[2010] Wikileaks' Julian Assange "in Danger" President Obama celebrated with new U.S. citizens at a naturalization ceremony Friday as both immigration advocates and Republicans expressed outrage at his deportation proposals. President Obama celebrated the naturalization of 13 U.S. service members and seven military spouses in South Korea on Friday, congratulating the new American citizens and expressing his pride at joining the ceremony at the National War Memorial in Seoul. “If there’s anything this should teach us, it is that America is strengthened by our immigrants," he said, repeating his determination to reform the U.S. immigration system. Meanwhile, back in Washington, his administration remains wedged between a congressional Republican-generated rock-and-hard-place on the issue of immigration reform, as it has for nearly a year. How would Obama bring about this border Armageddon? It’s a tough line to straddle, since anything Obama does to appease one side is seen as a big middle finger by the other. “Here’s the attitude.
Daniel Ellsberg's Website — Pentagon Papers For more background information, please see our Press Release. Larger Version Joint Chiefs of Staff meet at the LBJ Ranch, 12/22/1964 National Archives Identifier 192566 The Pentagon Papers, officially titled "Report of the Office of the Secretary of Defense Vietnam Task Force", was commissioned by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara in 1967. On the 40th anniversary of the leak to the press, the National Archives, along with the Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon Presidential Libraries, has released the complete report. What is unique about this, compared to other versions, is that: The complete Report is now available with no redactions compared to previous releasesThe Report is presented as Leslie Gelb presented it to then Secretary of Defense Clark Clifford on January 15, 1969All the supplemental back-documentation is included. All files in the "Title" column are in PDF format. Due to the large file sizes, we recommend that you save them rather than try to open them directly.
Pentagon Papers A CIA map of dissident activities in Indochina published as part of the Pentagon papers The Pentagon Papers, officially titled United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense, is a United States Department of Defense history of the United States' political-military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. The papers were discovered and released by Daniel Ellsberg, and first brought to the attention of the public on the front page of The New York Times in 1971.[1] A 1996 article in The New York Times said that the Pentagon Papers had demonstrated, among other things, that the Johnson Administration "systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress More specifically, the papers revealed that the U.S. had secretly enlarged the scale of the Vietnam War with the bombings of nearby Cambodia and Laos, coastal raids on North Vietnam, and Marine Corps attacks, none of which were reported in the mainstream media.[3] Contents[edit] U.S.
[2010] DOJ Probing Wikileaks Disclosure – Main Justice DOJ Probing Wikileaks Disclosure By Leah Nylen | July 28, 2010 10:30 am WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange (Getty) The Justice Department has opened an investigation into who leaked thousands of classified documents on the war in Afghanistan to the website Wikileaks, the Attorney General said Wednesday. “The Justice Department is working with the Department of Defense with regard to an investigation concerning who the source of those leaks might be,” Attorney General Eric Holder said at a news conference at the U.S. Over the weekend, Wikileaks, a website that publishes leaked documents, published a trove of 91,000 classified U.S. military documents pertaining to the U.S. war in Afghanistan from 2004 through 2010. “I deplore the release of classified information,” Holder said. Holder is in Africa this week.
Daniel Ellsberg Says He Fears US Might Assassinate W RATIGAN: Do you see direct parallels between what’s developing here and what you went through? ELLSBURG: Yes, there does seem to be an immediate parallel between me and whoever leaked the video on the assault on the 19 or 20 Iraqis. Someone–allegedly, it was Bradley Manning–did feel that that deserved to be out. the “Reuters,” whose newspapermen were killed in the course of that, had been trying to get that through the freedom of information act for two years, as I understand it and had been refused. Let’s say whoever did it, hypothetically, Bradley Manning, showed better judgment in putting it out than the people who kept is secret from the American people and from the Iraqis. RATIGAN: What is your sense of disclosure of information to the American people today, compared to the period of time that you lived through, where there was similar issues with, with the perception of reality of information being withheld from the public? RATIGAN: Phillip, what is your understand of where Mr.
Index:Pentagon-Papers-Part IV. A. 5.djvu Index:Pentagon-Papers-Part IV. A. 5.djvu From Wikisource Jump to: navigation, search Retrieved from " Category: Index Not-Proofread Navigation menu Personal tools Namespaces Variants Views More Navigation Tools Download/print Languages Add links This page was last modified on 1 June 2013, at 17:05. Is Wikileaks Like the Pentagon Papers? | Floyd Abrams With rendition switcher Question: Is the Wikileaks document release protected by the First Amendment? Floyd Abrams: Well, I don’t know of anything in what Wikileaks has published which violates any law. One of my concerns for example, it’s non-legal concern, but one of my concerns is that when you have 92,000 documents that it’s more likely than not that—when all of them are classified by the way, although at a relatively modest level—that there may well be some material which could be genuinely harmful to national security. I find it really disturbing that they really, on the one hand, have this great passion for revelation of secrets which is their raison d'etre, that’s why they exist, that’s what they believe in but I find it disturbing that they don’t really seem to accept the proposition that there are some materials which, if published, can do harm. Question: Is it treason?
U.S. Urges Allies to Crack Down on WikiLeaks For five long and very strange years, death haunted tiny Dryden, NY, a town near the Finger Lakes where a plague of car accidents, suicides, and even grisly murders involving two popular cheerleaders just kept mounting up. At the end of Fargo, Frances McDormand’s police chief, Marge Gunderson, captures the psycho played by Peter Stormare. He’s in the backseat of her police cruiser and she talks to him as she drives. We see that she cannot fathom the evil she’s just seen. “And here ya are,” she says, “and it’s a beautiful day. I am not surprised by violence or horror but still sometimes find myself struck, not unlike Marge, in a kind of a daze, unable to wrap my head around it. Why do horrible things happen? In the meantime, dig into “The Cheerleaders.” The Cheerleaders by E. Welcome to Dryden. If you live in Dryden, the kids from Ithaca, that cradle of metropolitan sophistication 15 miles away, will say you live in a “cow town.” In the summer of ’96, many bonfires are built. “What?”
Ellsberg paradox The Ellsberg paradox is a paradox in decision theory in which people's choices violate the postulates of subjective expected utility.[1] It is generally taken to be evidence for ambiguity aversion. The paradox was popularized by Daniel Ellsberg, although a version of it was noted considerably earlier by John Maynard Keynes.[2] The basic idea is that people overwhelmingly prefer taking on risk in situations where they know specific odds rather than an alternate risk scenario in which the odds are completely ambiguous—they will always choose a known probability of winning over an unknown probability of winning even if the known probability is low and the unknown probability could be a guarantee of winning. That is, given a choice of risks to take (such as bets), people "prefer the devil they know" rather than assuming a risk where odds are difficult or impossible to calculate.[3] The 1 urn paradox[edit] Utility theory interpretation[edit] Mathematical demonstration[edit] where See also[edit]
Julian Assange profile: Wikileaks founder an uncompromising rebel | Media Julian Assange is self-consciously an individual. He thinks in his own way, primarily as a physicist, having studied pure maths and physics at university in Australia where he grew up. So, for example, explaining his decision to found Wikileaks, he starts with his interest in the physics of a small release of energy triggering a much larger release; asks what small actions might release energy for "just reform"; identifies the role of information and observes the restriction on the amount of information flowing into the system; and sees Wikileaks as a mechanism "to maximise the flow of information to maximise the amount of action leading to just reform". He also acts in his own way. He reckons he is genetically predisposed to rebel. Assange's whole lifestyle is independent. In his late teens, he says he was part of the computer underground, working on early versions of the internet, hacking into the email of the power elite.