Slashdot Mirror
Assange Stands 'Real Chance' of Election In Australia
Okian Warrior writes "Various new sources are reporting the results of a recent Labor Party poll, indicating that Julian Assange would be elected to the Australian senate, should he choose to run. From the Sun Daily article: 'Controversial WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange stands a real chance of winning an upper house seat in his native Australia if he presses ahead with plans to stand for election, a poll showed Saturday. A survey conducted by the ruling Labor party's internal pollsters UMR Research and published in the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper showed 25 percent of those polled would vote for the whistleblowing website chief.'"
Unban Ethanol-fueled
i will sell everything i own and move to australia because it is the last western nation with a little redemption left in it
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Because they'd never lie about his chances in an attempt to drum up support. Oh no, that would never happen.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Would be nice, but I would think he has a real chance of getting arrested again before that happens.
Would this grant him political immunity? ;-)
If he becomes part of the Australia gov, then future Wikileaks exposés on governments that are Australia's economic/geopolitical competitors would be more easily called into question. Releases on China, Japan, NZ, Indonesia, even the US, would at the outset be accused of having pro-Australian political motivations behind them.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
So how long before OpenLeaks posts the real poll results?
Australias puppet government is controlled by the US - if Assange goes back there he is on the next plane to gitmo.
... think Assange is?
Australia? The county that plans to sell out its sovereignty to the us by blindly allowing extradition of its own citizens to the us for doing things in Australia that are legal in Australia but against the us farce of "law" without even being charged and given due process in Australia?
It's a fucking american 3-letter supercop agency trap, period.
I hope Assange is smart enough (and not vein enough) to fall for that fucking Acme trap.
As compared to the current anti-American political motivations behind Wikileaks exposés?
If he's such a champion of truth, why doesn't he take on Russia or China?
He would have a very hard time serving in office from his cell at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
After Michael Moore got a Phycus Tree elected in the US, a few years ago - and showed how much apathy and neighbourhood-playground-level strong-arming goes on unabashedly.
Why not a Telepresence Surrogate Robot Avatar Candidacy by Assange, in Australia? The proposition is too much of a Honeypot to be accepted as-is. And a physical presence might be too dangerous, honeypot-wise, in the original mataphorical use of the term. He would then only have to worry about hacking attempts into his robotic surrogate avatar. I'm sure the nerdworld could open-source it? It could then be used for tele-aid - in places where real doctors and nurses get threatened, beaten, bombed and shot up too often. Online watchdogging could be improvised, to make sure no misuse or hijacking went on. Heck, volunteer medstaff could pitch in collective huddles. And students could watch. Satellites. Dronedrops of medicine and clean bandages. The works. A pity some relevant international org, like WHO?, is too mired in outdated burocracy to even consider the option.
Technology is useless, unless used for good, by all.
None of which will be spent on ads, billboards, brochures, or anything with a paper trail. But that's ok: what's good for Assange is good for everybody!
I hope Assange is smart enough (and not vein enough) to fall for that fucking Acme trap.
CORRECTION:
I meant:
I hope Assange is smart enough NOT to fall for that fucking Acme trap and doesn't let his vanity (which is what Wile E Obummer and the Keystone Cops are counting on) cloud his judgement.
Because WikiLeaks can only publish material it gets. If they don't get material about Russia and China, they can't publish it. WikiLeaks doesn't actively go for material, they just offer a platform to publish it.
If you want something about Russia and China published on WikiLeaks, go, get the stuff and publish it!
One corrupt super-power at a time, big fella.
A narcissistic parasite that loves publicity and preying on young women, politics is his natural home.
Perhaps because no one from Russia or China is sending him leaked documents?
I Hope they would make him Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Fuck you U.S.A.; Diplomatic immunity.
I know it would never happen, not even sure if that position has Immunity. Leave me with my dreams....
Residents of the U.S.A. elected George W. Bush; how could he be worse than that....
And you call us 'batshit insane'?
from memory he has a criminal record for hacking in Australia yeah?
you cant be in parlment with a criminal record...
