of knowledge and contacts. Subculture groups nobody in 'mainstream' has ever heard of gaining political power and significance within weeks or even days, anonymous individuals and rag-tag tribes rapidly forming doing something with a solid political and international impact and disbanding inmediately after. Think about it: Wikileaks is no real-world Nation, yet their actions have a measurable impact on politics. You can't even pinpoint the people controlling it. Assange is just a figurehead that can be replaced by anonymous at a moments notice.
It is called the Age of Cyberpunk, and it is dawning as we speak. And no matter what the powers that be do to try and stop it, it is gaining momentum and tracktion day by day. Interesting times indeed.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
"... scared shitless", and don't want "internal strife" amongst the ranks. What a pack of freaking idiots they are. That's the type of thing that will only make folks read it all the more. I think that Julian Assange and crew over at wikileaks have them quaking in their boots. Look at them trying any damned thing they can to "disparage" Assange's character (and failing. When I saw the alleged "rape" charge, I was like "how damned obvious can you stupid shits in gov't. be for cripes sake - talk about obvious "setup"". The rest of what's going on such as driving he from hosting provider to hosting provider doesn't look good either (though as Amazon said, he's the target of DDOS, so that's believable as a plausible cover story at least (heh, "leave it to geeks" to figure a good one out here on this account at least)), but this puts the icing on the cake, as to whom is guilty of what and trying their best to "cover it up" and failing... badly! Personally here, in closing? I think that what Assange is going to uncover is going to "blow the lid" off the garbage can (that is truly full of human garbage, the worst kind (the type that live off taxpayer money and kickbacks from their wealthy corporate masters (politician scum)) and expose the fact that the USA is no longer and hasn't been for decades, a democracy. This is going to show a lot of folks that we are in fact, living in a corporate dictatorship/corporatocracy.
I think anyone who is taking a serious interest in a government career SHOULD be perusing Wikileaks, and any other important governmental matters. We need more smart, well-informed people working for the people, to replace the navel-gazing two-faced cowards that are so ingloriously featured in these leaked cables. These hypocrites are the true enemies of democracy, and their successors should learn from past mistakes, lest we repeat them.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
I didn't read anything in wikileaks about secret unethical US government activity.
So requesting US diplomats to acquire credit card numbers and biometric data doesn't count as unethical activity in your book? A foreign country politely invites US diplomats to their land to negotiate in a spirit of goodwill and trust - and the second they arrive, Hillary Clinton instructs the US diplomats to crawl around collecting saliva and hair clippings - and you consider that ethical behavior?
US citizens seriously need to take a long hard look at the adversarial way that their elected representatives are approaching diplomatic relations. The current US policies seem designed to destabilize certain parts of the world, rather than to create a lasting peace.
You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
I think a lot of people are missing the point, while ranting about the hypocrisy and perceived evils of the government's actions. While these may be valid points, that's not what the email is advocating.
The email is essentially just saying that in order to work for the State Department, it's very useful to be able to set aside logic, reason, and rationality, and blindly follow orders, no matter how idiotic you may perceive them to be (and conversely, the inability to refrain from participating in actions which help further the cause of freedom and might embarrass the government can be a career limiting move there). To that extent, it's good advice; based on my experience, I would also recommend that if you value freedom and transparency in government, you probably shouldn't be working for "them".
Think of how hard it would be to grope children in the TSA if you couldn't turn off the part of your brain which screamed about how it's a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment which does nothing for security and just increases government oppression; this is the same kind of thing. If you can't be a good soldier and follow orders, no matter how morally questionable or asinine they might be, you're probably not a good candidate for government office, especially in the State Department.
Once, something classified leaked to the internet and was reported all over various web sites. A guy I knew, who was in the military and his coworkers all were looking at CNN or whatever and saw this. When their LT found out, he wanted to wipe all of the computers who had ever went to CNN.com or wherever because, after all, they had classified information on them. Likewise, I had another friend who worked on a really super-secret project that they were never allowed to mention involved satellites... until Dan Quayle accidentally told the press that their program involved satellites. Then, that became unclassified, because, what else are you going to do?
