Punishing the WikiLeaker misses the point

[JBeee]

By ERIC MARGOLIS



George Orwell wrote: “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

A true journalist’s job is to expose government wrongdoing and propaganda, skewer hypocrites, and speak for those with no voice. And wage war against mankind’s two worst scourges: Nationalism and religious bigotry. Not to lick the boots of government.

I’ve always felt kinship for free thinkers, rebels, and heretics.

That’s why I am drawn to the plight of Pte. Bradley Manning who apparently believed Ernest Hemingway’s dictum: “Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.”

The 22-year-old U.S. Army intelligence analyst caused a worldwide furor by releasing to WikiLeaks secret military logs that exposed ugly truths about the brutal conflict in Afghanistan, including widespread killing of civilians.

To again quote Orwell: “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

Manning also released a suppressed tape of a U.S. Army helicopter gunship killing two Reuters journalists and a civilian.

A civilian hacker, employed by some shadowy U.S. government intelligence “contractor” spying on the Internet turned Manning in.

Revenge was swift.

Manning was thrown into solitary confinement and faces a long prison term.

His case recalls another courageous whistleblower, Israeli technician Mordechai Vanunu, who revealed Israel’s large nuclear arsenal, was kidnapped, served 17 years in solitary, and still remains a semi-prisoner.

WikiGate provoked a flood of bombastic pro-war propaganda from America’s mainstream (read: Government guided) media, its rent-a-journalists, and Canada’s wannabe Republican neocons.

Manning’s revelations were blamed on his being gay, a loner, or maladjusted.
The Soviets used to lock away such “anti-state elements” and dissenters in mental institutions.

The neocons tried to divert attention by trumpeting the plight of a wretched Afghan girl whose nose had been cut off by her backwards tribal in-laws.

She was turned into a pro-war martyr.

This crime was immediately blamed without evidence on Taliban and served up as the reason why the Western powers had to garrison Afghanistan.

No pictures of Afghans blown to bits or maimed by U.S. bombs were published. No mentions of oil and gas.

Uncoincidentally, a few months ago, in response to Europe’s growing opposition to the Afghan War, the CIA reportedly advised NATO the best way to keep marketing the Afghan War to the public was claiming it was a crusade to protect women’s rights.

Inconveniently, the U.S. and Canada’s Afghan allies — Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazara — mistreat their women as badly as Taliban’s Pashtun.

When I served in the U.S. Army, we were taught it was our duty to report up the chain of command all violations of the Geneva Conventions and war crimes. These included killing civilians, torture, reprisals, and executions.

Manning reportedly sought to report to his superiors just such crimes committed in Afghanistan by some U.S. forces and their local allies and mercenaries.

He was ignored. Just as was the courageous Canadian diplomat Richard Colvin when he warned Ottawa that prisoners were being handed over to the brutal Afghan secret police for torture and execution.

Manning’s motivations for whistleblowing matter not. What does matter is he revealed to the public the brutal nature of the colonial war in Afghanistan and the bodyguard of lies protecting it from public scrutiny.

If Americans and Canadians really knew the truth of this resource-driven war, and its carefully concealed cost, they would end it very quickly.

 

[CDNBear]

By ERIC MARGOLIS

An almost waste of skin...

George Orwell wrote: “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

He also said..."People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

A true journalist’s job is to expose government wrongdoing and propaganda, skewer hypocrites, and speak for those with no voice. And wage war against mankind’s two worst scourges: Nationalism and religious bigotry. Not to lick the boots of government.

Which is why an Op/Ed specialist like you (Margolis) are not a journalist.

I’ve always felt kinship for free thinkers, rebels, and heretics.

Since you (Margolis), seem to enjoy Orwell quotes, have you heard this one..."Until they became conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."

That’s why I am drawn to the plight of Pte. Bradley Manning who apparently believed Ernest Hemingway’s dictum: “Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.”

As true as the crime of espionage.

The 22-year-old U.S. Army intelligence analyst caused a worldwide furor by releasing to WikiLeaks secret military logs that exposed ugly truths about the brutal conflict in Afghanistan, including widespread killing of civilians.