He would never release anything meaningful from Russia or China. Russia and China would have no problems just killing him if he released anything they considered state secrets. As it stands now the US has not did anything to him. If the US wanted him dead or in US custody he would be. The man has an agenda and frankly is just a plain weirdo based on his behavior when he was negotiating with other news outlets like the BBC or New York Times. His tries to stage manage the release of data to support his own agenda. He also claims to "own" the data and requested payment from others before he would give them access. Wiki leaks and similar companies serve as a place where people can submit information while preserving their identities. Any data they get their hands on should be released in whole without any commentary or political manipulation. Release the data and let the general public draw their own conclusions. There is a reason a majority of key people quit working for him because of his behavior and policies.
The Australian Labour Party is hugely unpopular (the Greens even moreso), and likely to be completely annihilated in the next election. Assuming he could actually win a riding, Assange would be a powerless member of a small minority party (which is still far too much power for such an egomaniac).
(Maybe the little pissy-pants who modded my correction down (how the fuck can you be fucking stupid enough to mod an AC correction down?) has buggered back to dipshitdom, so I'll say it again):
CORRECTION:
I meant:
I hope Assange is smart enough NOT to fall for that fucking Acme trap and doesn't let his vanity (which is what Wile E Obummer and the Keystone Cops are counting on) cloud his judgement.
Addendum:
Then again, Assange is not american, so he probably has an uncorrupted brain.
twice, even.
This story just highlights not how good Assange is (as he has done virtually nothing to win) but just how bad the people are who are running against him.
Key people like Daniel Domscheit-Berg that claimed to be a programmer and wikileaks architect even thought he's never wrote a single line of code? Who else is in this "majority of key people"?
What is this world coming too? We are electing shit to office. In the US you have criminals running / getting elected for office. Other free countries are doing the same. Now Australia wants to elect a straight up attention whore to office.
The world should collectively facepalm today.
Awesome, i'd vote! At least he discloses information unlike most Australian Politicans.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2010/12/turn_yourself_in_julian_assange.html
Then I would vote for him!
As for the rape charges.. To me it's not "rape" to
1) initiate sex with a sleeping sex partner or
2) to not notice that a condom broke.
The first Swedish prosecutor apparently refused to prosecute. Then an ambitious prosecutor, inferring perhaps that Hillary was a premium victim of Assange, realized that a horrendous crime had been committed.
Can't blame the Swedes. They probably have no power to restrain their (probably independent) prosecutors.
There couldn't be a more appropriate job for a unctuous, hyper-vain, womanizing publicity whore who's always looking for other people to fund what he wants to do.
And more importantly, he'll have a first-hand chance to see - behind the scenes - exactly why some government communication has to be kept out of public view. Everyone who gets elected to such positions gets a big fat wake-up call about security matters they used to blow off as irrelevent.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I'm not Australian, but I'd vote for him if I were.
Why is it that this guy can be a serious candidate for the Australian Senate and the Pirate Party can win seats in European Parliaments, but we can't even get f-ing single payer health care in the United States?
The world really needs Democracy 2.0, badly. This autocracy/oligarchy/crony capitalism thinly disguised as democracy crap has got to go. We need a system were the sociopaths who currently comprise our "leaders" are expressly barred from any position, of any power, ever.
If not us, who? If not now, when?
Release the data and let the general public draw their own conclusions.
Like to the New York Times, The Guardian, and der Spiegel? Oh, he did! Huh.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
.. ugly, pathetic and old man?
Here is a fact, the two women reported the rape MONTH before the controversy was even started. Then the serial rapist used the controversy as an excuse no to stand trial. In fact, he is still fighting to stay out of the country to avoid being jailed for multiple rapes.
But since idiots around the world believe whatever piece of human trash there is as long as they say something bad about the US ....
Looking at the choice currently facing the Australian voter, a three legged sheep would stand a "real chance" of election.
Wooooo! Like Ron Paul, only crazier and Australian! Wooooo!
You don't know who Julian Assange is, do you?
"Rape". You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Assange and Controy would likely be in the same state (Victoria) and competing against each other.
