Comments on: The true test of freedom

By: Anthony Farrugia

Anthony Farrugia — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:16:17 +0000

This link shows that US government is requesting Twitter, apart from other social networks, to provide details of non-US collaborators of Wikileaks all in the name of freedom of information!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/09/iceland-us-ambassador-twitter-wikileaks

By: Anthony Farrugia

Anthony Farrugia — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 09:27:38 +0000

In reply to Dr Francis Saliba. When you hear experts speaking about computer and internet security they smother us with gobbledegook and then they left archived diplomatic cables accessible to a young, bored (that's the key word) soldier with time on his hands. Incredible!

By: Dr Francis Saliba

Dr Francis Saliba — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 22:36:34 +0000

Julian Assange is an Australian citizen trying to obtain asylum in any country that would accept him. But the thief who purloined the secret and confidential diplomatic exchanges before passing them on to Assange (at what price?) is a USA soldier.

By: Anthony Farrugia

Anthony Farrugia — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 21:09:38 +0000

In reply to Anthony Farrugia. And to day we have Republicans of all shades crying crocodile tears over the Arizona massacre after months of hate comments on blogs, radio, and Fox TV !

By: Pat

Pat — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 14:15:47 +0000

In reply to Anthony Farrugia.

“Sarah Palin” and “reasoning” shouldn’t be put in the same sentence, ever. Unless it’s separated with “lack of”.

By: Anthony Farrugia

Anthony Farrugia — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 12:51:13 +0000

In reply to Dr Francis Saliba. In the case of Julian Assange, "treason" against which country? Australia? Please remember that Assange is an Australian cditizen. This brings to mind Sarah Palin/Tea Party reasoning!

By: Dr Francis Saliba

Dr Francis Saliba — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 17:25:21 +0000

The difference between “treason” and “free speech” cannot reside in the question whether the profitable harmful revelation of stolen secret documents, occurs in peacetime or in time of war, hot or cold.

By: Anthony Farrugia

Anthony Farrugia — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 23:18:40 +0000

In reply to P Shaw.

He has already published about shady business deals between Putin and Berlusconi.

Sarah Palin wants him charged with treason when he is not a US citizen.

So you do not believe in freedom of information and want to be lied to by characters as George W Bush and Tony Blair (eg Saddam Hussein and Weapons of Mass Destruction).

Hmmm Daily Mail a rehashed article .
Takes all characters…………………….

By: H.P. Baxxter

H.P. Baxxter — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 21:02:56 +0000

Storm in a teacup, what. There’s nothing on Wikileaks that any half-decent intelligence agency didn’t already know. Even allies spy on each other.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 13:59:32 +0000

In reply to Dominic. Dominic, in the US the publication of "stolen" material is protected by the First Amendment when that material is a matter of public concern. The Supreme Court ruled in Bartnicki et al v. Vopper that “a stranger’s illegal conduct does not suffice to remove the First Amendment shield from speech about a matter of public concern.” This means that even if Bradley Manning acted illegally in leaking the documents - which I doubt - the publication of those documents remains legal. Mintoff's conversations in the abstract sense are not a matter of public concern, but if the conversations revealed public corruption, for example, then they would be. Context is everything.