If you read the wikileaks you are breaking the law

[OldJourno]

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787749893649600512

Hope the link works.

I never knew I had rights beyond those of an average citizen. But according to CNN, I can peruse the WikiLeaks and you can't.

 

[underguy1]

CNN is an organ of state propaganda and Cuomo is a presstitute.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

The real nightmare would be if any of us had to share a jail cell with that idiot reporter.

 

[OldJourno]

The real nightmare would be if any of us had to share a jail cell with that idiot reporter.

Do you suppose he's that stupid or do you think it was a stab at deliberate disinformation?

 

[Que]

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787749893649600512

Hope the link works.

I never knew I had rights beyond those of an average citizen. But according to CNN, I can peruse the WikiLeaks and you can't.

Well, yeah. Don't peruse them yourself. You might end up forming opinions that are less than flattering to their preferred candidate.

They'll sort through them let you know what was written, what it means, and what you should think about it, comrade.

 

[eyerlives]

The real nightmare would be if any of us had to share a jail cell with that idiot reporter.

"us", Butthurt?

A normal ego of an actual journalist would've simply posted:

The real nightmare would be having to share a jail cell with that idiot reporter. ...

...an apt comment reflecting the true reality of one writer simply stating his opinion.

But, that's not enough for your collective-dependent, wannabe ego which inherently has the totally foolishly need to post for "us" when it can only post for itself.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, wannabe...

The Cracker Jack School of Journalism must be teetering in total shame today.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

"us", Butthurt?

A normal ego of an actual journalist would've simply posted:

The real nightmare would be having to share a jail cell with that idiot reporter. ...

...an apt comment reflecting the true reality of one writer simply stating his opinion.

But, that's not enough for your collective-dependent, wannabe ego which inherently has the totally foolishly need to post for "us" when it can only post for itself.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, wannabe...

The Cracker Jack School of Journalism must be teetering in total shame today.

The absolute worst nightmare, of course, is that anyone has to share this planet with you.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Do you suppose he's that stupid or do you think it was a stab at deliberate disinformation?

He's that stupid. The whole "deliberate disinformation" meme is absurd. Why would a professional news organization do it when there are far too many other sources of information, most notably competing news outlets who would love to expose the errors of a competitor, available to correct the gaffe?

 

[Que]

He's that stupid. The whole "deliberate disinformation" meme is absurd. Why would a professional news organization do it when there are far too many other sources of information, most notably competing news outlets who would love to expose the errors of a competitor, available to correct the gaffe?

I suspect that he assumes that the Pentagon papers imbued some sort of unique rights to people who happen to be employed in jobs that call themselves journalists as if it was the recipient not the flow of information that was protected.

 

[underguy1]

He's that stupid. The whole "deliberate disinformation" meme is absurd. Why would a professional news organization do it when there are far too many other sources of information, most notably competing news outlets who would love to expose the errors of a competitor, available to correct the gaffe?

The old competition fantasy.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

I suspect that he assumes that the Pentagon papers imbued some sort of unique rights to people who happen to be employed in jobs that call themselves journalists as if it was the recipient not the flow of information that was protected.

It is the same myth by which people believe that freedom of the press is a "corporate" right rather than one guaranteed to each individual.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

The old competition fantasy.

Don't you have any sheep to go fuck?

 

[eyerlives]

The absolute worst nightmare, of course, is that anyone has to share this planet with you.

At least you finally admit your wannabe grasp of reality.

Good job, Butthurt!

 

[Sean]

He said it was illegal to "possess" them, not to read them. of course, if you read them on a computer screen, the content is held in your computer's memory while it is on screen, so the distinction may be moot, but his statement isn't actually factually inaccurate.

 

[eyerlives]

Don't you have any sheep to go fuck?

Tsk, tsk, tsk, wannabe.

There you go exposing that "nature" of yours again, you know, your "nature" you unashamedly blame others for bringing out of you...

I'M A VICTIM, DAMMIT!

QUIT MAKING ME BE ME!

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif

 

[underguy1]

Don't you have any sheep to go fuck?

Just another American racist, eh?

 

[Bray123]

He said it was illegal to "possess" them, not to read them. of course, if you read them on a computer screen, the content is held in your computer's memory while it is on screen, so the distinction may be moot, but his statement isn't actually factually inaccurate.

I'm fairly sure that 'possessing' indecent images of children is complete when they are on your screen, therefore 'possessing' wikileaks will be no different. If it exists.

In the UK the unlawful possession of state secrets would be an offence no matter how you do it, maybe that's how the USA law works as well.

 

[eyerlives]

Why are progressives so eagerly draconian in this specific case...

...as if they never worshipped Daniel Ellsburg at all.

Why do progressives now want to prosecute Ellsburg's progeny?

Huh.

 

[Que]

Just another American racist, eh?

Speciest, technically.

 

[Hypoxia]

It is the same myth by which people believe that freedom of the press is a "corporate" right rather than one guaranteed to each individual.

Pre-Internet, it pretty much *was* a corporate prerogative because platform -- an individual's "free speech" was pretty much drowned out by broadcasters and publishers. If you weren't a big-media owner you were free to pass out your leaflets on street corners and shout from your soapbox.

Those pre-Net days had at least a modicum of accountability. Commercial media must satisfy stockholders, advertisers, and audiences and so can't act *too* deranged. But in a world of free blogs and social media there's no payback for being a lying shit. The lying shits can freely exercise their right to spew. And I can freely exercise my right to browse elsewhere.