It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

To All Federal Employees: If ever there was a good time to disobey, Now Would Be That Time!!!

page: 2
56
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by orbitbaby
 


It's kinda ironc now, the US Government has been gathering information on what thier own Citizens about what they say and do (spying if you prefer) for donkeys years. Now you have Hillary with her Panties in Bunch because everything the Governments say and do is known to the Public.

It's just a shame their was no Wiki during the Bush Dictatorship era.




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by orbitbaby
 



The release of wikileaks documents was an illegal act - period. I cannot change law because I may or may not find it to be inconvenient. Only judges have assumed that authority in spite of the Constitution. Those documents still have a valid security classification applied to them and are still subject to being handled in accordance with proper procedure. Failure of federal employees to handle classified material according to the instructions provided by their member agencies is grounds for prosecution.

I cannot change law. It is not a threat. It is not anything 'unexpected.' It is simply the way things are. I have my doubts about how successful they will be in enforcing this - but I'm also not about to stick my wang out there to risk being slammed in the door, either.

The contents of these documents are rather inconsequential to my own personal convictions, and are really only useful as a historical record and account. I am already well aware of the fact that people in positions higher than myself make decisions I would fundamentally disagree with. I am already well aware of the fact that we collect intelligence on other nations, allies included.

edit on 6-12-2010 by cdnutz44 because: (no reason given)


This is the first responsible, in touch with reality post I have seen here on this subject. I applaud you sir for your clear headed response!


edit on 6-12-2010 by cdnutz44 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:27 AM
link   
I'd rather not face Non-Judicial punishment just for the satisfaction of showing them that I think this is stupid. Losing pay, getting restricted to the unit, getting busted down, and possible confinement are not worth it to me. We all had to sign a form saying we read and understood the orders about not reading wiki*****. I dont agree with it but orders are orders.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Paranoidinmycrawlspace
 


Orders are Orders?

Of course, orders were always orders! Back in the Roman empire in 33 A.D., back in Germany 1933 - 1945, back over Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, back in Abu Ghreib in 2005 etc., etc.

"think for yourself, question authority" (T. Leary)

Or just check your heart. If your orders conflict with what your heart is telling you, then it's time to disobey.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by kyred
reply to post by orbitbaby
 


Federal employees? While social security recipients, military retirees, got no raise last year and will get none this coming yesr, because cost of living actually went down,


And federal employees got raises because their expenses rose, WTF????, lol

Do you expect people, federal employees, like senators and congresspersons, would refuse these obviously unwarrented raises? LMAO!

What I'd like to see is, federal employees get paid in cash each payday. And then wish them good luck getting that cash home or to their favorite bank. lol

Just maybe, if the reality of life of most American citizens, came home to roost upon the teat sucking scums, things might change.


Wow. OK change will come when people learn the facts.
Congresspersons, senators and their staff are not federal employees. They are supposed public servants.
Your federal government employees are the ones working for agencies! And for the most part, if you ever examine an agency, there are departments that don't even know other departments exist. It's called compartmentalization - the governments answer to leaks; if you don't have all the pieces to the puzzle, you can't complete the picture. This is why they discredit whistleblowers so well. So if you are a FGE for NSA you probably don't know that your 'agency' doesn't answer to the laws of the land unless their name is directly in it.
Besides, it is human nature to be so lazy as to not want to know what the other cubicle is doing just in case you might be asked to do it without a pay raise.
Even if they all jumped up and told their stories, it would take us years to collectively piece together the truth.
That, in short, is the nature of the beast you call your government and its antics.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Peloquin
 


I think there may be a slight difference between them telling us to not read classified info and the holocaust.
BTW, Nagasaki and Hiroshima ended the war with Japan. They were warned several times. (research it) I guess you think America is the bad guy? What about Japanese rape camps? What about Palawan? What about Loa Kulu? What about Cheribon? What about Bataan? I could do this all day. I guess you would have been the guy to say "Let's talk it out" while this stuff was going on. Glad American leadership had guts...back then.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by orbitbaby
 


As a federal employee, I have to say I disagree with you on this point.

There is never a good time to disobey a lawful order. There are only times to do what is correct according to your values and principles.

People keep secrets. If your life were cracked open, most of the people out there could be jailed for some offense or another that has been committed and gone unnoticed and unprosecuted. Government agencies are also authorized by our elected officials to keep certain things secret, and for good reason. Many of those things are not going to be popular, but need to be done.

