Glad i sniffed this up by coincidence, and thought i'd introduce myself... Excuse me for my grammatic failures or misspells ^^
Between fellow net-fags i go by the name Gaylord Liggins, Lithik, or Anonyfruit. Im a scandinavia-fag, which means i wont be able to take too much part in your discussions, i will be reading all of it tho, and possibly make delayed responses if i can be arsed.
Im a non-proffessional in everything due to a young age, but i'm very much into politics, and i spend just about all my time discussing religion politics, and our current media, who i've loathed since i grew a mind of my own, basically. I'm a musician, and i'm in a metal band, where my guy fawkes mask suits as an epic prop.
News and the music industry are my biggest iritational-areas, as the way that the music industry is set up right now, is so... Disgusting. And the failure which is the news on their sensationalism, reporting half-stories, and not doing research, is sickening... Sorry for the emoing ;O
Aaaanyways, i am a supporter of wikileaks, obviously, and the prossecution of julian assange pushed me over the edge to become an oficial anon instead of just an observer, as i had been for... about a year, i guess? And i believe that EVERY information regarding the public should be oficial to the public. A government who has something to hide, is not a government i support. So hook me up, americanos, and for gods sake dont point and laugh at my Hotmail.
Subject: Re: Press Release for Project PM/Anonymous rally in NYC
From:
barryeisler@mac.comDate: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:46:44 -0800
CC:
lordpai@hotmail.com; To:
barriticus@gmail.com
Hi all, I've been lurking for a while, too, so here's a brief introduction. From 1989 to 1992 I worked in a covert position at the CIA, which I think might sound more exotic than it really was, but it did give me an inside view of how bureaucracies, specifically intelligence agencies, disfunction. After that I spent about a decade as a lawyer in private practice in DC, Silicon Valley, and Japan, then a few years as an executive with a technology startup, and since then I've managed to make a living writing novels full time while enjoying blogging as a hobby. I claim no special expertise in politics or media; I just read and think a lot and sometimes write about issues that concern me, for whatever that's worth.
I'm a huge supporter of WikiLeaks for some of the reasons others have already articulated on this thread. Todd, I think all your concerns are valid, but I think they also apply to the New York Times, Washington Post, Google, and anyone else who handles confidential information. Overall, I think excessive secrecy is a disease in a democracy and that WikiLeaks is part of an immune response. Like a fever, sometimes the immune response might be too strong or otherwise less than perfect, but overall I'm still far more concerned about the disease. For the most part, I share the views on WikiLeaks articulated by Glenn Greenwald, Jay Rosen, Aaron Bady of Zunguzungu, and by Barrett himself.
I like to listen more than I like to talk, so I will now officially pipe down again. Thanks, everyone, for having me here -- it's an honor.
Barry Eisler
www.barryeisler.com
On Jan 13, 2011, at 8:45 PM, Barrett Brown wrote:
Yes, I forgot that Scott had also had concerns about Wikileaks, which we discussed a few weeks back. I would remind you, though, that you also had concerns about Anonymous, and you seem to have changed your mind upon meeting some of the top people like Gregg who have also put their time, money, and energy into charitable operations. Having said that, there are indeed objections to be made to our support of Wikileaks and if you'd like to make them, this would be the time to do so, as I'd like for us to reach a compromise, as you propose, as quickly as possible.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Scott Mintz
<scott.w.mintz@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm typing this on my phone and suck at doing so, so I'll keep this brief.
I would be a shocked if out of the 100+ participants indicating interest in Project PM Todd is/was the only one with concerns. In fact, it's possible many may be not so much opposed, but rather not quite ready to have their name associated.
I myself have raised concerns with Barrett. I'm not saying I'm pro or anti as I'm certainly open to debating and reserve the right to change my mind at any time.
While I fully understand the overlap between the two and appreciate this as a marketing tool, it is my hope a compromise can be reached rather than alienate those who aren't comfortable.
My 2 cents.
On Jan 13, 2011 6:09 PM, "Barrett Brown" <
barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
Todd-
Briefly, I would object to your characterization of myself and others involved having decided to support Wikileaks despite an "absence of serious discussion" of these issues. I, for one, have been covering Wikileaks since April of last year, well before almost any other media or individuals have heard of it. I have also been criticizing the organization for almost as long when warranted; just today I wrote that Wikileaks will lose credibility unless it gets rid of its Russian representative, who is an obvious anti-Semite, among other things. More specifically, I would object on the grounds that we have indeed been having serious discussions about Wikileaks for quite a while now in our weekly meetings and our various other conversations. Just last night, for instance, I spoke to Michael Hastings about the issue for quite a while, and I've spoken to Barry Eisler, a former CIA Directorate of Operations chap, a number of times. Both of these individuals are very strong backers of Project PM and both support what Wikileaks is doing in general (and as they are cc'd on this, they can add their thoughts if they'd like). Meanwhile, I have not gotten any objections other than yours from anyone associated with PM. This is not to say that you are wrong, of course, but rather that the organization as a whole tends to support Wikileaks, as do I.
Regarding the hypotheticals you have put forward, I would begin by noting that this is obviously not the first time I have heard or considered such objections since I have been debating the issue quite actively lately. The quick answer to them is that Wikileaks has actively worked with media outlets such as The Guardian (for which I'm now writing in part for that reason) and the New York Times in order to ensure that anything which is a legitimate secret is redacted. That process is not perfect, but neither is journalism, a discipline which often finds itself trying to find a balance between its role as a watchdog of governments and a responsible industry that is mindful of legitimate national security concerns. I prefer what people like Hastings and organizations like Wikileaks do over what it is that the media as a whole has been doing over the past decade or so, during which it played a large part in allowing two wars to launch and fail at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives and untold damage to the nation's credibility, economy, and military. As for your questions, then, I suppose you could ask similar ones in the context of such things as the Pentagon Papers.
Obviously, if you are uncomfortable with Project PM's advocacy of Wikileaks and don't want to be associated with us any longer, we will respect that. I would prefer to change your mind, although I imagine - even if you think otherwise of me - that you have put a great deal of thought into your position.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Todd Essig <tessig@me.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, Todd-
>
--
Regards,
Barrett Brown
512-560-2302
--
Regards,
Barrett Brown
512-560-2302