Crossing the wikileaks Rubicon.

It seems that Representative Pete King wants to have Wikileaks.org declared a Terrorist Organization. I can see how this might be a very appealing idea to someone who wants to wrap himself up in the flag, and doesn't believe we'll think too hard about it.

However, things are not as simple as King would like. Wikileaks has not committed any crimes, nor are they attempting to terrorize anyone. They exist because the mainstream media has been rendered useless by their corporate masters in the consolidation of the "news business" over the last 50 years. Had journalists been doing their jobs, the things being leaked might have been uncovered years ago, instead of being allowed to fester in the dark alleys of power in Washington.

If King gets his wish, the line in the sand couldn't be clearer... the State Department would in effect be declaring itself to be above the law, above reproach or redress from the citizens of this or any other nation. Wikileaks is a free association of people who are effectively The Press. The FREEDOM of the PRESS should never be violated.

Declaring Wikileaks to be an enemy of the state is a line over which the administration would be foolish to cross. Once this rubicon is crossed, it is obvious that no peaceful reforms can be accomplished within the existing framework handed down by our forefathers for peaceful change... leaving the other means of change they used so effectively against the previous administrations that ruled without regard to the citizens from distant shores.

We, the people, have a right to assemble, to speak and publish our views and facts as we find them. We will not stand for the destruction of our 1st amendment right of free speech.

To declare the majority of citizens as terrorists is to give up the consent of the governed.

To ban Wikileaks is the path of fools... lets hope calmer voices prevail.

Good night, and good luck.

StumbleUpon breaks the rules a bit

In the "I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure you're not a Nazi" spirit.. I'd like to lodge this gentle complaint about StumbleUpon.

People like the photo I posted yesterday, which is fun to watch the reaction to... but one of the referers that Flickr showed was

http://stumbleupon.com/refer.php?url=http%3A//www.flickr.com/photos/--mike--/5198232631/sizes/l/in/photostream/

Unfortunately, this doesn't actually refer to a StumbleUpon page, and instead feeds me to a generic page about StumbleUpon.

I'd like to know who referred to my photo, and why. It's not unreasonable to want to know what is being said about my stuff.  Referrer fields exist to help give this feedback, and StumbleUpon breaks this social norm.

If the people at StumbleUpon could fix this, it would be appreciated.

Sometimes an experiment works out well... this is one of those times. I'm VERY pleased with this photo. It is a stack of day and night images composited into this view. You can see the lights on, and the reflections of the city lights in the water. It's a bit surrealist, and kind of fun.

I hope you like it as well.