The contents of these documents are rather inconsequential to my own personal convictions, and are really only useful as a historical record and account. I am already well aware of the fact that people in positions higher than myself make decisions I would fundamentally disagree with. I am already well aware of the fact that we collect intelligence on other nations, allies included.


As a federal taxpayer I have to disagree with the basis of your post. The first two bolded sentences can be completely contradictory, and you act as though they can coexist...they cannot in a rational world unless you continuously conform your values and principles to match current laws.

Second, your comparison of private citizen's secrets to those of govt agencies and ***public*** officials is quite ridiculous. They are elected by us, paid for by us, therefore they should answer to us. They can keep all of the secrets they want but not in my name as part of their public official/govt role, and not on my income.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   
As 64c said, the documents are still classified. So I can speak as a militay man and say it is not worth my stripe to look at something at work which really has nothing to do with me anyway. NPR tells me the gist of what is in the documents, and I can rely on the fine folks here to tell me any bombshells.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by BenIndaSun

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by orbitbaby
 


As a federal employee, I have to say I disagree with you on this point.

There is never a good time to disobey a lawful order. There are only times to do what is correct according to your values and principles.

People keep secrets. If your life were cracked open, most of the people out there could be jailed for some offense or another that has been committed and gone unnoticed and unprosecuted. Government agencies are also authorized by our elected officials to keep certain things secret, and for good reason. Many of those things are not going to be popular, but need to be done.

The contents of these documents are rather inconsequential to my own personal convictions, and are really only useful as a historical record and account. I am already well aware of the fact that people in positions higher than myself make decisions I would fundamentally disagree with. I am already well aware of the fact that we collect intelligence on other nations, allies included.


As a federal taxpayer I have to disagree with the basis of your post. The first two bolded sentences can be completely contradictory, and you act as though they can coexist...they cannot in a rational world unless you continuously conform your values and principles to match current laws.

Second, your comparison of private citizen's secrets to those of govt agencies and ***public*** officials is quite ridiculous. They are elected by us, paid for by us, therefore they should answer to us. They can keep all of the secrets they want but not in my name as part of their public official/govt role, and not on my income.


This line of logic will eventually take to to the point that your boss has total power over you. After all, your boss chose you, hired you, pays for your food and shelter, why should he or she not know everything about your private life, after all, you could be doing something against company policy...



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BenIndaSun
 



As a federal taxpayer I have to disagree with the basis of your post. The first two bolded sentences can be completely contradictory, and you act as though they can coexist...they cannot in a rational world unless you continuously conform your values and principles to match current laws.


My second post, to be found here: www.abovetopsecret.com... - addresses this quite clearly.

A lawful order is one that is lawful. This is not contradictory to my moral values. I swore in to defend the Constitution of the United States and the people who have agreed to abide by its principles. However, I will also recite the Sailor's Creed for you:

"I am a United States Sailor.

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and I will obey the orders of those appointed over me.

I represent the fighting spirit of the Navy, and those who have gone before me to defend freedom and democracy around the world.

I proudly serve my country's Navy combat team with Honor, Courage, and Commitment.

I am committed to excellence and the fair treatment of all."

In a nutshell - an unlawful order will conflict with that notion.

However, if one finds their life continually in moral conflict with lawful orders - then they are in the wrong line of work. As I said - there is never a good time to disobey a lawful order - only a good time to do what you see as morally correct.


Second, your comparison of private citizen's secrets to those of govt agencies and ***public*** officials is quite ridiculous. They are elected by us, paid for by us, therefore they should answer to us. They can keep all of the secrets they want but not in my name as part of their public official/govt role, and not on my income.


No, they should not answer to you. They should answer to your elected representatives. They have been given the authority to keep secrets by legislative process and it is to your representatives that our military and agencies answer to.

You may or may not think we should be able to keep secrets (like who, exactly, is giving us data on Chinese weapons development) - but it is an authority we are given, and there are rules and guidelines established that we must follow.

However, you are a civilian. You are entitled to participating in elective and legislative processes as described in federal and state constitutional law. You are not entitled to government secrets, regardless of how much you paid in taxes.

If you wish to change this, you are more than welcome to involve your legislators and petition to have the laws changed.

The reality, however, is that the Freedom of Information Act is about as much as close as you are going to get with regards to transparency of classified information. If you want records on what happened in, say, Bosnia - you can fill out a FOI request form, and even have people help you fill out the form correctly. The form directs people to pull open the file cabinets and search the hard-drives for documents related to your query, and they will review each document to determine whether or not the document should be considered too sensitive to release, what information should be inked out, etc.