Conroy is from the Australian Labor Party has tried very hard to impose stricter censorship on us, last election there was a campaign encouraging people from all parties to put conroy last on the ballot (preferential voting). He is not well liked by the people, well, excpet for when hes doing NBN stuff.
With Conroy and Assange on the same ballot, it would be difficult to not think about censorship when voting.
Aside from having a person who's willing to "chap a few (or a lot of) hides" in order to do what he thinks is right, in government, it would certainly make it a LOT harder to extradite him if he were to become a senator. Just how many world leades get extradited? Not many, I recon.
As an American, I won't claim to know the intracacies of Australian government/politics, but at least on the surface, running/getting elected sounds like a smart thing for Assange to do...assuming nobody assassinates him for it.
There's no such thing. You are thinking diplomatic immunity. Diplomatic immunity is granted to any accredited diplomat working in the host country. It also can be, and is, granted to politicians visiting on official state trips. However it isn't something that happens by magic. It is granted by the host nation, meaning the nation the person is in.
What's more, it can be waived. If a diplomat commits a crime the host nation can ask the parent nation to waive immunity. Depending on the relationship between the nations, this can happen. An immunity waiver isn't up to the diplomat, it is up to their government.
So even if immunity applied (it wouldn't since he was never granted it) Sweden could ask the Australian government to waive immunity on the rape charges. Australia probably would.
It is not this magic shield that protects any politician people seem to think.
Government watchdog is one thing. Watchdog government is entirely different. I'm not sure how he can continue what he's doing while holding actual power.
Here is a fact, the two women reported the rape MONTH before the controversy was even started. Then the serial rapist used the controversy as an excuse no to stand trial.
Your so-called "facts" leave much to be desired. "Serial rapist"?!? For consensual sex? After it all blew up in his face, he asked the prosecutor if he was free to go, and they said yes. He left. Then the second prosecutor started the current situation. Now, he's just trying to avoid being crucified by a stupid Swedish definition of rape. Yo girls, IT'S ALRIGHT TO SAY NO. Really. Honest! Say no if you want to! REALLY, damnit!
You are an imbecile.
But since idiots around the world believe whatever piece of human trash there is as long as they say something bad about the US
Poor baby. Do you feel the same way about Daniel Ellsberg and Thomas Drake?
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
I think the prosecutor was a WOMAN who dropped the silly sex case against him. The 2nd prosecutor went out HIS of the way to go after Assange; because he is a most likely crook.
The women wanted Assange tested and maybe a little bit of revenge but nothing like what is being done against him. Rather pointless if the two women were tested and didn't pick up any STD. If one did, then there could be a case of him knowingly infecting another but that would likely have resulted in different allegations probably REAL CHARGES -- remember, they never brought charges against him! They just wanted to "question" him under their custody so they could find any questionable legal excuse to whisk him away to gitmo. If they really wanted tests or answers from him there was ZERO need for the actions taken; trusted 3rd parties and ask him and test him... plus that information can be passed using technology, no need bring him on horseback to their investigators.
You call the poster an imbecile when you are the only one who sounds like an imbecile.
Consensual sex according to the rapist ..... with a woman who said NO. Only a complete imbecile thinks that is consensual sex.
Hope somebody rapes you a few times just to see if you like your definition of consensual sex.
Or just setup a site that contains the raw information for public consumption. And he did not release all the data he received at one time. Was he just spell checking the documents? Organizations such as this should serve only as a conduit for releasing the raw information as widely as possibly while protecting the identity of the person who provided the information to them. And pray tell why he demanded money from other news sources for access to the data? Why does it take millions of dollars to provide this type of service? An Internet connection, small staff, and a few servers should do the job just fine.
The "sad" story you are claiming is the story published by Assange's lawyers. A story that was proven false when the actual charge documents were released.
Or just setup a site that contains the raw information for public consumption.
No, raw data needs to be sanitized to protect the innocent.
Organizations such as this should serve only as a conduit ...
... which is why people like you are not in charge. It's not as simple a thing to do as you wish it to be.
And pray tell why he demanded money from other news sources for access to the data?
