popsjumper 2 #401 February 18, 2011 Sometimes you knock on the door and there's nobody home. Some people just want a police state and nothing else will do. It must be something in the water.I'm just glad that there's a few thinking people out there holding them in check somewhat. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #402 February 18, 2011 Quote Sometimes you knock on the door and there's nobody home. Some people just want a police state and nothing else will do. It must be something in the water.I'm just glad that there's a few thinking people out there holding them in check somewhat. I might have missed it, did you ever describe where you think that the line should be between what can and cannot be held secret by the government?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #403 February 18, 2011 Quote I might have missed it, did you ever describe where you think that the line should be between what can and cannot be held secret by the government? I think this is a totally irrelevant question. The government can try to keep secret what they want (within the confines of the law). They failed to do that in this case. Their procedures and safeguards were not enough to keep Bradley Manning from copying an amazing amount of classified information. Manning broke the law and will be punished. That has nothing to do with Assange. Assange is a publisher. That's it. He didn't decide what the U.S. government could or couldn't keep secret. He merely published what he got when the government failed to keep its own secrets. That's what publishers do. If the U.S. government goes after every publisher who prints anything classified, or stories based on classified information, there are going to be an awful lot of empty newsrooms."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #404 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuote I might have missed it, did you ever describe where you think that the line should be between what can and cannot be held secret by the government? I think this is a totally irrelevant question. The government can try to keep secret what they want (within the confines of the law). They failed to do that in this case. Their procedures and safeguards were not enough to keep Bradley Manning from copying an amazing amount of classified information. Manning broke the law and will be punished. That has nothing to do with Assange. Assange is a publisher. That's it. He didn't decide what the U.S. government could or couldn't keep secret. He merely published what he got when the government failed to keep its own secrets. That's what publishers do. If the U.S. government goes after every publisher who prints anything classified, or stories based on classified information, there are going to be an awful lot of empty newsrooms. It isn't irrelevant. Certain claims have been made. What are his conclusions of what constitutes the confines of the law? It was a question to his opinions. Are you saying that his opinions are irrelavent?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #405 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuote I might have missed it, did you ever describe where you think that the line should be between what can and cannot be held secret by the government? I think this is a totally irrelevant question. The government can try to keep secret what they want (within the confines of the law). They failed to do that in this case. Their procedures and safeguards were not enough to keep Bradley Manning from copying an amazing amount of classified information. Manning broke the law and will be punished. That has nothing to do with Assange. Assange is a publisher. That's it. He didn't decide what the U.S. government could or couldn't keep secret. He merely published what he got when the government failed to keep its own secrets. That's what publishers do. If the U.S. government goes after every publisher who prints anything classified, or stories based on classified information, there are going to be an awful lot of empty newsrooms. Assange knowingly took possession of stolen property. That is a crime. If it can be proven that Assange in any way conspired with Manning before Manning actually stole the documents....then assange has bigger problems than sex charges in Europe.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #406 February 18, 2011 Quote[I might have missed it, did you ever describe where you think that the line should be between what can and cannot be held secret by the government? Nope. Never did.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #407 February 18, 2011 Quote Assange knowingly took possession of stolen property. That is a crime. -Where? Quote If it can be proven that Assange in any way conspired with Manning before Manning actually stole the documents....then assange has bigger problems than sex charges in Europe. -Who gives a shit about 'What Ifs'? - Stick to the facts - no need to make shit up or cloud the issue. And anyway - even if he did so outside of the boarders of USA - I doubt that any who cares will give a flying fuck. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #408 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuote Assange knowingly took possession of stolen property. That is a crime. -Where? Quote If it can be proven that Assange in any way conspired with Manning before Manning actually stole the documents....then assange has bigger problems than sex charges in Europe. -Who gives a shit about 'What Ifs'? - Stick to the facts - no need to make shit up or cloud the issue. And anyway - even if he did so outside of the boarders of USA - I doubt that any who cares will give a flying fuck. "I doubt that any who cares will give a flying fuck" Say what?? That has got to be one of the most contradictory statements I have ever read. But I agree. Let's stick to the facts. -Manning stole documents from the US. -Manning gave those documents to Assange. -Assange knew they were stolen. Which of those is a legal activity and where?HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #409 February 18, 2011 Quote Assange knowingly took possession of stolen property. That is a crime. Plenty of reporters and publishers have received stolen classified documents. I don't believe the government has ever successfully prosecuted on for the crime of receiving stolen property. I guess it is not impossible but it would be a novel charge to make stick. Again, if they wish to do this, I hope they will apply the law consistently to all other reporters and publishers. QuoteIf it can be proven that Assange in any way conspired with Manning before Manning actually stole the documents....then assange has bigger problems than sex charges in Europe. Assumes facts not in evidence."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #410 February 18, 2011 Quote "I doubt that any who cares will give a flying fuck" Say what?? That has got to be one of the most contradictory statements I have ever read. Yeah, you're right that does read a bit strange, don't it? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #411 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuote[I might have missed it, did you ever describe where you think that the line should be between what can and cannot be held secret by the government? Nope. Never did. Could you now clarify please?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 616 #412 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote "I doubt that any who cares will give a flying fuck" Say what?? That has got to be one of the most contradictory statements I have ever read. Yeah, your right that does read a bit strange, don't it? They just haven't quite learn't the Queens english over there yet.