Manufactured by the CFR/NWO
Posted on 12/07/2010 10:15:23 AM PST by wikifreedom
Open Letter to America:
One might be forgiven for reading current media debates over wikileaks and concluding that we are not a nation at global war.
Last time we were in a world war, the citizenry took its contributions upon itself, melting pots for ammunition, volunteering for grassroots war causes, and buying bonds to support the troops.
What's the difference this time? Now we have a people who seem to put the right they imagine they have to know the inner workings of their government ahead of the ability of that government to protect them.
In the 1940s, newspapers were the principal cheerleaders for our war effort. While the media did a noble job reprising that role in the lead-up to the Iraq War, especially The New York Times and its team of prize-winning patriots such as Thomas Friedman and Judith Miller, what has happened over the past five years? Now we have a press that seems to be putting its notion of transparency ahead of the country it serves.
We have the Times, as the only U.S. paper with advance access to the cables, pursuing the schizoid strategy of, on the one hand, publishing countless stories detailing the contents of the cables, and, on the other, offering its editorial and more “news-analysis” ink to voices critical of wikileaks. The more noble and uniform strategy would be to refuse to dignify the cables and to publish no stories based on them, while continuing to give voice to our core national values by publishing columnists opposed to wikileaks. That would create the consistency we need in the war effort.
The Times of 2003 might have had the guts to say, “You know what, wikileaks? Thanks, but no thanks.” With a quarter-million leaks still to be released, the Times has 250,000 more chances to do the right thing.
The government has taken the wise step of warning its employees that if they access the illegally obtained cables, they are breaking the law because this information has not been declassified. Is there any reason to stop at government employees? If a citizen who is not a government employee reads illegally obtained classified information, he is breaking the law, too, and should be prosecuted. It's very simple: This is still classified information; it is illegal without clearance to read classified information; if you do so, you are breaking the law. Quod erat demonstrandum.
Moreover, just as Assange has broken the law and, if he is lucky, will soon be rendered for prosecution to this nation, people around the world who read these cables are breaking the law, because they are reading illegally obtained still-classified information.
We have a military presence in over fifty countries of the world, many of which, for all practical purposes, are our satellites and will follow our command. Why not flex this muscle? We have the cyberassets to put a stop to this hemorrhaging of our data. People in any country of the world detected to be reading these cables are breaking the law and should be rendered to the United States for prosecution.
We have become an “information”-obsessed society. What we need to turn the tide against “information” and toward victory is a nationwide boycott of wikileaks, from The New York Times on down to the people. We can call our movement wikifreedom.
You may be asking, “What can I do in my daily life to join the wikifreedom movement?” If you are watching TV, and some mention of the cables comes on, either hit “mute” or “off.” If you are surfing the net and come across a description of what's in the cables, navigate away from that page and don't go back. If a Facebook friend posts a link to a story about the cables, defriend him.
These are some of the little things you can do that, stacked one on top of another, create a genuine war effort, just as people in the 1940s did what they could at home to stop fascism in the larger world.
Remember: the only story we want to see about Assange is one featuring him swinging from a rope. The only story we want to see about wikileaks is one announcing that its plugs have been pulled, its underground offices shuttered.
We are using the principle of supply-and-demand upon which this country was founded. If the demand for information dries up, so will the supply. If no one reads these leaks, there will be no interest in them. They will get no attention. People with the nefarious urge to leak will no longer turn to wikileaks. Donations will stop. Wikileaks will go out of business, and the greasy punk hackers will have to leave their basements and find gainful employment.
Newspapers of record can help the war effort by giving even more space to the voices of freedom, in order to counterbalance the corpulent children of privilege known as the left. (Thank you, New York Times and Washington Post, for the recent acquisitions of Ross Douthat and Marc Thiessen, respectively). And we the people need to serve notice to these papers that if you continue to publish stories based on these illegally obtained cables, we will cancel our subscriptions.
For those worrying about freedom of the press, please re-read the First Amendment. It says, “Congress shall make no law...infringing freedom of the press...” First and foremost, wikileaks is not the press. They do no reporting; they cut and paste illegally obtained information. Second, in joining this boycott, we're not asking Congress to make any laws. There is no command coming down from on-high. This is, at worst, a temporary self-censorship. This is a newspaper deciding on its own to put country first, to put patriotism ahead of gossip, and to just say no to any mention of these cables. The press of the 1940s offered cartoons with caricatures of Japs and Krauts. While similar depictions of Muslims may not be possible in today's climate of political correctness, the media can do what they can to help the war effort.
Perhaps the people and presses of other nations will even follow suit, recognizing that it is also against their best interests to have their secrets spilled. Remember, a government's survival depends upon its keeping secrets, from other governments and, yes, from its own people, just as your survival within your family probably depends upon you keeping your secrets from the ones you love.
