Any government that conceals information from it’s public is not a true democracy. To that effect, no government on the planet is a true democracy.
Anyone with even basic internet skills can find out about all sorts of classified stuff, and foreign governments probably know it all anyway, so why doesn’t the government just stop lying to everyone and let the public know?
Suggestions please (I’m sure there are plenty of innovative ones out there…)
What if the people decide that some types of info shouldn’t be revealed to the public? Like the address of a mafia informant? What’s undemocratic about witness protection?
We the people don’t want the social security administration blabbing our social security numbers to them the people.
Nothing I write about any person or group should be applied to a larger group.
Because as long as there’s 10,000 conspiracy theories floating around, nobody really knows which ones are true and which aren’t.
The government just denies everything and we are left to sort out what’s true and what’s not. When all the info is classified, these things aren’t easy to prove.
Wow, you don’t often see a simul-post at 5:31 AM.
There is a difference between politics and law enforcement. Mafia (and other) informants are probably on about a million hit lists anyway, but the government doesn’t need to release that information to jeopardise their lives.
What I was referring to is the restriction of knowledge which really doesn’t need to be classified but is. If the government just opened up about which are the TRUE ‘conspiracy theories’, it wouldn’t change much (apart from maybe help the public to trust them a bit more). Even if no-one believed them, at least they would be being honest as opposed to, as you so correctly say, denying everything and leaving the public to permanently suspect them…
“Now be quiet before I rather clumsily knight you with this meat cleaver” - Edmund Blackadder
Well if they tell us their scientists have made a major discovery, doesn’t really matter what the discovery is, we are going to ask them to prove it. To prove it they must present us with all their research and the scientists that did the research. Now all the sudden everyone in the world knows how to do the exact same thing, or at least knows who has the information as to replicating the discovery. Immediately you have taken away the reason for breakthrough in the first place, to be one step ahead of the competition. The military wants to have the top of the line, they also don’t want the competiton to have what we have. The same can be said for most industry technology, the longer you have the state of the art and the competition doesn’t, the higher the profits.
That’s a good point, I guess you could say I was taking the argument to the extremes. However, the advantage that you describe simply does not exist, as foreign governments will have already infiltrated every ‘top secret’ base there is and learned their secrets - pretty much guaranteed.
The point I’m trying to make is, if the other governments know these secrets, then why shouldn’t the public of the country that’s made the discovery? Even if all the government did was set up a website or something detailing the progress they were making, at least then only people that wanted to know would, and it would maintain a degree of restriction (ie - people with access to the internet who had an interest in the subject), but at least the information would be there in the first place.
Instead, we have to rely on the ‘evidence’ provided by people who claim to have worked in military (or other) research centres.
“Now be quiet before I rather clumsily knight you with this meat cleaver” - Edmund Blackadder
Bill Clinton can’t even cover up a simple sexual liasion.(sp??) How many conspiracies can there be?
LOL good point, but I have a nagging feeling that the answer may be more than you (or I) think…
“Now be quiet before I rather clumsily knight you with this meat cleaver” - Edmund Blackadder
BIGmatt
If you truly believe that other governments already have the information, then why don’t you ask one of them for it?
They don’t tell us because most people are sheep, easily startled. For the sake of Buddah, look what the y2k ‘scare’ is doing. imagine if the gov said, ‘yep, everythings going down!’
I treated Art as the supreme reality, and life as a mere mode of fiction–Oscar Wilde
GQ Mod
Even if all the other governments know about it, do you really want every splinter faction of every terrorist group in the world to know about it too?
I just don’t want everyone in the world to know about everything our government is working on. For example, when the government was developing Stealth technology , should they really have put progress reports on the web?
Think about it BIGmatt; given all the idiots, racists and wackos on this planet, do you want Uncle Sam saying: “Oh, hell, this is a democracy. Let’s establish a web site telling people how to make neutron bombs, H-bombs and nerve gas.”?
As much as I dislike the government, I think some things should be kept secret.
Armed, dangerous…
and off my medication.
First of all, it is NOT a given that other governments know about our black projects. There are lots of projects that, when declassified, surprised other countries.
Second, what makes you think that all of these breakthroughs are universally kept secret? The only time something is really kept secret is when national security is at stake. I’m having a hard time thinking of any fundamental technologies that were kept secret from the people. Programs, yes. Specific weapons, yes. But not much fundamental technology. When SDI research was making breakthroughs, it was being publicised on TV by the military.
I don’t see how the government could tell you the truth about the “thousands of conspiracies”. I mean, if they denied one, wouldn’t that just be proof of the conspiracy? If they said one was true, wouldn’t that just be a smoke-screen to hide the true conspiracy? Conspiracy whackos will always believe there is a conspiracy, there is no way of preventing it.
I did have an idea about this, once.
Currently, under U.S. law, any document that is classified stays classified until it passes a declassification review board. It’s very easy to casually mark an internal Pentagon document as Classified. It’s very difficult to go through that entire document and make sure it contains no sensitive information.
This is why the declassification review process can sometimes take decades. There are documents written by Abe Lincoln’s administration that are still classified.
What I propose is the following: All classified documents are automatically declassified after 30 years.
Howzat sound?
I hate to pick nits (ok, that’s a complete lie . . .) but who ever claimed that the US was a “true democracy?”
Of course there are no real democracies in the world, BIGmatt. We’ve got a republic, a “representative democracy,” but being based on democratic principles does not a democracy make.
-andros-
Who was it that said that the problem with conspiracy theories is that they assume the government is organized?
To whoever said that foreign governments were surprised by technological announcements by the government… these so-called ‘surprise’ discoveries would have been knopwn by at least one foregin government, and if they didn’t know about it it was probably because the technology was developed during wartime, when security is much higher anyway.
Also, who implied that I was refering to weapons technology? The US government imparticular has been supposedly developing secret propulsion systems for air/spacecraft for decades, not to mention the restriction of knowledge concerning alleged encounters with extra-terrestrials.
Besides, even if the government did release the results of weapons programs, it would not have to show every stage in the process of constructing a weapon. It could show the basic ideas behind it, or even show the preliminary research, but it would not need to publish ‘The Terrorists Guide to Building Secret Weapons’ in order to show what stage it was at.
“Now be quiet before I rather clumsily knight you with this meat cleaver” - Edmund Blackadder