Stephen and Ellsberg spent most of their time talking about Julian Assange. If you have not yet heard about Julian Assange, he is somewhat of a modern day Daniel Ellsberg. Assange founded the WikiLeaks website in 2006. On November 28, 2010, WikiLeaks leaked information about United States diplomatic cables. The White House called Assange's actions "reckless and dangerous". For some brief background detail on Assange and WikiLeaks, click here to see Assange's Wikipedia page. Anyways, back to the interview...
Stephen and Ellsberg spent the majority of the time talking about how Assange should be viewed. Ellsberg thinks that Assange is a hero, and the public deserves to know this information. Others, though, are on the complete opposite end of the spectrum. If you watched the interview, then you saw how some people say Assange should be assassinated. One man, whose name i frankly do not know or care, said "I think Assange should be assassinated, actually, I think Obama should put out a contract and maybe use a drone." Someone who is more known, Newt Gingrich (Speaker of the House from 1995-99), called Assange a "terrorist". I personally take a more neutral side on this debate; I neither applaud his actions, nor do I think he should perish for them. If I had to choose one side, though, I think that I would personally tend to agree with Ellsberg, because the public has the right to know these things.

Julian Assange
Reed, no need to be so mechanical about constructing your blog posts. Remember, a hyperlink can function as an implicit explanation for your reader.
ReplyDeleteBy the time you actually get to the Assange material, it feels like the only thing specific you relate is whether or not to assassinate him. Perhaps you can mention a few more specifics regarding the material leaked.
In the end, this post is very similar to my own post from the previous week. Could you take this material in a different direction perhaps?