At this point, they might as well declassify all the documents. There is no longer a threat to our national security if they are revealed because they have already been revealed.
So the americans are becoming more like china, start blocking people's access to the web, maybe they'll setup a great firewall themselve.. this is ridiculous
"They say there is strangeness too dangerous
In our theaters and bookstore shelves
That those who know what's best for us
Must rise and save us from ourselves"
Neal Peart, Rush, _Witch Hunt_
Part of the Second American Revolution!
Seriously fuck that. We all cry foul when China blocks sites and info and if American's don't stand up and actually make their voices heard I have ZERO interest in remaining in this country.
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
A search of logs won't find any wikileaks urls ...
wikileaks
Two terms for you: "transparent HTTP proxy" and "reverse DNS".
Anyone who can log your browsing can do both.
The false sense of privacy you offer is worse than no privacy at all.
It is time for far greater transparency in government. Sure, revelations involving bad deeds will embarrass a few and cause others to lose their positions. But maybe we can build better relationships with other nations by simply being honest and open with all of them. There is simply no need for all of the secrets and double dealing that goes on.
I want a Babe Ruth kind of government. We need not fear truth and openness. The Babe pointed a the spot and knocked the damn ball out of the park. When it comes to foreign relations do exactly the same thing. Be fair. Be reasonable and tell all nations exactly what we intend to do no matter whether they throw us their best fast ball or not. We spend more on our military than any nation on Earth. Why must we having lies and false diplomacy when no nation should be able to harm us in any way. And if they can harm us why do we spend huge sums on our military. It is like declaring we are an economic giant while people can not even find enough of a job to keep food on the table. Seems to me we have become economic midgets.
RTFA folks! The summary is, at best, misleading. From TFA:
"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."
The request is to not PROPAGATE the material; note that there isn't even a suggestion to not READ the material.
I support Wikileaks, but under the circumstances the State Department's position in this matter seems reasonable.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Take a look at some twitter trends which shows that with the exception of the FIFA world cup announcement, these leaks dwarf sport. Even in the FIFA case, WikiLeaks has come into play with some commenters in the UK calling Russia a "mafia" state (two British papers Guardian daily sun, Google has plenty more). The NFL was beat out by WikiLeaks last Sunday and at the rate things are going it will be beat out again this week. Even the generic term football gets beat out except for the FIFA case.
Take this all with a grain of salt, but I believe this shows that WikiLeaks news is getting out despite all efforts against it.
Something else to note, I'm not sure how often this happens on twitter trends, but take a look at how constantly WikiLeaks is being mentioned. Its regularly around 0.5% up through 2.1% of all tweets, averaging roughly at 1%. This is over the course of close to 6 days and counting! Has a topic been this popular on twitter before?
The most interesting thing about this whole Wikileaks story is how it's exposed the corporate government as being exactly what we feared they had become.
If only for that, Assange will be assured status as a hero. He has been able to get the corporate-intelligence state to drop the mask of "democracy" and show their true face.
It's all been unfolding so fast that very few people have processed the meaning of Wikileaks and the power structure's response. But we're quickly learning who's who in the world and whom is dancing to who's tune.
