

Congressman wants WikiLeaks listed as terrorist group - Uncle_Sam
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20023941-38.html

======
jemfinch
Has representative King really considered the implication of such a
classification?

"Terrorism" implies that a group exists to cause fear.

Wikileaks releases secret documents produced by the government of United
States (et al).

If Wikileaks is a terrorist organization, then secret documents produced by
the government of the United States _must cause fear_.

Is that really what King intends to say?

~~~
tibbon
I wonder what percentage of the founding of America was done through
"terrorism".

~~~
Rhapso
none. Those were "Freedom Fighters" or "Guerilla warfare" only "bad" people
are terrorists, and by definition the american government cannot be "bad"

------
extension
I guess the New York Times is a terrorist group too since they did pretty much
the same thing as WikiLeaks: someone handed them the cables and they happily
published them.

~~~
rorymarinich
Well, we've known certain parts of the right have wanted to classify the NTY
as terrorists for years now.

------
iwr
Having your organization on that list means that any members of it, or
associates become non-persons (people without rights). It is striking that
this is happening in a Western country today.

~~~
alttab
We are "western" only by our location these days. Once cable TV gets shut down
we may actually see a revolution.

~~~
tomjen3
Which is why they will do almost anything to keep it on.

------
MichaelSalib
This is especially hilarious because Rep Peter King has a long history of
supporting terrorists and associating with terrorist groups, as recognized by
several different governments:

 _In the 1980s, King frequently traveled to Northern Ireland to meet with IRA
members. In 1982, speaking at a pro-IRA rally in Nassau County, New York, King
said: “We must pledge ourselves to support those brave men and women who this
very moment are carrying forth the struggle against British imperialis­m in
the streets of Belfast and Derry.” A Northern Irish judge ordered King ejected
from the former's courtroom, describing him as “an obvious collaborat­or with
the IRA”. He became involved with NORAID, an organizati­on that the British,
Irish and US government­s accuse of financing IRA activities and providing
them with weapons. He was banned from appearing on British TV for his pro IRA
views and refusing to condemn IRA activity in the UK._

See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#Northern_Ireland> for more
information.

One of the coolest things about being an Arab American living in the Boston
metro area is the near certainty that anytime I'm in a busy public place,
there are terrorists supporters and sympathizers with me, and they're all
white Irish people.

------
donohoe
Odd. The TSA has had more of a detrimental affect on my (physically and
emotionally) than Wikileaks ever could.

------
holdenc
On 9/11/2001 it meant something to be a terrorist. However, these days it
means nothing. Everything the government doesn't like is a potential terror
threat, and every person acting against it could be a terrorist.

There's a big difference between terrorist, activist and military combatant.

------
yequalsx
The interesting thing to me is that nothing will change. We have gotten a
glimpse into how messed up some things are but there's no public outcry for
change. People just aren't upset about the stupid things governments do.
Nobody really cares. It's a bit disheartening.

~~~
nhangen
Because very few are capable of creating it. It's easy to find fault, but much
more difficult to create a solution. That's why nothing is changing. No one
wants the responsibility of doing it.

~~~
yequalsx
I'm not finding fault in anyone. My point was that talk of labeling Wikileaks
as a terrorist organization or something evil are baseless when one considers
that leaking these documents doesn't change anything. It's almost comical that
the U.S. government raised a stink about this when the fact is that people
don't care enough to demand change.

------
vaksel
it saddens me that a congressman can say something like that and not be driven
out of town for abusing the 1st amendment.

How can you make laws, when you don't know that the first amendment guarantees
the freedom of the press.

it's like religion, in Europe those who bring up religion in politics get
laughed at....in U.S. it's next to impossible to get elected without it.

~~~
roel_v
Non-exhaustive list of court-recognized exceptions to the First Amendment:

(1) Defamation (2) Causing panic (3) Fighting words (4) Incitement to crime
(5) Sedition (6) Obscenity

I don't know what leads to you posit that the congressman doesn't know about
the First Amendment. It's very well possible to limit certain expressions of
speech, by 'the press', well within the boundaries of the First Amendment.

------
scrrr
They of course react totally wrong to WikiLeaks. Should they close the site
down, arrest Assange or something similar, the same will happen, as with any
BitTorrent-site take down: Two new ones will appear tomorrow.

~~~
jacquesm
I don't think Assange will be arrested or wikileaks shut down because they're
afraid of how much damaging material could be in a 1.4G encrypted torrent.

------
walkon
Should the government ever be allowed to have secrets? To what level should
government correspondence be public? Some situations (e.g. the Manhattan
Project) necessitate secrecy. What exactly is wrong with that, at least in
some situations, and why are we so willing to assume WikiLeaks/Assange knows
what should (or shouldn't) be leaked?

Just trying to understand as it appears the overall thought process here is,
"leak everything - the end."

~~~
redrobot5050
When Dick Cheney/Karl Rove/Scooter Libby "outed" Valerie Plame, they gave away
a dummy corporation used by the CIA for agents like Valerie who (mostly) did
not operate under a cover identity but gathered intelligence. It is estimated
that by blowing her cover, over 70 other intelligence-friendly agents or
sources were captured, imprisoned, or killed.

------
funkdobiest
I would think that the US armed forces would get proactive and start securing
their transmissions from end to end. Back when we had the cold war and Russia
got a hold of some top secret document, you didn't hear whiney congress dolts
saying they were a terrorist organization.. oh wait

------
ajays
Why do New Yorkers keep electing this chump? Someone with such a lack of
understanding of the basic tenets of our Constitution should not be elected.

~~~
slantyyz
Electorates around the world are apathetic and too fixated on their own lives
to vote or know their candidates, that's why.

------
tomjen3
By that definition, they should add every lobby group and the senate to the
same list.

That might be a good thing, actually.

------
papertiger
This is a truly horrifying prospect.