To again quote Orwell: “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

Again with Orwell? Then so shall I..."Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me'."

Manning also released a suppressed tape of a U.S. Army helicopter gunship killing two Reuters journalists and a civilian.

And anyone not void of journalistic integrity, critical thought, deductive reasoning, saw the very real reasons why the error was made.

A civilian hacker, employed by some shadowy U.S. government intelligence “contractor” spying on the Internet turned Manning in.

Some shadowy U.S. gov't intelligence contractor, me doth think you tip your hand.

Revenge was swift.

You spelled "Justice" wrong.

Manning was thrown into solitary confinement and faces a long prison term.

For having committed a crime. I'm sure this is a foreign concept for the ethically challenged and morally bankrupt, but a society has laws for legitimate reasons.

His case recalls another courageous whistleblower, Israeli technician Mordechai Vanunu, who revealed Israel’s large nuclear arsenal, was kidnapped, served 17 years in solitary, and still remains a semi-prisoner.

A crime is a crime.

WikiGate provoked a flood of bombastic pro-war propaganda from America’s mainstream (read: Government guided) media, its rent-a-journalists, and Canada’s wannabe Republican neocons.

Which would make you (Margolis) an anti-war propaganda, rent-a-journalist, and one of Canada's wannabe Democrat neolibs?

You would be an excellent example of Orwell's quote..."The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human."

Manning’s revelations were blamed on his being gay, a loner, or maladjusted.

By morons and idiots. I blame his lack of ethics, moral bankruptcy and ignorance.

The Soviets used to lock away such “anti-state elements” and dissenters in mental institutions.

Well then, it's a good thing he wasn't serving in the Russian Army then eh? Would you (Margolis) like to try and make any more asinine comparisons?

The neocons tried to divert attention by trumpeting the plight of a wretched Afghan girl whose nose had been cut off by her backwards tribal in-laws.

No, that was just a simple example of the good work that is being done there. It's hardly a single case, but hey, why let that fact get in the way of your excellent rent-a-journalist priorities.

She was turned into a pro-war martyr.

No, she was healed and we moved on. The only people still bring the spotlight to bear on her, are rent-a-journalists and anti-war propaganda types...Go figure.

This crime was immediately blamed without evidence on Taliban and served up as the reason why the Western powers had to garrison Afghanistan.

No, seeing as your lack of journalistic integrity seems to be getting in the way of your own Op/Ed continuity. You just said it was done by "backwards tribal in-laws". Which pretty much has been the theme of the reporting on the issue. The only difference being, some outlets aren't afraid to say that these are the types of punishments for laws set out and enforced by regimes like the Taliban.

Again, you bring to mind, another quote from Orwell..."We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right."

Not being a real journalist, is the probable cause of why you haven't the courage to just call a spade a spade, when you aren't in a crowd screaming in the same direction.

No pictures of Afghans blown to bits or maimed by U.S. bombs were published. No mentions of oil and gas.

Does the weather man have to say there will be air today too?

Uncoincidentally, a few months ago, in response to Europe’s growing opposition to the Afghan War, the CIA reportedly advised NATO the best way to keep marketing the Afghan War to the public was claiming it was a crusade to protect women’s rights.

Coincidentally, that has been a common theme from the get go. But hey, that awesome journalistic integrity of yours must have just caught up to us.

Inconveniently, the U.S. and Canada’s Afghan allies — Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazara — mistreat their women as badly as Taliban’s Pashtun.

A sad reality.

When I served in the U.S. Army, we were taught it was our duty to report up the chain of command all violations of the Geneva Conventions and war crimes. These included killing civilians, torture, reprisals, and executions.

Yep, was wikilieaks in your chain of command? It wasn't in mine.

Manning reportedly sought to report to his superiors just such crimes committed in Afghanistan by some U.S. forces and their local allies and mercenaries.

He was ignored.