It's interesting that there was almost no response from the government and law enforcement until it was announced that Wikileaks' next batch of leaks was from Citibank. Suddenly, the FBI, CIA and Interpol are involved and Assange is Public Enemy Number 1. Very interesting. When it was just foreign affairs, relations between superpowers and the military it wasn't that big a problem, but mess with the money boys and we go to Defcon IV.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Dude! Everyone who has any government security clearance is getting told to stay away from Wikileaks on both business computers and personal computers. That's a directive that came down from the DoD. I can understand their shock, but the posture towards this leaked information is all wrong. It seems that they seem fine continuing the the posture they had when the Pentagon Papers were leaked. The reality is that there is nothing I've read (from new organizations, not Wikileaks) about this information that makes it any sort of "smoking gun." Anyone who gets the news from more than a set a fake tits should have already known a few basic things: 1) The leaders of the Arab countries are very concerned about disarming Iran. They are also very opportunistic and are fine having the US do the dirty work for them 2) Many US diplomats to Europe do a spectacular job of misrepresenting us and the other side to us. 3) Hamid Karzai is running Afghanistan like a cheap bar with shitty patrons and we're the bouncers even though we aren't getting a cut on the deal. 4) Everyone hates everyone else for significant asshattery. Friends and enemies alike are spying on each other. Compared to the Pentagon Papers, we were learing alot about the lies fed to us from the government. This information is just federal gossip. If the US government was truly serious about quashing this scandal, they'd treat us like adults and just get on the level and say that they're duping us because we need to win our political war, I think this would go away a lot faster.
Mod me down, I shall become more off-topic than you could possibly imagine.
You want to wiretap the whole nation but when someone just looks at the tip of the iceberg as to what you got you go all crazy....I have no doubt that the CIA is looking to assassinate some people over this. Well I say if the government wants to wiretap the whole nation they deserve what they are getting and more. I wish all the hackers/leakers/etc. well and hope they pump the governments of the world dry of information....
M: ..lest you continue in your quotations and mention the name of the
"Scottish Play".
K: Oh-ho... never fear, I shan't do that. (laughs)
E: By the "Scottish Play", I assume you mean *Macbeth*.
(The actors perform a ritual warding off of bad luck.)
As: Aahhhhh! (slapping each others hands, pat-a-cake fashion) Hot potato,
off his drawers, pluck to make amends. (pinch each others noses)
Aaahh!
E: What was that?
K: We were exorcising evil spirits. Being but a mere butler, you will not
know the great theatre tradition that one does *never* speak the name
of the "Scottish Play".
E: What, *Macbeth*?
As: Aahhhhh! Hot potato, off his drawers, pluck to make amends. Ohhh!
E: Good lord, you mean you have to do *that* every time I say *Macbeth*?
If you have a security clearance, you are not allowed to talk about classified materials, even if you only know of those materials from an out of channel source (the news).
So now you're at a party, and everybody except you is discussing wikileaks. You have your fingers stuck in your ears. Oops, you just confirmed that the materials are really classified!
Boyo gets a double derp doesn't he.
Once the other governments have read it, what difference does it make if everybody else reads it then?
People at the State Dept might know what goes on at the State Dept? Thats supposed to be bad?
Considering these cables are on every news site and on TV it's no longer classified by law. They can try and pretend like it's still classified but it's not. Once it's saturated in the media and millions of people know about it all over the world it's public information.
If you have a security clearance, you are not allowed to talk about classified materials, even if you only know of those materials from an out of channel source (the news). You are also not allowed to seek out classified material that you do not need to know. If a person has had access to classified material without authorization beforehand, it can complicate the process of gaining a security clearance.
If the enemy can read it, if all your friends can read it, if everybody except you can read it, then you are at a disadvantage. It's a situation where the information is classified on paper but not in practice and to ask people not to read the Newspaper or go to their favorite websites is a bit ridiculous.
As for asking people not to seek out classified information that makes sense. In this case nobody has to seek it out, it's pretty much everywhere, even Larry King was talking about it with Putin.
What does this have to do with your ability to follow rules? I guess they give you this rule just to see if you can follow it. So follow the rules even if they don't make any sense.
And I hope for your sake that the majority of you went home and did just that. If your employer is trusting you with a security clearance but it's not trusting you with publically available data, it means that they are suffering from schizophrenia and you should call an ambulance.
If the employer tells you these are the rules, you follow the rules. They don't have to make sense. It's just to see whether or not you can follow senseless rules which is part of the military lifestyle.
If he works for the feds and has a security clearance he absolutely must follow orders. It's the same system for civilians as it is for the military, if you get ordered not to do X then you can't do X. It does not matter why, it's because the chain of command says so.
