With the evolution of “information” taking place, it holds true that as with all things which evolve it wishes to set itself free from its bounds and shackles that restrain it from the light of day. In fact there are folks out there like Julian Assange who wish to help it on its way to “freedom” by creating a “platform” where in his words “once something is imaged it cannot be forgotten” as in all things that are imaged must be real right?
With this false reality fathered by Assange, it has metastasized into the fad of the day with everyone and their preverbal brother creating a “secure drop box” to set the dirty laundry free of any fraternity, organization, business or government where someone who feels so inclined to illicitly pilfer various bits and bytes can deposit them. Now is this whistle blowing or down right treason as Pfc Bradley Manning, the perpetrator of the high profile government breach which shared with the world that Kim Jong-il was short and chubby with a maniacal tilt is charged with.
As how is absolute transparency a good thing, as are we all not a member of the establishment itself meaning the rights we enjoy are not a natural condition however a creation of that same “establishment“? If one simply looks to China we see that the Chinese people are not afforded the same rights as many western governments afford to their citizens as the “establishment” of rights for a populous are not only between the people and the government, however between the “people” and “people” so therefore a “common good” also exists which supersedes the individual. Therefore the right of a whole be it a government, business, or state should enjoy the same right to secrecy as the individual for efficient management.
So when someone like Assange and WikiLeaks or Daniel Domscheit-Berg of OpenLeaks shares a sound bite of pilfered information, are they aiding in setting the information free or in reality are they simply adding to the misinformation of a chaotic world? As if it’s believed that their innocents is maintain by remaining at a perceived arm’s length distance from the perpetrators, as they only harbor the forfeited spoils just as a shady pawn shop owner may turn a blind eye in a transaction he knows is illegal as anything which is deposited worth sharing has to have been acquired in such a manor. In that Assange didn’t provide Manning with the USB drive, nor the access to the deed, he only provided a safe harbor for the private to deposit his spoils for the perceived betterment of mankind as so we could better understand the girth of the North Korean dictator and the public persona of the French Prime Minister.
However even should one argue that this stretch is acceptable, as we even see this supported by Justice Hugo Black in the 1971 ruling regarding the New York Times publication of the “Pentagon Papers“, where he wrote “Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government“.
As if this is the case as put forward by Black, are they still not guilty of “contextomy” as information which is released out of context is nothing more than false attribution allowing others to see what they wish a kin to coming face to face with a Dali painting…