# Who are we, fucking CHINA!?! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 6, 2010, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146 "2010-12-06T14:45:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Mama\_Zappa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@Mama\_Zappa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mama_Zappa)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2010, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/41 "2010-12-07T20:27:49Z")
> [@Death\_of\_Rats](#): > > Even the message to the Federal Employees is a warning that the documents themselves are still classified and the leak has not changed that so if you do not have the proper clearance to view them in the government network you do not have the security to view them on Wikileaks and the leak will not be a defense against violating your security clearance to view classified documents. > > Not that strange. The leak did not change the security classification of the docuements and Federal workers are still bound by those classifications. Yep - we (not government employees, but government contractors) got similar emails because going to Wiki Leaks would result in classified stuff winding up on our computers. As my computer, for example. is probably NOT “hardened” enough to be considered permissible to carry classified docs, it makes sense to avoid getting anything classified on it. Plus, I don’t have a clearance at present and even if I did, I’m only supposed to look at stuff that is pertinent to my job: say I have a Top Secret clearance because I’m on a project making X-ray widgets. My buddy across the hall has a Top Secret because he’s developing gamma-ray doohickeys. If he leaves a schematic on my desk by accident, I’m not supposed to look at it, I’m supposed to make sure it gets locked down appropriate, and I’m supposed to report the breach to a security officer somewhere. I’m certainly not supposed to go rifling through his desk for those schematics. I have no Need To Know. My boss might well want to warn me that as Buddy has been found to leave his documents on his desk from time to time, I should maybe not visit him in his cubicle. All this is really barn door / horse gone stuff, because even if I don’t look at the schematics, Boris and Natasha have most likely already snapped pix. ---
**Author:** ![Mama\_Zappa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@Mama\_Zappa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mama_Zappa)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2010, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/42 "2010-12-07T20:32:13Z")
> [@Koxinga](#): > > Now, you know you can’t just leave us hanging like that – c’mon, dish! I’m not Suranyi but I too held such a clearance at one point (my employer was clearing people for a potential job). They’re, well, not a dime a dozen around here but they’re fairly common as well and for the most part don’t mean the person is doing anything more interesting than shuffling papers - just in a secured facility. And “not having one any more” is also no big deal, usually means your contract ended, you changed jobs, or whatever (mine died of old age, unused and unloved). Now, had Suranyi said “I had one, then they yanked it” there might be an interesting story! ---
**Author:** ![D\_Odds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/d_odds/32/2882_2.png) [@D\_Odds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Odds)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2010, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/43 "2010-12-08T23:34:25Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > I used to have top secret security clearance and that’s what I was supposed to say too, if anybody ever asked about anything. > > Not that anybody ever asked, and I haven’t had the clearance since I left that position about 15 years ago. We’d get questions sometimes, especially when out pub hopping. Them: “Do you work at the base?” [Only one base, and the haircut/American accent duo was a dead giveaway]. Us: “Yeah” Them: “Do you really keep elephants in there?”\* Us: “I cannot confirm nor deny that.” or something else that doesn’t answer the question. \*The huge fenced in area, easily visible from all around, was nicknamed “Elephant Cage”, and no, I will still neither confirm nor deny whether or not elephants were kept there, but I will confirm that this was a real question. [Picture](http://viewfinder.english-heritage.org.uk/search/reference.aspx?uid=113517&index=720&mainQuery=&searchType=all&form=home) ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2010, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/44 "2010-12-09T17:02:16Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > In the technical, legal sense? I don’t know. You’d have to ask a lawyer. In a practical sense? No, probably not. I don’t think anyone would actually have a problem with it. But just because it’s not a crime doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. I wouldn’t look at it on my work computer, that’s for sure. if I looked it up at home, I wouldn’t discuss what I saw there, even with my coworkers. I wouldn’t want to have to cop to it on a polygraph either. That’s why I’m not going to look at the site. > > And as was said earlier, if it’s against gov’t policy and you work for the gov’t, then you have to do as they say or you can get fired. It’s not much different than Best Buy demanding that you wear khakis. That’s hardly out of line, I think. I’m of the same mind. I won’t go to the site because I just don’t want to deal with the “what ifs” and the 'what abouts". I also don’t want some stupid GS1 clerk who doesn’t know shit starting a mess over it. If it’s in the news paper, fine. If it’s on television, fine. At least then I don’t have some dumb ass busybody asshole demanding an explanation about why I went to some website. I figuyre, if I did, odds are I’d get away with it, but I don’t want to deal with it. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2010, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/45 "2010-12-09T17:33:22Z")
I work as a military contractor and have a security clearance, and like others have said, I too have been instructed not to visit the site from work and that I shouldn’t talk about any information that has been released. I haven’t visited it at home or elsewhere also for similar reasons as others listed, because I don’t want to risk accidentally confirming information that is still classified. That said, I do think that information is often over-classified and I do wish more information was readily available. Classification is absolutely necessary for some things to work, for instance, we don’t want any potential enemies being able to precisely pinpoint important military units. In other cases, particularly with the state department, it seems like a lot of it is more just to save face. In the worst cases, it allows some parts of government to operate without the oversight of the public. So, to a certain extent, I think some info leaks are actually an interesting sort of check against the abuse of classified information. If a government official is sure he can do some repugnant things because the public will never know so he’ll still get elected, he has no reason not to do it; but if there’s a chance the public will found out, maybe he won’t. At the same time, that’s precisely the type of information that Wikileaks is after because it’s interesting to the public. So, I completely understand the government response, and it is the appropriate response, it is imperative that people with clearances are trustable, because some stuff may seem innocuous but only because you don’t have all the parts. At the same time, I’m only really upset by the actions of Assange by that it seems he is not much more than that little boy who snoops through his sister’s room and then shares her diary with everyone for some laughs. If he were an American and patriotically trying to keep the government in check by possibly filtering through and only releasing information that perhaps revealed corruption or whatever, it might even be an admirable act. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/46 "2010-12-10T02:33:46Z")
It’s kind of obnoxious as a student of international affairs, because I’m supposed to be spending my time learning and discussing. I’m told there is some information that is directly relevant to my area of interest, and I’d love to be able to enter the public discourse that is going on around it. But instead, I have to avoid the serious debates happening right now. It’s kind of contradictory to what being a student is about, you know? ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/47 "2010-12-10T04:47:49Z")
I, too, am a contractor working for a government agency, and received a similar notice. It instructed me that a) Just because something is leaked in the media does not declassify it. It remains classified. b) We should not use government equipment and networks for reviewing the classified information. It is a violation of government and company policies to reveal classified information to those who don’t have the need and clearance - including ourselves. Since IT regularly snoops our machines, be warned. I was not given any instructions to not look at it on my own at home. From what I read in the linked articles, some of the concern was for people who have the inside knowledge to accidentally confirm or verify some of the information. If you don’t look at it, you can’t reply to what is in it. This includes offhand comments to close friends and family that leaks out through word of mouth. **Acid Lamp** said: > [@](#): > > Don’t you think that a policy like that is little idiotic? The theory is that when it is leaked, it is still essentially a rumor. Someone having direct knowledge that confirms that rumor is violating their clearance. Besides, as **Ferret Herder** said, it helps prevent accidental additional leakage. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/48 "2010-12-10T18:25:19Z")
[Relevant:](http://cmp.hku.hk/2010/12/10/8918/) > [@](#): > > A translation of the Beijing Daily editorial follows: > > Why not give the peace prize to Julian Assange? > (北京日报) > December 10, 2010 > > Assange’s misfortunes tell us that the freedom of speech that America advocates is not an absolute freedom, that it is a matter of kind and degree, and that it has its limits. Ordinarily, if you say vicious things about the American government, talk about its problems, or even openly critical the American government, this is nothing very remarkable. But this time Assange has dared expose the truth, airing out before the world a number of things and remarks that the American government wouldn’t dare make public, make transparent or share with others — and this has stepped over the line of America’s freedom of expression. And the worldwide manhunt [for Assange] is no surprise. > > And this brings us back to the Nobel Peace Prize. According to the decision by the Nobel Committee and the remarks of a number of other Westerners [concerning [Liu Xiaobo](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=582384)], considering the acts of free speech in which this Assange has personally participated, opposing all on his own the “government violence” of several Western nations, could he not be regarded as a “fighter for freedom of expression”? Why don’t the noble members of the Nobel Committee claim that the Peace Prize is given “in the defense of freedom of expression,” and then give it to this Assange who has been persecuted, chained and jailed by the West? > > Everyone knows, of course, that this is impossible. . . . Assange wears the placard of “freedom of expression,” and this placard itself is something the West habitually uses to flaunt itself and intimidate others. But his actions [Assange’s] have actually jabbed at the American government and made Americans very unhappy. There is little hope, therefore, that he will be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize. If Mr. Nobel knew just how his Nobel Prize was being so spoiled, I wonder what he would think! ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/49 "2010-12-10T19:34:33Z")
I just love using my “freedom of expression” to flaunt about and intimidate others. Ohhhhhh look at me I can taaaaalk. Scared yet? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Nader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Darth\_Nader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Nader)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/50 "2010-12-10T19:41:25Z")
Wow, I have a Klein bottle covering my brain and I still can’t untwist that enough to make sense. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/51 "2010-12-10T20:24:24Z")
Not complicated. We criticize China for banning free speech and jailing various dissidents. Meanwhile, we’re using extrajudicial means to do the same to Assange, now that “free speech” is inconvenient for us. This is why “going after Assange” by any means necessary is a stupid idea. If we can’t follow legal procedures when it’s inconvenient for us, then our principles of liberty and justice look pretty hollow to the rest of the world. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146/52 "2010-12-11T02:59:53Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Well, yes, but the first dump didn’t have a lot of dirt that showed politicians and diplomats backbiting and sniping at each other like cliquish high school students. You didn’t think they did that? You must also think it matters. I don’t. `They also know that happens, it is the outsiders who are surprised. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-are-we-fucking-china/563146.md?page=2)