And yet, we've seen no proof of this, just Manning's claim. Or could it be, that once it left his office, he could not see the active investigation? Or maybe he didn't like the fact that his superior officers, fully understood things like the death of journalists happen in war zones.

Just as was the courageous Canadian diplomat Richard Colvin when he warned Ottawa that prisoners were being handed over to the brutal Afghan secret police for torture and execution.

Not even in the same league. But feel free to comapre him to Castro too if you like.

Manning’s motivations for whistleblowing matter not.

To a rent-a-journalist maybe. But to a real journalist, it matters plenty.

What does matter is he revealed to the public the brutal nature of the colonial war in Afghanistan and the bodyguard of lies protecting it from public scrutiny.

Wow, and you call yourself a journalist? He revealed nothing of the sort. All he revealed was info that was already public knowledge, and that he himself, was not to be trusted.

If Americans and Canadians really knew the truth of this resource-driven war, and its carefully concealed cost, they would end it very quickly.

If American's and Canadians knew how little journalistic integrity you truly had, your career would have ended years ago.

 

[Avro]

A little off but as usual Eric makes some good points.

 

[MHz]

An almost waste of skin...

Then he won't miss it when it is time vacate the land of the living. I have to assume you are using yourself as the standard to what a worthy piece of skin looks/acts like.

He also said..."People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

A slogan thought up by the same 'rough men' in that the most danger to men asleep is the sudden arrival of rough men in the dead of night.

Aren't those same rough men paid to make for steepness nights for those same ones who are claiming the right to a peaceful sleep? Seems they also lack any hint at 'remorse' or compassion if they can sleep peacefully knowing other are losing sleep (and their lives) because of their real fear.

 

[CDNBear]

Ahhh, the short lived life span of Mhz' iggy button...

Then he won't miss it when it is time vacate the land of the living. I have to assume you are using yourself as the standard to what a worthy piece of skin looks/acts like.

No actually, I would be basing that opinion on the death of journalism in general, but hey, if you want to, you can assume all you want, since it's the basis of all your outlandish claims, and use me as the system of measurement. Especially since you aren't familiar with "Objectivity".

A slogan thought up by the same 'rough men' in that the most danger to men asleep is the sudden arrival of rough men in the dead of night.

Actually, it's a quote from George Orwell. You may want to look him up. He wasn't very positively outspoken about big gov't. But hey, if you want to make stuff up, or twist Orwell's underlying contexts, feel free to be an excellent example of..."We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right."

Aren't those same rough men paid to make for steepness nights for those same ones who are claiming the right to a peaceful sleep?

I have no idea what a "steepness" is.

Seems the4y also lack any hint at 'remorse' or compassion if they can sleep peacefully knowing other are losing sleep (and their lives) because of their real fear.

Hmmm, seems to me, you would fit this too..."The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human."

Have a nice day Mhz.

 

[EagleSmack]

All this and it will matter not. He will find himself in prison for the rest of his life. In 20 years none of this will matter and the man will still find himself behind bars forever. He will have a long time to regret this decision.

 

[Colpy]

I don't think we should punish him: I think we should kill him.

He is the enemy, causing the deaths of our allies as surely as if he were carry an AK and pumping the bullets into them himself.

A dose of his own medicine is in order.

Oh, and BTW, the Orwell quote is an outrage......liberty does NOT mean the right to cry "FIRE" in a crowded theatre......thus causing death.

 

[EagleSmack]

I don't think we should punish him: I think we should kill him.

He is the enemy, causing the deaths of our allies as surely as if he were carry an AK and pumping the bullets into them himself.

A dose of his own medicine is in order.

I think a lifetime at Marion or Leavenworth would be well suited. He's in his early 20's and will, I assure, get a multiple life sentence for this. Particularly if he goes to Marion, it is almost total isolation with one hour a day out of his cell.

I hope it was worth it.

 

[MHz]

Ahhh, the short lived life span of Mhz' iggy button...

It wasn't on, the only replies you made was 'liar'. They should up the minimum letters for a post to appear. I had a reply in mind before I even saw the next post. but I figured you were too much of a stupid prick to to understand any reply. Care to guess what name/names I would have used.