So if they say you can't read or discuss wikileaks then you cant and shouldn't. I don't think it makes a lot of sense because it will make the people who don't talk about it stand out, but if it's a direct order "Do not discuss or read wikileaks", that has to be followed.
Rap News: WikiLeaks vs The Pentagon -- Exclusive: WikiLeakshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob7vcepdeOA
Everyone is talking about how the government should be held accountable but what is forgotten is that even the media has to be accountable to someone.
The fifth estate (media) has journalists who are accountable to their editors, their readership and other journalists but who is this wikileaks accountable to? Who watches the watchers?
Accountability is what keeps the media from becoming a vigilante without a moral/ethical compass.
Assange is a dangerous vigilante who is not interested in keeping people honest but rather to make a quick buck and hurt whoever he needs to in order to further his own personal agenda.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
If you can't talk about it, which makes sense. Sure you shouldn't talk about it if you can avoid it but if you actively avoid talking about something then people will question why everyone is talking about it but you.
So if it's supposed to be a secret that you work for the State Dept, in situations like these it becomes obvious who works for the State Dept or the government in general. Do you know anyone who hasn't been willing to discuss Wikileaks?
exactly what cults do to control information.
"Is that real poncho or a Sears poncho?" ~~FZ
What if you discuss Wikileaks because you don't sympathize with it?
If they are saying it's illegal to discuss it thats not the same as sympathizing with it.
Nobody is saying the government should hire Wikileaks sympathizers as that would be stupid. The problem is most people aren't going to know every obscure law regarding classified information so only individuals who have been briefed or who have clearance will know they can't discuss Wikileaks.
Now of course if you agree to protect a secret or not to discuss it then you should be held accountable.
If they don't have a security clearance and they haven't read the security forms how exactly would they "know better"?
Basically it's like saying if you wear these shoes made in China you might sympathize with the Chinese so you can't be hired in the federal government. Why? Because some obscure law in some form that 99.9% of Americans have never seen says so.
What else are college grads going to do when theres 9% unemployment?
US response to China's control over Google?!
It is very hard to tell the difference here.
Both wish to be in some control over information.
Become a citizen, don't read.
> The US State Department has started to warn potential recruits from universities not to read leaked cables, lest it jeopardize their chances of getting a job.
When they learn what a bunch of dictatorial thugs you guys are and decide to work elsewhere? We're supposed to live in an open democracy, you creeps! They're now telling citizens what news they're not allowed to read.
> They're also showing warnings to troops who access news websites
It's okay to die for us, but you're not entitled to know why.
The police when investigating someone to determine wether that person is guilty or innocent has to trample all over that persons privacy. It is how the justice system works. When investigating even private diaries are not off limits, without knowing everything how can the police do its job?
And WE are the police when it comes to determining if our politicians are guilty or innocent. How can we investigate them, truly determine wether their actions are just if we do not know ALL the details? All the facts no matter how private?
A lot of people think governments need secrets to function. They are correct but take the need for secrecy far to far. Do I need to know the launch codes? No. Do I need to know the security measures in place to prevent abuse? YES! Why? How else can I determine whether the elected officials are handling the security of the nuclear arsenal properly? The sad fact is that the past has shown countless examples were incompetence was hidden by secrecy. Who is exactly going to get hurt by revealing the truth?
That Saudia Arabia. The country is getting a LOT of US support but is also funding Al Quada. Politicians have denied this, lied about it. To protect what? The US relation with Saudia Arabia OR to protect the fat contracts of their friends? To some politicians, this is one and the same. What is good for them, is good for the USA. Soldiers send to die on an assault on Iran as Saudia Arabia has urged might think differently.
Does a father of a soldier need to know the full truth about the US "allies" to determine which elected official can decide where to send his son?
Democracy isn't easy. It is probably the hardest form of government to have and not just because the voters are idiots. Those idiots, who rather watch Idols, must be able to inform themselves. Else an election would be based on nothing more the campaign promises. And do we really need politicians who want that?
