lester1/2jr
11-30-2010, 02:24 PM
I knew something was fishy when everyone was extending Olive Branches to these guys last week over their opportunistic "we kinda don't like the Fed right now" defense of Ron Paul. Hey maybe I am just an asshole and it was genuine, anyway here's a good indication of where they stand on state power in general:
At some point people are going to start wondering, if they haven’t already, what leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, U.S. Grant, and Dwight Eisenhower would have done in respect of Wikileaks. We mention those names because they were presidents who led an army — or the whole nation — in a time of war. It’s hard to think of an attack on any of our nation’s war efforts quite like that which is being made by Wikileaks under the cover of a claim to be a publication. What would our greatest leaders expect President Obama to do in respect of Julian Assange?
Washington had an obsession with secrecy, about which he wrote in a famous letter that contained his celebrated sentence, sent from eight miles east of Morristown, New Jersey, in the middle of the revolutionary war. “For upon Secrecy, Success depends in Most Enterprizes of the kind, and for want of it, they are generally defeated, however well planned & promising a favourable issue.” He took his secrecy so seriously that he refused to share, even with the Congress, the instructions he had given to the negotiator of the Jay Treaty with Britain that nearly precipitated war with France.
You see it's like this: Washington was pretty much the same as Nixon.
Feature what Washington’s successor, John Adams, did, during the almost-war with France, to Benjamin Bache. Bache, via the Philadelphia Aurora, operated against Adams and the Federalists and for the Jeffersonians. He “knowingly sided with the treacherous French,” as Abigail Adams put it, according to an account of the First Amendment Center. Her husband was so beside himself that he signed the Alien and Sedition Acts and started arresting editors thither and yon.
yes the alien and sedition acts, the high point of this great experiment in liberty.
What the courts would have countenanced is hard to say, because, while awaiting trial, Bache got carried off by yellow fever at the age of 29. All that, in any event, was over a near-war that was never actually joined. It’s something to imagine what Adams would have made of things were America, as it is today, nearly a decade into a war and suddenly confronted by a publisher, if that’s what Mr. Assange is, issuing wholesale our un-redacted war secrets while our men and women were appearing in arms.
It is fearsome to think of what kind of black rage it would have put Lincoln in.
was that a pun? black rage?
He nearly brought Horace Greeley up for treason just for trying, as the famed editor of the New York Tribune did, to arrange peace talks with the South. Imagine if the oleaginous Greeley had been, while in foreign and even neutral countries, publishing tens of thousands of sensitive telegrams naming our agents, and our units, and disclosing to the Confederacy what we knew and when we knew it. Can one even conjure the intensity of Lincoln’s anger as he sat, as one can imagine, in Secretary of War Stanton’s cavernous office, poring over the details of the breach as an aide read out the sanguinary consequences?
cont.
http://www.nysun.com/editorials/wikileaks-and-the-war/87121/
really we should thank them for this.
At some point people are going to start wondering, if they haven’t already, what leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, U.S. Grant, and Dwight Eisenhower would have done in respect of Wikileaks. We mention those names because they were presidents who led an army — or the whole nation — in a time of war. It’s hard to think of an attack on any of our nation’s war efforts quite like that which is being made by Wikileaks under the cover of a claim to be a publication. What would our greatest leaders expect President Obama to do in respect of Julian Assange?
Washington had an obsession with secrecy, about which he wrote in a famous letter that contained his celebrated sentence, sent from eight miles east of Morristown, New Jersey, in the middle of the revolutionary war. “For upon Secrecy, Success depends in Most Enterprizes of the kind, and for want of it, they are generally defeated, however well planned & promising a favourable issue.” He took his secrecy so seriously that he refused to share, even with the Congress, the instructions he had given to the negotiator of the Jay Treaty with Britain that nearly precipitated war with France.
You see it's like this: Washington was pretty much the same as Nixon.
Feature what Washington’s successor, John Adams, did, during the almost-war with France, to Benjamin Bache. Bache, via the Philadelphia Aurora, operated against Adams and the Federalists and for the Jeffersonians. He “knowingly sided with the treacherous French,” as Abigail Adams put it, according to an account of the First Amendment Center. Her husband was so beside himself that he signed the Alien and Sedition Acts and started arresting editors thither and yon.
yes the alien and sedition acts, the high point of this great experiment in liberty.
What the courts would have countenanced is hard to say, because, while awaiting trial, Bache got carried off by yellow fever at the age of 29. All that, in any event, was over a near-war that was never actually joined. It’s something to imagine what Adams would have made of things were America, as it is today, nearly a decade into a war and suddenly confronted by a publisher, if that’s what Mr. Assange is, issuing wholesale our un-redacted war secrets while our men and women were appearing in arms.
It is fearsome to think of what kind of black rage it would have put Lincoln in.
was that a pun? black rage?
He nearly brought Horace Greeley up for treason just for trying, as the famed editor of the New York Tribune did, to arrange peace talks with the South. Imagine if the oleaginous Greeley had been, while in foreign and even neutral countries, publishing tens of thousands of sensitive telegrams naming our agents, and our units, and disclosing to the Confederacy what we knew and when we knew it. Can one even conjure the intensity of Lincoln’s anger as he sat, as one can imagine, in Secretary of War Stanton’s cavernous office, poring over the details of the breach as an aide read out the sanguinary consequences?
cont.
http://www.nysun.com/editorials/wikileaks-and-the-war/87121/
really we should thank them for this.