[ExI] inserting backdated posts, was RE: Who is safe?

[spike]

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Darren Greer
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2010 8:45 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Who is safe? was Re: Wikileaks

 

>Since Australia has troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Australians could
probably charge Assange with treason.<

 

I wonder why none of those claiming "Assange must die" or something like
bother to mention the fact that if Wikileaks is through some legal or
national security bullshit slight-of-hand held criminally, civically or even
morally responsible for leaking the documents.

 

 

 

I agree.  The story itself contains contradictions.  We hear of classified
information that was taken from an unsecured link, but nothing of the
leakers, those who put the info on an unsecured medium, which really is
illegal.  I don't mean PFC Manning, but rather the apparent authors.
Neither do I hear the obvious: if classified info was copied, how can it be
verified that it was genuine?  I suspect it was counterfeit, or was
liberally mixed with intentionally counterfeit posts.

 

In this spirit I now ask: can you think of any advantages or disadvantages
of generating back dated counterfeit ExI posts and placing them in the
archives?  If we could create an index of the inserted posts, which could
later be used to demonstrate *any* opinion we needed, anything from being
pro-singularity, anti-singularity, any position we wanted regarding global
warming etc.  

 

Of course if we do that, we give away the actual crystal clear foresight
which was occasionally demonstrated on this list, specifically with regards
to the future of war.  Some of those posts from over a decade ago were spot
on with what history is revealing today.

 

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20101212/bc3d32d1/attachment.html>