The cable leaks do not have a clear single focus. They are not showing that Senator X sold out the country for Y millions. Rather it reveals a layer of deceit and secrecy that a lot of our political masters now have to come to accept as the norm. The voters don't needs know the inner dealings so they can keep electing the next puppet president based on empty campaign promises.
Or do you think the embassy staff reveals EVERYTHING TO every single person who is thinking about standing for office? But how can I decide to run for office to stop further deals with Saudia Arabia IF I don't know about the deals? This is a fundamental issue. Democracy is FOR the people, BY the people. If the people ain't informed, then how can they act? How can you run on a different agenda then the established powers if the true agenda is hidden? How can you question US foreign policy if you don't know what it is?
None of this is easy. It upsets people because in our hearts we want a simple life. Simple truths and for our betters to tell us who are the goodies and who are the baddies. Why do you think we like movies and books so much? Because the director/writer tells us what to think and we think it. It is nice and comforting.
And along comes Wikileaks and forces us to think for ourselves. Only a fraction of the cables have been released so far and there are some shocking things. Oh not because nobody suspected the facts. But now we know these rumors are in fact facts. Take North Korea, slashdot has seen a lot of people speculating about how China truly feels about it. Well, now we know. And?
A western excuse for NOT interfering in North Korea with force has been that China would oppose it with force. That is what our leaders told us. Now we know that our leaders have been informed that China isn't all that happy with North Korea itself. So just how opposed would China really be to a forced intervention? Might there be terms by which China would agree to re-unite Korea? The leaks suggest there is. So why isn't the west working on this?
What does it say about our politica
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
The funniest about all this is that most people with security clearance would have been able to access those cables anyway through the gov systems.
So the objection is not to the information itself, but to how it got onto that particular computer. This means (according to the above) that if a gov employee reads the nytimes or wikileaks or one of hundreds of other websites they must call their local security officer to have their computer wiped and the uninformation destroyed. Insanity.
Seriously, have you read 1984?
It's all over just about every news website.
Classifying information that's in the public domain is just daft. It makes the diplomats look like even bigger fools desperately trying to cover up something they can't.
The USA is already fascist.
The president has a license to kill,
The police have extreme authority.
The USA attacks foreign nations with bogus justification.
Oh and my personal favorite: the American people are made to believe in a fictional extremely dangerous enemy threat that is based on a minor threat (i.e. terrorists are real, but not as dangerous as the US government says) and is represented by a social group - a religion specifically, and the people are made to live their lives fighting every day against this threat. Every fascist nation had one of these made-up threats, and always a religion or ethnicity.
People like him already woke up in a fascist state, but it will take them a while to realize it.
He isn't saying that if you read the cables you can't get a job at the State Department, but if you read the cables you won't *want* a job there anymore.
Next thing you know when the Republicans come in power, they ban you from reading Slashdot. Why? "Because it sounds a lot like this progressive liberal tech-loving hippy unpatriotic atheist crap".
In Carlin's words: "It's bad for ya".
Everybody else in the world, including all of America's enemies and people even in the most repressive countries, has access to those cables. How's forcing Americans to be ignorant of them help make America safer?
Threatening students for reading publicly available information is unacceptable. There doesn't seem to be anything security-relevant in these cables, it is simply a massive embarrassment to the government, both because of what's in them and in how poorly they protected them.
From a lowlife like Lieberman, I didn't expect any better than to call up Amazon and get them to block the site. But as someone who voted for Obama, I'm beginning to wonder whether I shouldn't just have stayed home, and that's just what I may do next time around.
"The truth is out there"
I have no mod points, and you have already received a full 5. I just wanted to say that your message is right on. I just hope that the U.S. leaders would read something like this.
1) The US critizises China for censorship all the time, talking about those poor citizens who are kept in the dark
2) Information of US origin gets published where the US basically talks down on everybody else (funny how that rarely seems to come up in US media ?)