No actually, I would be basing that opinion on the death of journalism in general, but hey, if you want to, you can assume all you want, since it's the basis of all your outlandish claims, and use me as the system of measurement. Especially since you aren't familiar with "Objectivity".

You did notice that was part of a question that, if answered, would eliminate any 'imagination' corrupting the facts? Normally you need some data to have an opinion. Most issues have two basic viewpoints, combine that with inner qualities of an individual and you have an opinion, or at least I do. If I find holes in the stories from both sides then I look for a third option. Sooner or later the ball is going to be in one court alone. Barring something new it stays right there. If you want to argue the blowing up of a building with women and kids is 'legal' because the one window was left open a crack rather the point that I see as being the important part that killing women and kids is fundamentally wrong if you actually promote a place where all members share the same rights. If the ones hoping for a peaceful sleep killed all the rough men they would have gotten what they were after. Pretty soon all the ones that should be asleep are walking the 'streets' with the rough men.

Actually, it's a quote from George Orwell. You may want to look him up. He wasn't very positively outspoken about big gov't. But hey, if you want to make stuff up, or twist Orwell's underlying contexts, feel free to be an excellent example of..."We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right."

You gave him the proper credit in the first post. 1984 already twists the words and the intended message. In 1984 who had he made the rough men?
I would change the first part to read 'we are still capable of saying or repeating thing' that we know are untrue. The way I read the quote it meant we can still be deceived even after we know all the facts. That might be possible if we deny some facts. Take what you put down on your 'resume' lately under the one for millwright (i turned off the spell checker, lol). Welder and fabricator, okay that is somebody who should have an above average grasp of the way steel interacts. Draw me a 'joint' that would all me to pull two items that are a match for the inner and outer columns of WTC 1 & 2 with a 'draw-bar' the size of the floor-joists. A fabricator would have an answer on the tip of his tongue as soon as he read the question. You qualification as a fabricator could be as easy as your agreeing to a 'fabricated truth' that actually defies the physics of this world.

I have no idea what a "steepness" is.

In my sleepiness I misspelled that word and then I clicked on the wrong word when doing the correction. It meant the ones having a restful uninterrupted sleep through the whole night.

Hmmm, seems to me, you would fit this too..."The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human."

That isn't anything new, there have been the oppressed and oppressors since men began to gather in groups. Before that the 'family' was the model and that same model can be found in many 'species' of wildlife. Man's society is closer to dolphins than anything else as far as the birth/old age cycle goes.
Society is two-tiered these days, the ones who have the weapons and the 'citizens' who don't. The 'elite' get to 'publish words' to the 'citizens' and it usually includes a a set of rules they should follow that involved protection for the elites even though they can/do commit the same acts that are deemed 'unlawful'

Have a nice day Mhz.

Not likely as finding support for this claim is proving to be difficult.

"In the nineteenth century, the European Jewish population had a constant growth in absolute numbers and percentages until 1880, when the percentage of Jews living in Europe reached its peak, then fell. There were then about 7,750,000 Jews in the world: 6,858,000 (88.5 percent) lived in Europe, 620,000 (8 percent) in Asia and Africa, and 250,000 in North and South America, and Australia. The absolute number of Jews in Europe continued to rise (particularly in Eastern Europe) even after 1880 (due to high birth rate and good health practices), yielding about 9.5 million Jews on that continent by 1938. However, they then constituted only 57 percent of world Jewry (16.6 million) because in the interim, new Jewish communities had grown up overseas, spurred by the 1880-1914 massive exodus from Europe."

This link provides some extra info that I am still reading. That is about as objective as I am at the moment.
Historical Jewish population comparisons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[CDNBear]

It wasn't on, the only replies you made was 'liar'. They should up the minimum letters for a post to appear. I had a reply in mind before I even saw the next post. but I figured you were too much of a stupid prick to to understand any reply. Care to guess what name/names I would have used.