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #413 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuote Assange knowingly took possession of stolen property. That is a crime. Plenty of reporters and publishers have received stolen classified documents. I don't believe the government has ever successfully prosecuted on for the crime of receiving stolen property. I guess it is not impossible but it would be a novel charge to make stick. Again, if they wish to do this, I hope they will apply the law consistently to all other reporters and publishers. It's not stolen property, it's not a stereo that the government can no longer use. It's intellectual property that was shared without their consent, and published by the press. So I don't see the stolen property bullshit getting any traction. It would be a specific law about receiving government secrets, which would not apply to someone outside the US. It's seems rather unnecessary to point out that he has not been charged with receiving stolen property yet. Heck, he hasn't even been charged with [Swedish minor rape] yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 892 #414 February 18, 2011 Legally, there are times thing being thrown away and taken without authorization from the original owner can be labeled as stolen property. Given the government never released the classification on the information, it was still theirs to do with as they please. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #415 February 18, 2011 QuoteLegally, there are times thing being thrown away and taken without authorization from the original owner can be labeled as stolen property. Given the government never released the classification on the information, it was still theirs to do with as they please. So do you believe that at least some of what the manner that documents were taken would be considered espionage?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #417 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuote Assange knowingly took possession of stolen property. That is a crime. Plenty of reporters and publishers have received stolen classified documents. I don't believe the government has ever successfully prosecuted on for the crime of receiving stolen property. I guess it is not impossible but it would be a novel charge to make stick. Again, if they wish to do this, I hope they will apply the law consistently to all other reporters and publishers. QuoteIf it can be proven that Assange in any way conspired with Manning before Manning actually stole the documents....then assange has bigger problems than sex charges in Europe. Assumes facts not in evidence. In a large portion of criminal investigations suspects are names by assuming facts not in evidence. I do not know if the government has ever actually charged a publisher with recieving stolen property. I do not know why they wouldn't.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #418 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote Assange knowingly took possession of stolen property. That is a crime. Plenty of reporters and publishers have received stolen classified documents. I don't believe the government has ever successfully prosecuted on for the crime of receiving stolen property. I guess it is not impossible but it would be a novel charge to make stick. Again, if they wish to do this, I hope they will apply the law consistently to all other reporters and publishers. It's not stolen property, it's not a stereo that the government can no longer use. It's intellectual property that was shared without their consent, and published by the press. So I don't see the stolen property bullshit getting any traction. It would be a specific law about receiving government secrets, which would not apply to someone outside the US. It's seems rather unnecessary to point out that he has not been charged with receiving stolen property yet. Heck, he hasn't even been charged with [Swedish minor rape] yet. Excuse me, but sharing intellectual property without the owners consent is stealing. Many engineers and executives have been convicted of theft for sharing company secrets and documents with competitors against company policy.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #419 February 19, 2011 Quote Excuse me, but sharing intellectual property without the owners consent is stealing. Many engineers and executives have been convicted of theft for sharing company secrets and documents with competitors against company policy. And yes, if WikiLeaks released engineering documents that someone used to build a new device, you might have a point. Though if you look at the past 60 years of the cold war, I can't recall the US suing the Soviets for stealing information on weapons design. They did, however, execute some for releasing that information to them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #420 February 19, 2011 QuoteQuote Excuse me, but sharing intellectual property without the owners consent is stealing. Many engineers and executives have been convicted of theft for sharing company secrets and documents with competitors against company policy. And yes, if WikiLeaks released engineering documents that someone used to build a new device, you might have a point. Though if you look at the past 60 years of the cold war, I can't recall the US suing the Soviets for stealing information on weapons design. They did, however, execute some for releasing that information to them. That sounds like a great idea.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #421 February 19, 2011 QuoteQuote Excuse me, but sharing intellectual property without the owners consent is stealing. Many engineers and executives have been convicted of theft for sharing company secrets and documents with competitors against company policy. And yes, if WikiLeaks released engineering documents that someone used to build a new device, you might have a point. Though if you look at the past 60 years of the cold war, I can't recall the US suing the Soviets for stealing information on weapons design. They did, however, execute some for releasing that information to them. You really don't get it, do you? The documents were, and still are, property of the US Government. The contents of those documents does not relieve Assnage and Manning of any criminal liability. They were still stolen. Now....why don't you tell us what documents should be made public and which ones shouldn't? You do have an opinion on that, right?HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #422 February 19, 2011 QuoteExcuse me, but sharing intellectual property without the owners consent is stealing. Many engineers and executives have been convicted of theft for sharing company secrets and documents with competitors against company policy. They also worked for private companies, which is a different story. It would be possible for the information taken in your example above to be copyrighted. They may have also signed (and violated) NDAs which would be a civil matter in addition to theft. "Works" created on the government's dime are in the public domain by default and are generally available via a FOIA request. If it's classified in accordance with the E.O. du jour, then you can only access it after signing what basically amounts to an NDA with criminal penalties behind it. It's not possible to be charged with anything related to handling of classified material if you've never signed such an agreement. The only people who can get in trouble are the person who gave the information to a third party, or anyone read in who holds up something that was leaked and says, "yup, definitely authentic." (which would be incredibly stupid.) If (and only if) Assange conspired with Manning prior to the release of information, he could be charged as well, but it still wouldn't be for theft. In any event, I've heard nothing to suggest that this actually happened. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #423 February 19, 2011 EspionageI'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #424 February 19, 2011 QuoteCould you now clarify please? Nope. Irrelevant.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #425 February 19, 2011 Quote [Yeah, you're right that does read a bit strange, don't it? I got it Shroppy....he who cares right up to the point of flying fuck but no more. Caring a flying fuck is waaaaaaaay down the caring scale. It's Brit thing, right?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