3) The US officially tries to apply censorship in different ways, including this newest attempt of threatening or almost blackmailing people
I'm only waiting for "something to happen" to the Wikileaks people, or for them to get punished for a made up claim.
But they should think carefully about it, for it will create a -lot- of martyrs who will be a lot more extremist about releasing information.
The horse has left the barn, but people in power always insist on closing the door afterwards. That was clearly visible with DeCSS, it's visible now, it's a general trait. Maybe you have to be this kind of fucked-up idiot to rise to power in our western party-ocracies.
The best you can do is laugh about it. I know I'd rather cry knowing that people with a negative IQ are ruling over me, but it doesn't change anything. It's a big satire on the human race, really, that the dumbest of the dumb are governing us.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
err! what secret documents are we talking about?, surely documents spread all over the world and readable by anyone are..well....NOT secret?, are you prevented from reading newspapers and watching the news if you want a goverment job?, lot's of secrets in history books, contempory books too, even the stealth fighter got into a car advert before the government admitted they had em, so you have to avoid advertisments?....someones talking like a dumbass...oh! government!, right!!!.....carry on, nothing to see here.
The email said nothing of READING the Wikileaks material. It advised against posting anything about it on social media sites. So once again a slashdot headline is misleading. The whole premise of the story is BS so yes, nothing to see here.
Warning! The USA is a de facto ditactorship! "Try to think outside the box and you will see it", Neo
Here is an idea, what if spammers for a change use there network for a useful cause and mail everyone parts of the leaked cables.
Isn't it great, that threads like this can turn into open season on America and everyone can bash the shit out of the USA.
The Iraq war and -more importantly- it's ridicuous justification has been all the reason you need to bash the shit out of the USA.
But let's ignore that and continue to blame Bush.
That's what I'm saying.
...On purpose, I suspect.
Reading the original email, it says that if you're intending to work for the govt in a position that includes dealing with classified material, then you shouldn't post links or facebook about the cables because the material remains 'classified' (to the US if nobody else) and this may cast doubts on your ability to deal with classified material appropriately.
It says NOTHING about not reading the cables.
-Styopa
Two points:
In other words, do the exact opposite if you want to be hired by the government in the future.
many mideast leaders lie to their public about relations with the US, Israel and Iran. They lie because having good relations with the US is not popular with their people. This is why secrecy is needed.
Wow, how very hypocritical.
What if the situation were reversed, and American leaders were lying to the American public in order to have good relations (i.e. getting millions of dollars in bribes) with foreign leaders that the American people despised. Would you be singing the same tune, or would you be thanking Wikileaks for bringing to light the fact that your leaders were actually corrupt, and NOT the people you thought you elected?
Here's a question for you: If what Wikileaks has exposed results in the people in certain countries overthrowing their corrupt leaders and electing people that reflect their beliefs and values, how is that a bad thing?
Or is it only bad if it happens in a countries that don't share your beliefs and values?
And with strange aeons even death may die.
Never mind what illegal, immoral or just plain goofy activities were leaked, the RESPONSE the government has had to the leaks is far more telling. On one hand, Obama releases a memo that says, "Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing." And out of the other side of his mouth he's talking about prosecuting Assange for providing just that very sort of transparency. What the government is WILLING to tell us they are doing is not going to be the interesting part, any more than it is a fact that the speech that most needs protection to be free is that which is unpopular.
If the government is uncomfortable with what has been showing up on Wikileaks, they should have thought of that before they set the precident by things like the Bush administration pardoning Scooter Libby for being instrumental in outing Valerie Plame, for the Obama administration granting immunity to AT&T for illegal wiretapping of US citizens. They set a good example with those, showing us that it's OK to illegally spy and leak, you can get away with it-- we let our buds off the hook on that all the time! If it wasn't for that kind of example-setting, they might have gotten a little more sympathy for the impact the leaks have had on their operations. As it is, it's the just deserts.