Thousands of documents are generated each day that end up being classified as "Secret" or above. Searching through all of them and reviewing how many should remain classified after a year, two years, etc is volume-prohibited. That is why the Freedom of Information Act exists - rather than spend millions of man-hours searching through classified documents (the rate at which they are generated will only increase as time goes on), we have people looking through only the documents people are interested in finding.

For once... Once - I can say the government and military came up with a halfway sensible and efficient solution to a problem. At least in concept... I'm sure it's all screwed up on the inside... but it sure beats how they address a number of other issues.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 




I cannot change law because I may or may not find it to be inconvenient.


You sir are the epitome of why this country is in its downward spiral having no concept of government of by and for the people. Government derives it's authority from the consent of the people, are you not one of the people? The people are the creators of the government, does the creation have more authority then its creator? By lending authority to the government did you lose said authority as a free sovereign individual? No you merely designated a servant to wield that authority on your behalf and you always retain that authority at all times for you are the source of it.

The only authority you gave government was to uphold the rights of the people. To obey a law for sake of law is the watch cry of a slave. You are the master and source of government not the other way around and as the master have every right and every duty to know what your servant is up to. But you have reversed the roles and forgotten who you are as most Americans have and think you are the servant bound to obey the master your government. Nothing could be further from the truth! You the master now fear your servant the government and are afraid to disobey his unlawful decrees.

This type of thinking has effectively nullified Government of by and for the people and changed it to Government over the people by threat of force violence and death!
edit on 6-12-2010 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paranoidinmycrawlspace
I'd rather not face Non-Judicial punishment just for the satisfaction of showing them that I think this is stupid. Losing pay, getting restricted to the unit, getting busted down, and possible confinement are not worth it to me. We all had to sign a form saying we read and understood the orders about not reading wiki*****. I dont agree with it but orders are orders.


I can understand accessing using Government Equipment, but on your own PC at home, Come On. And how can they Police or know what you doing on your PC at home unless they were spying on you 24/7. They only way they can "Lawfully" spy on people is if they are suspected of Criminal Activity. I thought only politicians were criminals and everybody else just drones. Sigh, the fear of GOD will prevail, because nobody will challenge it. However you should be able to challenge them using their own Laws against them.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 



You sir are the epitome of why this country is in its downward spiral having no concept of government of by and for the people.


I do not believe, Sir, you really understand what our government is about.


Government derives it's authority from the consent of the people, are you not one of the people? The people are the creators of the government, does the creation have more authority then its creator?


There is a distinct difference between a Democratically elected Constitutional Republic versus "I pay taxes and am supposed to be the Government, I get to do whatever I want!"


By lending authority to the government did you lose said authority as a free sovereign individual? No you merely designated a servant to wield that authority on your behalf and you always retain that authority at all times for you are the source of it.


No, you do not have authority over the federal government as an individual. You have the authority to elect and correspond with your representatives. Period.

The -only- other authority you have is over yourself and the authorities your state government recognizes you having.

You do not have the authority to revoke law. You do not have the authority to change law. That is an authority given to the representatives you elect and correspond with.

You do, however, as a unified body, have the authority to declare that U.S. laws no longer have any jurisdiction. This is an inherent authority that can be assumed by any group of people who can form a coherent structure.


The only authority you gave government was to uphold the rights of the people. To obey a law for sake of law is the watch cry of a slave. You are the master and source of government not the other way around and as the master have every right and every duty to know what your servant is up to.


This is a dangerous and irrational way of thinking. To obey the law placed forth by the system that the people of the United States put into place is concurrent with a system that works of and by the people. To disregard law on the premise of personal dislike under the banner of "a government of and by the people" is to disregard the Government that is of and by the people.

The system is in place so that you may use the system to change laws that you do not like. You do not, however, have the authority or liberty of simply saying: "I don't like that law, so I'm not going to abide by it." That principle of liberty is completely incompatible with any form and system of government.

The law may be good, the law may be bad, the law may even be stupid. Until following the law directly and imminently jeopardizes your rights, life, or ability to continue your quality and standard of living - there is no justifiable reason for disregarding what would thus amount to a lawful piece of legislation.

Some stupid laws have been passed - a few just passed here in Missouri that are completely ridiculous. That doesn't mean I get to flip the laws the bird. Those laws passed with a direct popular vote of the people and the laws were written by our elected officials.


