Psychological analysis: The Wikileaks dilemma.

Mr. Julian Assange runs a nonprofit website organization that floods the media with original documents of a sensitive nature, information obtained from low-level intelligence officers in the United States government and elsewhere. The obtaining of some documents classified as “secret” by the government is illegal because it can compromise clandestine operations, but not all. The government claims that releasing the information to the public compromises national security.

The psychological issue is: Does the public has the right to know all information in its original form? The answer is No. The public does not have the right to know sensitive information that may hurt the – public (nation). Self preservation is a natural law! Does the public has the right to see all the original sensitive documents that are reported and interpreted in the Media by biased editors and news organizations trying to sway public opinion? Yes. The Media in a democracy is free, but not honest. The Media in China is not free and not honest. Wikileaks and other internet organizations can force the Media all over the world to at least become honest if not free! The public has the right to know what leaders say that may affect individuals and the public. it is crucial to national security in a democratic country that the media becomes honest. Lincoln said, “You can’t fool all the people all the time.”

The psychological solution: Congress must appoint a bipartisan commission, 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans to determine the small number documents that should be classified as Top Secret, whose leaking will be punishable by law. We, the people, must make sure that documents that embarrass immature leaders with big mouths are not classified as Top Secret!


Tags: , , , , ,

5 Responses to “Psychological analysis: The Wikileaks dilemma.”

  1. Jon Kinarthy Says:

    Why is Wikileaks more inherently trustworthy than the media?

    • drkinarthy Says:

      Because the media is a corporation in a vicious competition with other corporations trying to sell a service or a product called news that this generation isn’t really interested in (like the WWII generation was). They have to corrupt the news to sell it!
      Wikileaks, unless Assange is an anarchist (I don’t think he is. His material is not fabricated), is just a website.

  2. Noah Says:

    I take your meaning to be. If media is free but dishonest, then it is capable of, or at least legally entitled to, report on any issue and in any fashion it desires. The question becomes, why would anyone who could report the truth, not report the truth? It becomes clear that in most cases the media is not free. If the media is not free then to speak of honesty is meaningless. So given that a dishonest media can’t be free, I propose that western media (by and large) is free only in name, and that in practice it is as circumscribed by a power elite as any totalitarian state.

    It would be a matter of child’s play to co-opt a bi partisan panel. Money talks, and there is no end to the supply of dishonest dollars.

    As long as documents like this

    continue to be produced, then no serious conversation about the public not being let in on the governments actions can take place.
    Evil thrives in secrecy, and more than anything wikileaks has shown that any trust one may have had regarding the propriety of the US government was badly misplaced.

    • drkinarthy Says:

      No media is laissez faire free. Western media is relatively more free than totalitarian media because of due process (government can’t just send the goons like in Iran and bomb the office). It is dishonest in the sense that it does not report facts (what you call the truth) but rather zeitgeist interpretations that bring in the income. About “money talks,” let’s add Sex, Food, Power and Obama’s persuasive eloquent oratory. Life all boils down to this: The winner knows (and acts) that “Might makes Right” but says (and don’t act) that “Right Makes Might.” Bingo!

  3. Noah Says:

    @jon wikileaks does not report, there is no spin. It simply provides a safe haven for the release of documents that would not be dealt with by the msm.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: