Slashdot Mirror
Julian Assange To Run For Australian Senate
New submitter bozman8 writes "Announced recently on social networking platform Twitter, Julian Assange has found a way to run for the Upper House of the Australian Senate, despite being detained under house arrest in Britain. Along with Julian's candidacy, WikiLeaks has announced that they are going to run a nominee against current Prime Minister Julia Gillard in her local electorate."
Go Assange! I wonder if they would trust him with secret documents!
Whistleblowers and muckrakers shouldn't be a part of the government.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes and all that rot.
You're assuming that he's a reformer. I think he's an attention whore. If I'm right, politics is the perfect profession for him.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
An attention whore who gets said attention by exposing the flat-out evil things all of our governments do on a near-daily basis.
At least he does something for society compared to any of those reality show retards.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
By definition, a whistleblower IS part of the organization he blows the whistle on. Sometimes the muck needs a close up raking.
That doesn't eliminate the need for outside muckrakers as well in case the insider goes over to the dark side.
Whistleblowers and muckrakers shouldn't be a part of the government.
Neither should liars and assholes. But guess what?
I think he's the real life version of Gaius Baltar. Do whatever will get you popular and get you women.
If elected he'll have immunity (or so I think, I don't know Australian law) and can be rid of the false charges against him (for a few years, anyway). Knowing Australia, though, I'd be surprised if they don't vote for Cthulhu instead.
Australia, don't fuck this up.
Because US government goes around shooting journalists and kids from attack helicopters on near-daily basis and then cover it all up.
What?
I live in the next electorate across from Ms Gillard's electorate, so I won't get the privilege of helping stir the pot... but if I could I'd definitely vote for anyone promising the level of transparency Wikileaks represents.
The other important point here is that Julia has done a shameful job of supporting a high profile Australian in trouble, pretty much towing the pro USA line (Australia traditionally lives in the US of A's pocket) which means she hasn't acknowledged the important community service roll that whistle blower organisations such as Wikileaks fill in a open and honest democracy. Good luck to Julian, he's a national hero!
He has no chance of winning but the number of votes he gets will be noticed and may influence policy. Runing for the senate in Australia is not the Billionaire's game that it is in the USA. Last election I recall something like six canditates standing on shooting and fishing issues in my state, as well as a few other single issue canditates. You could just about use the senate ballot paper as a tablecloth.
I hope he runs in Vic. I'd vote for him.
The senate has proportional voting.
Everyone ranks all the candidates, then they start counting. As soon as a candidate has enough to get elected, any further votes move to the second preference. You can end up with some funny results if everyone puts the major party they don't like last.
I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
Remember pauline hanson?
Yeah he's not that bad really, just a massive ego like most hackers. Compare to others running in politics
he's not that bad, look at bob katter and his wing nut party. Remember Sir Jo from QLD back in the day? I do
and so does julian. Remember the publicity stunt of Peter Garret joining the labor party, where is he now?
More power to him, I'd certainly vote for him
He may have to wait a bit to try for the Senate.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Australian_federal_election it must by held by 30 November 2013. Whilst there is *some* possibility of it being called early, I wouldn't be holding my breath.
Ever stop to think
Being a British criminal has never kept anyone out of Australia, quite the contrary. ;)
And what better place than with all the other criminals that run the country?
Case Closed: Weapons Clearly Seen on Video of Reuters Reporters Killed in Iraq
You may want to read the documents from the official investigation which are seen at the bottom or the link above.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
For the lulz if nothing else.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
The Upper House of the Australian parliament is the Senate, "Upper House of the Australian Senate" doesn't make any sense.
Close! He's an attention whore who gets attention by exposing the things all governments do on a near-daily basis and pretending that they're flat-out evil. If they don't seem evil enough, just edit the videos until they do. Journalistic ethics should never stand between a whore and his attention.
Just like mainstream journalists then. Yet they aren't being detained, because they tell the right lies.
While wikileaks is in no way immune to this, mainstream journalism is much worse.
You shouldn't just trust any information, whether that's your local newspaper or wikileaks. Get all the facts from all sources, and make up your own mind.
That said, think about this : if all goverments are doing such a good job, and aren't evil at all, why is there so much suffering,poverty and violence in this world.
And what can YOU do about it ?
I'm sorry, did you forget about the part where the US government covered it up and lied to Reuters about the investigation? Do you particularly think it's all ok just because it was in their "Rules of Engagement"? If the government says that torturing and killing your family is part of their "Rules of Engagement," is that ok with you? Weekly Standard is neoconservative propaganda founded by News Corp and supported solely by people like Rupert Murdoch (according to Wikipedia the magazine has NEVER been profitable, citing the NY Times), the same liars who spread the same government propaganda that started the Iraq War (remember those WMDs? Whatever happened to those, hm?). US apologists make me sick.
Whistleblowers and muckrakers shouldn't be a part of the government.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes and all that rot.
Dude - Maxine Mckew winning Bennelong off John Howard was one of the sweetest moments in Australian politics.
In case you've already forgotten - she also was a journalist, and has definitely been a muckracker and whistlebower in her time at the ABC.
You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
You could just about use the senate ballot paper as a tablecloth.
I somehow miss-read tablecloth as toilet paper.
We have to vote on this coming Saturday, I hope it's both soft and strong.
Isn't that pretty much the exact thing you'd want. At least you get to vote on actual issues, as compared to "liberal" versus "conservative" like most of us. Where the liberals are about as liberal as the conservatives are conservative.
Just like mainstream journalists then. Yet they aren't being detained, because they tell the right lies.
That, and they aren't charged with unrelated crimes. The ones that are charged with unrelated crimes tend to be arrested and tried.
Attention whore, maybe. Idealist, certainly.
Maybe he gets in the senate, get's on a committee (doubt that but anyway) and learns why secrets are kept.
I personally agree with everything he's done. If we were all completely open about everything we have done that directly effected at least one other human, I don't reckon there would be war. If there were, they would be very short. Courts can be great things when they're not bogged down in IP law and drugs.
spoken as someone with no direct interest in the money for killing tea towel heads consortium.....
I don't therefore I'm not.
All his opponents have to do is run a campaign saying he;
was accused of rape in Sweden and has been under house arrest, (make him look like a criminal)
has not lived in Australia for 6 years (wiki says he hasn't lived in australia since starting with wikileaks [founded in 2006]), (make him look unaustralian)
released private diplomatic cables relating to Australia, (make him look like he doesn't care about australian national security)
and they'd get pretty easy boost.
Yeah! right! And you are also confused about the drones in pakistan, when they crash a terrorist wedding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan). But good thing that the U.S could make us those magic drones, somehow, whoever those drones kill, they magically become terrorists post mortem. So, these drones are only used for antiterrorist purposes!
I wasn't aware that anyone actually took those allegations seriously. They basically amount to a condom having broken and claiming that he intentionally broke the condom, or that he began having sex with them while they were asleep. IIRC, after originally issueing the warrants (or whatever) in Sweden, a higher up judge later dismissed it for lack of evidence, which was then later overturned by another higher up. These women were openly bragging about their relationship with him only days before filing charges, and only did so once they found out he was involved with both of them. They were both seen attending one of his speeches and comfortable watching (this is on video) a few days later. It's rather transparent that the US government (among others) are using BS sex-crime allegations to try and silence someone blowing the whistle on their corrupt practices. Try this, if you'd actually like to hear the other side of the story (that doesn't involve the political motivation to shut down wikileaks and scare off other whistleblowers).
Actually, they really should be, the same way they should be a part of big pharma and big tobacco and any other large, profitable organization that damages the lives of others through corrupt practices. Whistleblowers are the ones who expose corruption. Saying they shouldn't be a part of the government is basically saying you don't want any corruption that goes on exposed.
How do you go from two women scorned to US government involvement being transparent?
Read this carefully. The US government can not take him out of Sweden PERIOD. He is required by extradition to be return to the UK FIRST.
It also shows just how little slashdotters know about pissing off women. They will stab you in the back if you scorn them by sleeping with other women and lying to them about it.
Also Sweden's Laws on rape are very very much in favor of Women. She can change her mind after the fact lie about it and still have you found guilty.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Oh trust me, I am aware. I've been arrested (case later dismissed) because of women lying about me, and even had to call the cops three months ago to explain how another girl I'd been involved with was trying to spoof emails to frame me for "harassment" in order to avoid paying me the money she owed me. But the US government has wanted to get Assange extradited to the US so they could try him under the Espionage Act ever since the Collateral Murder video. I don't see how they'll be able to do that just from this, maybe they think they can put more pressure on the Swedish government than the UK, or maybe they think discrediting him as a rapist or putting him in Swedish jail is satisfactory. Sure, I admit I can't prove it's part of an ochestrated smear campaign or conspiracy, but given the fact that the accusations are based on an apparently obscure and rarely used "surprise sex" law, the timing of the incidents, the fact that at least some people in the Swedish legal system wanted to just throw the case out when it originally happened (this is from memory, sorry I couldn't find a link), I think I'd have to be gloriously naive to think the US didn't play a role in all this, even if they weren't directly involved with the two women making the accusations.
If this is unreasonable, call me out on it, but honestly how can anyone take these charges seriously?