But you have reversed the roles and forgotten who you are as most Americans have and think you are the servant bound to obey the master your government.


No, I simply have respect for the system of government as it was put in place. The problem is that people have forgotten how to use the system. Contrary to ATS belief - representatives do not get installed with high-quality telepathy devices. They have to first read something you've submitted to them, or listened to you speak before they can get a vague idea of what you are thinking, and the concerns you have regarding various laws going to the floor.

People treat the election like a race - where the winner takes all and the "other side" doesn't get a voice. Representatives are -supposed- to represent the people of their districts regardless of party affiliation - a number of representatives are actually pretty good about this (provided the people actually talk to them). Some aren't - and need to be voted out of office or removed via petition if they are that bad.

I'm not going to sit here and blow sunshine up your ass - the system isn't perfect, and has gotten distorted considerably since it was put into place. However, it is not so far gone as to not be capable of being fixed.

What you are talking about amounts to armed rebellion. I'm not at all afraid of that, nor do I have any reservations about killing hundreds - even thousands in the street. Just let it be known that when you do that, you commit to an ideological war. As far as I'm concerned - the bureaucrats have pretty well screwed themselves over - if a civil war breaks out, I'm not taking any bullets for them.

Then what? Even if the "revolution" is "bloodless" - we've still invalidated our entire system of government and provided no means of functionally resolving the differences in opinion. We can't even agree on health care issues, for Christ's sake. It wouldn't remain "bloodless" for long.


Nothing could be further from the truth! You the master now fear your servant the government and are afraid to disobey his unlawful decrees.


I am but one person among 300+ million.

You are but one person among 300+ million.

Neither you, nor I, have the authority to individually do whatever we please because of "a government by and of the people."

Now, if we can get enough of us together and introduce legislation that resolves issues we have with the system - that's how our government works by the people. But just because you or me are inconvenienced by a law does not mean the government is somehow no longer by and of the people.


This type of thinking has effectively nullified Government of by and for the people and changed it to Government over the people by threat of force violence and death!


*sigh*

Tell me, child - how many people do you know who have a friend or a brother in the military? In the police? Probably quite a few. Invert the concept. How many people in the military have friends and family in the civilian world?

I'm not going to look at you and give you classified information because you pitch a fit and rant or rave about government by and of the people. That's not how it works. You don't need to know. There are reasons for this and it has been established by our system of government that certain agencies have the authority to assign a classification level to documents detailing events, technology, etc. Quite simply - people die because of idiots, such as yourself, who believe they are entitled to classified information because they pay taxes. I personally find the notion quite obnoxious.

However, if you think - for one moment - some bureaucrat is going to tell me what to do, then you are entirely misinformed. Sure - if you're causing a bunch of trouble, I'll put a stop to it. However, I'm not going to come yank you out of your house. For one - you might be naked, and I don't want to see that. Worse - you might be getting it on with another guy - and I -really- don't want to see that. It's safer for you and me if the walls of your house remain unviolated. For another - I swore to uphold the Constitution and to protect the people. If my orders seem close to violating those principles - I'll tell them where to shove that order. I can assure you that I will not be alone.

However - the people of the U.S. put this system of government into place - for better or for worse. The only way for the problem to be solved is for people to get back in control of the system. Getting a hold of classified information in no way aids this goal. Peering into the lives and activities of various agencies, again, doesn't get you control.

All it amounts to is drama.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic_al
 



I can understand accessing using Government Equipment, but on your own PC at home, Come On. And how can they Police or know what you doing on your PC at home unless they were spying on you 24/7. They only way they can "Lawfully" spy on people is if they are suspected of Criminal Activity. I thought only politicians were criminals and everybody else just drones. Sigh, the fear of GOD will prevail, because nobody will challenge it. However you should be able to challenge them using their own Laws against them.


Generally speaking, they cannot realistically enforce this on private computers. The exception is that members living on base likely go through server nodes with at least a small node existing on base that can use packet-filtering. It's highly unlikely, and in all reality they probably have no real intention to follow up with prosecuting.

It is mostly a general reminder that we are, in fact, breaking the law to read content released by wikileaks - and that can get us hemmed up. Again - the law is the law.

Many of these things get misinterpreted. They are not threats. I've gotten an e-mail that reminds all DoD personnel that it is illegal to read the documents. Don't do it - if someone wants to push the issue, they can, and you're in hot water.