Remember what this war is about: it's about protecting our way of life. In this country, we can do and say whatever we want without fear of persecution, and where else in the history of the world has that been possible?
Sincerely, and may God Bless America, Dustin Lavent
(Dustin Lavent is the nom de plume of an analyst at the Heritage Foundation.)
Yes, we have. And few can resist a trainwreck.
Many are hoping for certain missing information that leads to the impeachment, de-frocking, and charges of treason of the Fraud-in-Chief.
Is that so wrong?
If the information is made public, how is not reading it going to help? I fail to see the logic in this article. Do you believe that our enemies will not read it? When did ignorance become a virtue? The person that should be punished, and I would suggest the death penalty, is the PFC that released it. From a strictly psychological point of view, when you tell people that they should not read something, that encourages them to read it.
>> If no one reads these leaks, there will be no interest in them.
Nonsense ... our enemies will be interested whether we are or not. If the cat’s already out of the bag (which it is), there is no good reason that the American people should remain intentionally uninformed.
SnakeDoc
Why not, show how virtually no liberal show ever be in a political office - anywhere.
Registered today to post that somehow us not reading the leaked info will, what, stop our enemies from reading it? That’s as ridiculous as the State Department memo that people in government shouldn’t read the leaked info because that will, what, also stop our enemies from reading it?
Once it’s out there, we better read it so we know at least as much as our enemies. And don’t forget, this nation is “We the People,” not “We the Government,” so jihadists et al are the enemies of We the People, not just of the government!
Wow.
“it is illegal without clearance to read classified information...”
Really? Would that be state law or federal law? Under what law is reading a crime?
“...just as Assange has broken the law...”
If this is so obvious to so many, why can’t anyone cite exactly what law he broke and the evidence that he did so? Has our Attorney General done this?
Yeah, right. A real Heritage analyst would not be so hopelessly naive, or so cowardly as to call for a boycott anonymously. I smell a troll.
Manufactured by the CFR/NWO
Registered today to post that somehow us not reading the leaked info will, what, stop our enemies from reading it? That’s as ridiculous as the State Department memo that people in government shouldn’t read the leaked info because that will, what, also stop our enemies from reading it?
Once it’s out there, we better read it so we know at least as much as our enemies. And don’t forget, this nation is “We the People,” not “We the Government,” so jihadists et al are the enemies of We the People, not just of the government!
Wow.
6 posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2010 12:33:24 PM by piytar
Evidently, the BO regime has an endless supply of useful idiots like this newbie, wiki “freedom.”
Is it too late to take it back? Can I un-read them? I want to be a wiki-virgin again...
I know. One of those Men-in-Black, memory erasing thingees...
IBTZ
Now there's your basic mistake in understanding. It's going to come as as horrible blow to you and your colleagues at the foundation when you realize that the government is not here to protect us... and an even bigger blow when you realize we are NOT interested in their protection.
Hi. We're from the government and we're here to protect you.
Hmmm...
*** Signed up TODAY
*** This vanity is your first and only post
*** hit and run — you haven’t replied to your comments
Is that YOU, Hillary Clintoon?
Last time we were in a world war the President(s) did not refuse to name the enemy,nor impose asinine restrictions on nearly every American citizen without a clear purpose and goal.
Yeah, right. A real Heritage analyst would not be so hopelessly naive, or so cowardly as to call for a boycott anonymously. I smell a troll.
Dustin Lavent is a cheerleader for tyranny. I ain't buyin' your Astroturf, wikifreedom.
THAT WE HERE HIGHLY RESOLVE
THAT THESE DEAD SHALL NOT HAVE DIED IN VAIN
that this nation, under God,
shall have a new birth of freedom
and that government of the people, by the people, for the people,
shall not perish from the earth.---Abraham Lincoln, Gettysberg
---November 19, 1863
Facing an Islamic revolution, the Shah appealed to Carter for help. On November 4, 1978 U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski called the Shah and said the United States would "back him to the hilt." This would never be the case."A month prior to Brzezinski’s speech, in November of 1978, “President Carter named the Bilderberg group’s George Ball, another member of the Trilateral Commission, to head a special White House Iran task force under the National Security Council’s Brzezinski.” Further, “Ball recommended that Washington drop support for the Shah of Iran and support the fundamentalist Islamic opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini.”
However, Ziggy and Henry the K have never been alone in this endeavor. Look to the Council on Foreign Relations. The Trilats. The Bilderbergs. The Globalists need a strong sovereign USA out of the way and its institutions crippled - if not destroyed outright. Up till now things have gone according to Plan.
It's time to pull back the curtain and have the wise wizards behind it all waddle down Constitution Avenue in virtual chains and orange jumpsuits -- lest we get another dose of Smoke, Mirrors, and the usual Bullshyte.
Hear ya. When's the Party begin? :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.