I think he's the real life version of Gaius Baltar. Do whatever will get you popular and get you women.
That might be the case, but even though Baltar was a whore for popularity and generally spineless, he served humanity well when it was needed and although not all people liked him for the most part (in the show and in the audience) he played an important part in making things better.
I don't care if the guy sleeps with a newly imported Swedish prostitue (sorry, friend) each night. If he brings some accountability and causes the Australian government to go in a better direction, then I can't say that I am anything but delighted. I don't care what the hell politicians do once they are off the clock - I want my politicians to work and do their best for me as a faceless, anonymous member of the public.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Correction, I was able to find the original news reports of the allegations against him being dropped and then reinstated.
And people die in war, when you have a war with a terrorist organization the line between civilian and insurgent is thin mistakes are made.
Which is why we should cover casualties, military and civilian, accidental and intentional, as much as possible. The more aware people are of this simple fact, the less likely they will be to tolerate war.
Vote for me, I'll put our allied troops in danger just because I don't like war.
Really now. Who's more concerned about the safety of the troops? The ones who want to send them to war, or the ones who want to end it?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
>in a war that innocent people die
I like that, "in a war" like "in a rainstorm" or other event that had no human cause.
Your google for today is "robert jackson kingpin", and search the top link for "kingpin". Jackson was a US Attorney general that thought (as official US policy) that plotting aggressive war was the greatest crime possible, which he prosecuted before, and as a greater crime than, the Holocaust. In the case of this war, the plotting of aggressive war was made possible by secrecy and lies. The secrecy and lies then continued to deepen and extend the war, and to cover up the thousands of smaller crimes it made possible.
As to your argument that "anyone with a half a mind knew it was going on anyways", clearly people have a remarkable capacity to fool themselves, as you can see years later right here on slashdot, with the link to the two bodyguards that were carrying weapons, and the CentCom "investigation" that exonerated, well, CentCom and all its loyal employees. But the huge majority of those present were NOT carrying weapons, which means to anybody who'd been on a street in Baghdad that year, that they were civilians with the indispensable bodyguards, not a militia where everybody would of course have been armed.
When people don't WANT to believe something, you have to pry their eyes open like Alex in Clockwork Orange and then you still have to rub their noses in it. Twice.
This war will be admitted for the crime it was only long after the last participant has died of old age.
And never mind your "troops in danger" crap, that was trashed using the Pentagon's own admissions about day 2.
Just like mainstream journalists then. Yet they aren't being detained, because they tell the right lies.
That, and they aren't charged with unrelated crimes. The ones that are charged with unrelated crimes tend to be arrested and tried.
If the power structure wants to find crimes, they will find crimes.
"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. "
- Cardinal Richelieu (Prime Minister of France, 1624-1642)
I know you are going for the bullshit baffles brains crap but suck it up, when White phosphorus is used to generate smoke or in a flare, it is not considered a chemical weapon but when it is targeted at people it is a chemical weapon, end of story. Forget the silly propaganda crap.
Carbon monoxide is produced by motor vehicles, people that drive cars and not considered to be using a chemical weapon. However if you put people in a room and fill that room with carbon monoxide from a car exhaust you have used a chemical weapon to kill them. See, double plus points for using a car analogy to blow holes in your crap let's fuck with literal interpretations to hide murderous criminal actions behind propaganda bullshit.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Then take her and go...far, far away..another galaxy would be good...and don't let her return.
Nos Morituri te salutamus
Oh well that proves he in league with all the CIA nefarious deeds without a doubt. If that is the proof for your accusations you best keep it to yourself so no one finds out what a gullible idiot you are. Conspiracy theories, blog echo chambers for extremists on all sides, and innuendo is tearing this world apart every day. As far as Assange goes the purpose of Wikileaks was to release information to protect the identities of the source. Instead he took ownership, strong armed media organisations, released selective information in order to boost his viewpoint, and asked for millions of dollars to support Wikileaks. Why the hell do you need that kind of money to serve as a conduit to getting something posted on the net anonymously? A fucking Internet connection should suffice. People need to see the raw facts and make their own decisions based on what they see. You can't achieve that goal by selectively editing and putting more emphasis on someone's opinion rather than just releasing the data as is. And he did not give a shit about putting any one in danger. There is a reason so many people left his organization when they started to realize that Wikileaks is no better than any other media site who shapes the data to represent an editorial opinion. Assange's only goal was gaining attention to himself. He did nothing to be congratulated for. The data was given to him freely and it's not like he is some sort of super spy who got the information all by himself. He can run for any political office he chooses because he certainly displays the same characteristics as most elected politicians today in any country. Does Australia even allow people with a criminal record to run for office?