They can't even change the law. It is what it is. It is a reminder of what the law states and that choosing to read wikileaks is choosing to break the law. You may get caught - you may not. You may be prosecuted, you may not. They don't have to remind people - they could just flag people reading the documents and nail them. This is - really - those people looking out for us. They are not the ones responsible for monitoring users and prosecuting violations - those are all done, usually, by civilian contractors.

As for using the law against them? How do you propose you do that? "Well, I may have read wikileaks... but it was an article about how Clinton did something illegal." Typical ATS round-about logic doesn't fly in the real world. When using a government computer, you sign a statement each year stating that you knowingly submit to monitoring while on that system and that you are to use it for official purposes only - that whole jig. There's no magic "get out of trouble" card. There's the law, it's black-and-white, we have been given instruction on it. We have also been reminded of the law and how it applies to a current scenario. Then we knowingly break the law.... because we think it doesn't apply to us? Or shouldn't?

Doesn't work that way.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paranoidinmycrawlspace
reply to post by Peloquin
 


I think there may be a slight difference between them telling us to not read classified info and the holocaust.
BTW, Nagasaki and Hiroshima ended the war with Japan. They were warned several times. (research it) I guess you think America is the bad guy? What about Japanese rape camps? What about Palawan? What about Loa Kulu? What about Cheribon? What about Bataan? I could do this all day. I guess you would have been the guy to say "Let's talk it out" while this stuff was going on. Glad American leadership had guts...back then.


I'm sorry, it was not my aim to insult you, of course there is a difference between reading not classified info and the holocaust! It was just an impulse I got after reading your last words about orders, and it came possibly more from my heart, than from my brain, so sorry for that!

But there's one thing I can tell you: I'm from Germany, and I've studied the embarrassing history of my history, and because of that I know what I'm talking about, when I'm talking about the dangers of obeying.

Today, I'm working with people with special needs. Those people I love and work with, would have been murdered in the days of the Nazi Regime. And many of them got murdered in those times (approx. more than 70.000). But because of the fact, that many germans were still somehow bound to their christian faith and it's ethics, the Nazis had to accomplish their murdering of the people with special needs secretly. And sadly, they were good in doing it; only few people came to realize, what really happened to those people, because their tracks nearly got lost in a long paper trail.

Just those, who took a closer look at the papers (that documented their transport through several stations in the country to finally the places where they got murdered by gas as a blueprint for the following holocaust on the jewish people and all the others that were condemmned by the Nazis) were able to understand what happened. Some (very few, of course) did, and they tried their chance to do something against it, like judge Lothar Kreyssig (en.wikipedia.org...)

I'm not saying, that the US are the bad guy. I'm not that black and white. I know there are good people in the US, and there are not so good people, as everywhere.

I just say, be careful and keep your eyes and ears open, because history tends to repeat itself.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by orbitbaby
 


As a federal employee, I have to say I disagree with you on this point.

There is never a good time to disobey a lawful order. There are only times to do what is correct according to your values and principles.

To that, I must point out, the wikileaks documents have little to do with it. I disagree with a number of things in our government at this point in time - and have for a while - and I really only care to see the size of government reduced and its influence over individual civilian lives reduced along with its tampering of the business world.

People keep secrets. If your life were cracked open, most of the people out there could be jailed for some offense or another that has been committed and gone unnoticed and unprosecuted. Government agencies are also authorized by our elected officials to keep certain things secret, and for good reason. Many of those things are not going to be popular, but need to be done.

The only sensible action to take is what I already chose to do - work towards the minimizing of government influence in areas it has no business interfering with. That reduces the influence of any crimes or corruption in the government and also reduces the possible gains to be had from criminal behavior.

The release of wikileaks documents was an illegal act - period. I cannot change law because I may or may not find it to be inconvenient. Only judges have assumed that authority in spite of the Constitution. Those documents still have a valid security classification applied to them and are still subject to being handled in accordance with proper procedure. Failure of federal employees to handle classified material according to the instructions provided by their member agencies is grounds for prosecution.

I cannot change law. It is not a threat. It is not anything 'unexpected.' It is simply the way things are. I have my doubts about how successful they will be in enforcing this - but I'm also not about to stick my wang out there to risk being slammed in the door, either.

The contents of these documents are rather inconsequential to my own personal convictions, and are really only useful as a historical record and account. I am already well aware of the fact that people in positions higher than myself make decisions I would fundamentally disagree with. I am already well aware of the fact that we collect intelligence on other nations, allies included.


As a former federal employee in the Navy, that statement of yours is full of crap. We CITIZENS of these United States own this country and we damned well can change law.