But the behavior that has resulted, suggesting an Assange assassination, prosecution for espionage, censorship akin to shutting down a newspaper's printing press because they don't like its politics. A complete attack on the messenger, the vehicle of freedom of speech, of speech that MOST needs protection because it is unpopular. While they may have legitimate issues with Bradley Manning leaking the info in the first place, the fact that Assange doesn't roll over and play dead and cover it up like Amazon did at the snap of the US government's fingers is WAY out of line. The real scandal here is not the shenanigans revealed in the leaked cables, but the responses they have had to the idea of a legitimate news publisher doing it's job-- publishing the leak itself. Behavior that shows that to them, while they talk a good game about transparency and freedom of speech, they are no different than any totalitarian government when it really counts.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
What's happened to the usual cart load of monkeys who trot out the dopey, "If they've got nothing to hid they've got nothing to worry about."
Lalala ! I can't hear you ! I've got fingers in my ears ! Lalala !
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
No point linking to wikipedia, everyone has heard of it already.
The mail doesn't say anything about not reading them, just not posting about them.
I guess they're saying "Don't leave any evidence that you read them"...
Actually it is more like, "Don't leave evidence that you are a blathering idiot who cannot exercise a modicum of self control."
The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
What if the situation were reversed, and American leaders were lying to the American public in order to have good relations (i.e. getting millions of dollars in bribes) with foreign leaders that the American people despised. Would you be singing the same tune, or would you be thanking Wikileaks for bringing to light the fact that your leaders were actually corrupt, and NOT the people you thought you elected?
Then I would be upset at American leaders and I would be thankful to wikileaks for exposing that information. I would also be skeptical of the leak because the source of the leak would be the country that I despised.
Here's a question for you: If what Wikileaks has exposed results in the people in certain countries overthrowing their corrupt leaders and electing people that reflect their beliefs and values, how is that a bad thing?
Pretty sure I never argued that was a bid thing. I only wrote that the parent's argument that the US needed to be exposed was false. Your claim is that mideast leaders needed to be exposed and I actually agree with that but I don't believe that's the duty of a foreign country. I'll even go as far as saying that it's ethical for a country NOT to interfere in the politics of another country whether through war or propaganda (these cables were all written from the US point of view, so they make the US look favorable) so exposing corruption is good but that process needs to happen domestically because people have a right to self-determination.
Or is it only bad if it happens in a countries that don't share your beliefs and values?
It's only bad if it happens by foreign interference. Documents written by US officials should not determine the future of another country's government.
I think the state department is trying to recruit employees that understand the value of discretion. reading wiki leaks is one thing; gossiping about it on facebook, etc. is a strong indication that these potential employees can not be relied on to be discreet.
This sounds like something they'd do. When you interview to be a Foreign Service Officer they refuse to tell you on what criteria you're going to be evaluated, and when it's over they refuse to tell you how you did. Because those criteria are top secret. This genius system was designed for them by McKinsey & Co, who are of the same ilk as Goldman Sachs and all the other tea & crumpet outfits that are the last bastion of the White Man's burden. The State Department, along with the rest of the government, needs to be defunded, dismantled, and built back up to reflect and represent American values.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
Before we all blow up, the warning was from one alum to their alma mater, and was suggesting not to post links to cables and WL on facebook, twitter, etc. because "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" which, honestly, is pretty reasonable. If the State Department is deciding between equally-qualified five candidates, and three have indicated they sympathize with WL, well then the choice is down to two. Just like companies looking at your pictures on facebook before hiring. It sucks but it's true - be responsible with what you say about yourself.
"Before we all blow up" makes the assumption most posters were already in some sane, rational starting point. All you can do is sit back and laugh at them. Watch this.
ZOMG US GOVERNMENT IS SUPPRESSING WIKILEAKS READ IT HERE
http://www.us-cert.gov/current/#potential_wiki_leaks
Enjoy the Olympic scale conclusion jumping and tin foil hat craft fair.
So only US state department employees won't know the leaked US state department cables but everyone else will? Sounds like a winning plan.