I'm sure they were as limited, puerile and asinine as the bulk of your name calling.

You did notice that was part of a question that, if answered, would eliminate any 'imagination' corrupting the facts?

There wasn't a question to notice, just your usual asinine BS.

Normally you need some data to have an opinion.

Normally, but you have no need of normal, nor evidence.

Most issues have two basic viewpoints, combine that with inner qualities of an individual and you have an opinion, or at least I do. If I find holes in the stories from both sides then I look for a third option.

Or conjure one out of thin air.

Sooner or later the ball is going to be in one court alone. Barring something new it stays right there. If you want to argue the blowing up of a building with women and kids is 'legal' because the one window was left open a crack rather the point that I see as being the important part that killing women and kids is fundamentally wrong if you actually promote a place where all members share the same rights. If the ones hoping for a peaceful sleep killed all the rough men they would have gotten what they were after. Pretty soon all the ones that should be asleep are walking the 'streets' with the rough men.

That being a fine example right there.

1984 already twists the words and the intended message. In 1984 who had he made the rough men?

The quote has nothing to do with 1984.

The way I read the quote it meant we can still be deceived even after we know all the facts.

Which of course goes back to..."We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right."

That might be possible if we deny some facts.

Why not, you're an expert at that.

Take what you put down on your 'resume' lately under the one for millwright (i turned off the spell checker, lol).

This being an excellent example of making it up as you go along. I've never said anything about being a millwright.

Welder and fabricator, okay that is somebody who should have an above average grasp of the way steel interacts.

Of course, which is why I've embarrassed you so many times, you refuse to answer my simple questions.

Draw me a 'joint' that would all me to pull two items that are a match for the inner and outer columns of WTC 1 & 2 with a 'draw-bar' the size of the floor-joists. A fabricator would have an answer on the tip of his tongue as soon as he read the question. You qualification as a fabricator could be as easy as your agreeing to a 'fabricated truth' that actually defies the physics of this world.

Take it back to the thread it belongs in.

That isn't anything new, there have been the oppressed and oppressors since men began to gather in groups. Before that the 'family' was the model and that same model can be found in many 'species' of wildlife. Man's society is closer to dolphins than anything else as far as the birth/old age cycle goes.
Society is two-tiered these days, the ones who have the weapons and the 'citizens' who don't. The 'elite' get to 'publish words' to the 'citizens' and it usually includes a a set of rules they should follow that involved protection for the elites even though they can/do commit the same acts that are deemed 'unlawful'

Awesome, anymore babble you feel the need to get off your chest that has very little to do with the subject? Maybe it needs more Joos?


Not likely as finding support for this claim is proving to be difficult.

"In the nineteenth century, the European Jewish population had a constant growth in absolute numbers and percentages until 1880, when the percentage of Jews living in Europe reached its peak, then fell. There were then about 7,750,000 Jews in the world: 6,858,000 (88.5 percent) lived in Europe, 620,000 (8 percent) in Asia and Africa, and 250,000 in North and South America, and Australia. The absolute number of Jews in Europe continued to rise (particularly in Eastern Europe) even after 1880 (due to high birth rate and good health practices), yielding about 9.5 million Jews on that continent by 1938. However, they then constituted only 57 percent of world Jewry (16.6 million) because in the interim, new Jewish communities had grown up overseas, spurred by the 1880-1914 massive exodus from Europe."

This link provides some extra info that I am still reading. That is about as objective as I am at the moment.
Historical Jewish population comparisons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/QUOTE]

 

[MHz]

That was a reply to 'have a nice day and it took less than an hour.

'Wikileaks is a Government operation Nobody is going to be wandering around if/when they had leaked real classified documents let alone as many as in this last batch.

 

[JBeee]

More like a savior for most Americans....tho they may not realise it today (hi Cleatus!):canada:.....now and more so, far into the future, no matter how long he`s locked up by those in charge, with a guilty conscience.

I happen to look at it as the glass `half-full`.