If this info was so damned sensitive, then why wasn't it guarded closer? Because it ISN'T sensitive; it is simply embarrassing, which is a whole nother matter.

Either wikileaks is disclosing relevant info, or exposing a weakness in our security systems. Either way it is a service to our citizens.

Pardon me if I don't buy into your "authoritative missive", but I have pissed on more federal employees than you have ever met.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by mydarkpassenger
 



As a former federal employee in the Navy, that statement of yours is full of crap. We CITIZENS of these United States own this country and we damned well can change law.


Not without going through the legislative system as established by the Constitution. You do NOT have the authority to say "I don't like that law, therefor, I am not going to follow it." You have the right to make whatever personal decisions you want - but if those personal decisions are in violation of a law that is on the books, it's your ass, no matter how controversial the law is.

Until it is changed via the process of law - or the entire system of government is rendered inert by a vote declaring secession - enforcement authorities can and will prosecute you to the extent allowed under that law.


If this info was so damned sensitive, then why wasn't it guarded closer? Because it ISN'T sensitive; it is simply embarrassing, which is a whole nother matter.


You are not given the authority to decide what is and is not sensitive material. Nor am I. However, I can assure you that the "plan of the month" we use is considered "sensitive" as it has names and contact info on it. These documents are considered of a sensitive nature because they list names, dates, times, contingencies, and give an indication of our and other nations' resolve regarding various issues.

The amount of strategic information that can be gleaned from these documents is immense and absolutely unprecedented.

As someone with clearance, I can tell you that the security of this information is highly dependent upon the individuals working with that data. Sure - there are monitoring programs in place, data is encrypted, but no system is fool proof or immune to being circumvented. That is why we have clearance levels.

It's like the TSA - you can't passively defend against a dynamic threat. It's why bases have chain-link fences instead of a massive concrete wall of manned MG-nests - have roving patrols pick up anyone who doesn't understand that a razor-wire fence says: "don't go there." Most people will get the hint and it automatically filters out those who would cause trouble.



Either wikileaks is disclosing relevant info, or exposing a weakness in our security systems. Either way it is a service to our citizens.


Disclosing relevant info? The founder says his entire goal with wikileaks is to demonize the U.S. I fail to see that as a service to its citizens.

There's also a difference between reporting a weakness in security systems and publicly exploiting that weakness.

Example: I walk up and say: "Hey, you probably should not leave your window open like that - someone could get in." - That's reporting a weakness in your security.

Or, I post an ad in the newspapers "This guy leaves his window wide open, a key under the flowerpot next to the door, and leaves his 14-year old daughter (a teen-model, no less) with her high-priced electronics. The gang-bang robbery will be at noon tomorrow."

You wouldn't be thanking me for exposing your weaknesses. I can guarantee that.


Pardon me if I don't buy into your "authoritative missive", but I have pissed on more federal employees than you have ever met.


It's generally considered disrespectful to piss on people. It also tends to make the Navy Working Uniform fade - so I'd appreciate it if you didn't.

I will tell you, however, that this country will not survive with the type of attitude you portray. You do not own the government. You are part of the government. There is a distinct difference between the two. It would behoove you to read my other comments on this section. I've no love for our current representatives or the way things are going in our country.

However, Wikileaks is a distraction from the real problem. The real problem is a federal government that is allowed to have massive amounts of control over businesses and the individual lives of people. The more power we give the government - the more lobbyists and special interest groups will flock to Washington's steps - the more reason they will have to influence legislation, and the more anti-competitive markets can become.

That is problem number one in this country, and highly related to our present issues with foreign policy.

National representatives are elected over issues relating to our personal lives (abortion, healthcare) and business issues that are defined in the Constitution as powers reserved to the States. Our national representatives have done -exactly- what we voted them into office to do - take control of our lives and businesses. We have lost concept of the idea that the National government is to handle foreign policy and settle issues between individual states.

That, sir, is why the federal government is out of control. It is not out of control because of people willing to follow laws. It is out of control because the massive cluster# of people "who own the government!" are too god damned ignorant to read and understand a document that is about half as long as this entire thread is.

It is out of control because people don't know the laws, or about the system that allows them to "own the government." Not because I recognize and respect a law that has been in place since before I was born, and decide to follow it and abide by it.

I swear to God - if someone comes up to me in the midst of a civil war and blames me for what's going on because I'm wearing a uniform - I'm shooting the daft bastard, even though I'm 'against' the government.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 1   >>

log in

join