So the only ones who will be ignorant of what is happening are government employees and those in the military? The only people who actually should know. Par for course, I guess.
or else!
They'd actually have to do the reverse dns thing.
Two points:
In other words, do the exact opposite if you want to be hired by the government in the future.
Nice way to cover up the fact that the advice you offered was wrong and useless. Gotta look good and all of that right?
It's such a meaningless threat that YOU SUGGESTED A WAY TO MITIGATE THAT THREAT. Self-contradiction established.
That method of mitigation happens to be useless. I called you on it. Your reply to that has been useless rambling and nothing more.
Hint: whether any request not to follow a warning about reading these cables would appeal to the stupid and timid and what their job prospects in government might be is a separate discussion. We were discussion countermeasures against an adversary who can log your HTTP traffic. No, using the numeric IP address won't hide anything from such an adversary. Full-stop.
The next step is to jail you and ruin your life if you accidentally read something that wasn't approved by the information ministry.
Step 3 is to strategically plant this forbidden knowledge so as to shut down pages, companies, dissidents...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I'm glad our government(s) use Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt / Threats against the general population. What a way to inspire me!!!
Go Obama - you da man...
Was a factor jeopardizing the career perspectives. The USA went a long way to where the Eastern Block was 25 years ago...
Radio Free Europe (US), RFI (France), BBC (UK) were the source of forbidden news and I am grateful for their work.
Death is a legally valid punishment for treason. Congressmen swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, so having them tried for treason for blatantly ignoring it by calling for the death of someone exercising first amendment protected rights sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Our local reag, er, newspaper, allows comments on stories. The paper reports on every crime in the county, of course, and blog entires rapidly "decide" guilt or innocence, sometimes both, depending on the crime and circumstances. Usually it's a big brawl, such as when a cop shoots someone, and the conversation is over whether or not it was justified.
The important part here is that the prosecutor and defense attorneys are both starting to realize that the blogs can be influential, so they ask in pre-dispositions and in jury selection questionaaires whether a prsspective juror is active on or ahas evebn read 'the blogs.' A positive answer is grounds for throwing you off a jury.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
19 kids and counting.
Let me get this straight -- a buck private can read them, copy them to DVD, and give them to treasonous weasels, but if a graduate student reads them, they are barred from employment? Has the world gone mad?
It's more the Red Prada and the Blue Prada, though, at least as far as how often I hear talk of "consumers". Make them want something no one needs, and then lead them by the nose using the very aspirations you've indoctrinated them with.
Meh.
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
repressive government also tell people what can read and can say and what cannot read and cannot say.
This is different, how?
Now is no more Soviet Russia government, only former. Maybe about this fact US government should be thinking.
Freedom of speech implies that others can read or listen to what is being said.
It seems to me that this strategy is akin to: If you cannot muzzle the speaker it is fair to puncture the eardrums and pluck out the eyes of any potential audience?
I am not a fan of WiKi leaks blindly publishing documents but some of the stories that are surfacing with research from major news outlets are telling a story that may well qualify as justification. Time will tell. I do not know enough yet to solidify an opinion yet.
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
http://www.basicincome.org/bien/
It would give people free time again to be good citizens, including time for keeping up with what the government is doing.
Why should everyone not have some claim against the industrial commons, given so much is now privatized through questionable processes?
Alaska has a bit of a basic income through the Alaska Permanent Fund distribution oil wealth periodically to all Alaska residents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund
Is Sarah Palin a socialist? :-)
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
"They'd actually have to do the reverse dns thing" by tomhudson (43916) writes: on Saturday December 04, @08:45AM (#34442966) Homepage Journal
"the reverse dns thing" which of course, dumbo tomhudson has no clue on how to do it (try PING, TRACEROUTE, or WHOIS for starters, stupid). The more I see this douchebag tomhudson post, the more I realize the technical saavy around the once revered slashdot has gone way downhill.
Big "American" Brother ...
The world is so sick ...
What if it should not have been classified? What if it is a classified level you're allowed to see anyway?