With these recent `secret` revelations in public hands, how many NATO troops will now think twice about taking aim at a known innocent Afghan civillian and blowing his/her head off, just for the fun of it?

There, another life saved in this War On Islam.

I don't think we should punish him: I think we should kill him.

He is the enemy, causing the deaths of our allies as surely as if he were carry an AK and pumping the bullets into them himself.

A dose of his own medicine is in order.

Oh, and BTW, the Orwell quote is an outrage......liberty does NOT mean the right to cry "FIRE" in a crowded theatre......thus causing death.

Though mostly hot air, dam you`re long-winded CD.....and 7am at that! :smile:

Though you do make some valid points in other arguments in this regard, it seems you`re grasping at straws in this case. This guy Margolies(sp) has been around the block in his career. (I remember reading his columes in the TO Sun back in the late 70`s/and 80`s when Jimmy Carter and Ronald Regan was in charge) on an almost daily basis. He made sense then as he does today, 30 years later. He tells it like it is....no sugar-coating a situation to please either side of the hall.

A true journalist and one of the few remaining we have left in this sappy, kow-tow world of present day `reporting` or `journalism`. (I believe he just got the boot recently from the Sun Corp and this his last colume for the paper).

Just as well. They (The Sun) were clamping down on opinions getting out there during these difficult times anyways.

An almost waste of skin...

He also said..."People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Which is why an Op/Ed specialist like you (Margolis) are not a journalist.
Since you (Margolis), seem to enjoy Orwell quotes, have you heard this one..."Until they became conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."
As true as the crime of espionage.
Again with Orwell? Then so shall I..."Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me'."
And anyone not void of journalistic integrity, critical thought, deductive reasoning, saw the very real reasons why the error was made.
Some shadowy U.S. gov't intelligence contractor, me doth think you tip your hand.
You spelled "Justice" wrong.
For having committed a crime. I'm sure this is a foreign concept for the ethically challenged and morally bankrupt, but a society has laws for legitimate reasons.
A crime is a crime.
Which would make you (Margolis) an anti-war propaganda, rent-a-journalist, and one of Canada's wannabe Democrat neolibs?

You would be an excellent example of Orwell's quote..."The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human."
By morons and idiots. I blame his lack of ethics, moral bankruptcy and ignorance.
Well then, it's a good thing he wasn't serving in the Russian Army then eh? Would you (Margolis) like to try and make any more asinine comparisons?
No, that was just a simple example of the good work that is being done there. It's hardly a single case, but hey, why let that fact get in the way of your excellent rent-a-journalist priorities.
No, she was healed and we moved on. The only people still bring the spotlight to bear on her, are rent-a-journalists and anti-war propaganda types...Go figure.
No, seeing as your lack of journalistic integrity seems to be getting in the way of your own Op/Ed continuity. You just said it was done by "backwards tribal in-laws". Which pretty much has been the theme of the reporting on the issue. The only difference being, some outlets aren't afraid to say that these are the types of punishments for laws set out and enforced by regimes like the Taliban.

Again, you bring to mind, another quote from Orwell..."We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right."

Not being a real journalist, is the probable cause of why you haven't the courage to just call a spade a spade, when you aren't in a crowd screaming in the same direction.
Does the weather man have to say there will be air today too?
Coincidentally, that has been a common theme from the get go. But hey, that awesome journalistic integrity of yours must have just caught up to us.
A sad reality.
Yep, was wikilieaks in your chain of command? It wasn't in mine.
And yet, we've seen no proof of this, just Manning's claim. Or could it be, that once it left his office, he could not see the active investigation? Or maybe he didn't like the fact that his superior officers, fully understood things like the death of journalists happen in war zones.

Not even in the same league. But feel free to comapre him to Castro too if you like.
To a rent-a-journalist maybe. But to a real journalist, it matters plenty.
Wow, and you call yourself a journalist? He revealed nothing of the sort. All he revealed was info that was already public knowledge, and that he himself, was not to be trusted.
If American's and Canadians knew how little journalistic integrity you truly had, your career would have ended years ago.