I assume he was trying to figure out how to do it. He was inventing. I've been there.
I don't think he's our saviour. I do think he's just another guy. I think he had a bright idea and he's doing his best to run with it. I haven't seen him do much that I'd consider "evil" (and I'm fairly picky in that area). To my mind, so far, so good.
I think it would be seriously cool, on many levels, if Australia's PM was Julian Assange. I hope he enjoys the ride.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
I've long fantasised about a politician running for office on the platform of complete openness; all conversations with other ministers, their own advisers, business leaders, lobbyists and community groups are recorded and made available for the public to peruse.
In the case of Assange his Wikileaks background makes this almost plausible. I'm not naive enough to believe he won't use the same old tactics of networking and backroom deals, but it's a dream...
...waits for his arrival.
As compared to the current anti-American political motivations behind Wikileaks exposés?
If he's such a champion of truth, why doesn't he take on Russia or China?
Wikileaks publish materials about corruption in other countries than the U.S., but you didn't bother about it because you don't care about other countries.
"And he did not release all the data he received at one time. Was he just spell checking the documents?"
Or did he think there was a high enough number of absolute bombshells in what he had received, each of which he thought it was important for the public to be aware of, and he didn't want to release them all on one day and run the risk of one of more of those stories being completely buried due to the sheer amount of other news generated that day from his release?
I think in his situation that would worry me. Of course, he could just have been trying to drag it out for as long as he could and ride the fame. But that being true to a greater or lesser extent doesn't entirely preclude the idea of strategic management of releases to ensure the greatest possible public awareness level of the information.
No, but I know your mother. Very very well.
You apparently need to beg, borrow or steal Willie Smits to come and tell you how to restore your rainforest, etc. :D (This guy should be cloned...LOL! We need a lot more like him)
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/willie_smits_restores_a_rainforest.html
If he becomes part of the Australia gov,
There is a big difference between being in parliament, and being in the government.
No he was looking for the information that would support his political ideas the most.
Sanitize the data to protect the innocent? That's a complete load of shit. And why is he entitled to determine who is innocent or guilty? The guy is a plain weirdo when off his meds.
"... which is why people like you are not in charge. It's not as simple a thing to do as you wish it to be." It's simple if you know what the hell you are doing. Evidently your knowledge on the subject is lacking in the extreme. And I most certainly do not want to be in charge of anything of this nature or any other government related operations.
"I assume he was trying to figure out how to do it. He was inventing. I've been there."
He didn't invent anything. All the encryption and other technologies have been is use for years. And I could care less what Australia political position he obtains and I don't consider him "evil".
Sanitize the data to protect the innocent? That's a complete load of shit.
You really don't have any clue as to what we're talking about. Clue: raw data from $somewhere contains the *real names* of *real people*, whose names should not be disclosed to the $badguys. Those real people may be CIA operatives or confidential informants or *our people* who have jobs with *their gov't.* We don't want to compromise people who're helping us by supplying us with intel or doing *other nice stuff that we want done.* Duh. Go read some Sun Tsu, ffs.
If that doesn't make any sense to you, think of WWII and William Stephenson (Intrepid) and French Maquis behind Nazi lines. Secrecy was paramount to them, and whole towns could be decimated in retribution for a successful op.
I assume he was trying to figure out how to do it. He was inventing. I've been there.
All the encryption and other technologies have been [in] use for years.
Inventing *the process of leaking info* (wikileaks), not inventing tech. And no, leaking info is not that simple. Look at the mess he's in right now if you don't believe me.
Bradley Manning's considered a traitor by many for what he's done. "Whistleblower", chyaaa, right.
You appear to be avoiding the obvious and so far appear intent on remaining ignorant. I wonder why. Open your eyes.
"Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit
Listen dude I know exactly what raw data is and the ramifications of releasing such data. When Assange got his hands on the US related data he personally declared that no one would be excessively harmed by the release of the data. Of course all his sycophants immediately jumped on the bandwagon. When the criticism increased they changed their mind and stated that they would look through the data to make sure no one gets harmed. But here's the thing, how do they know who might be harmed? The sheer amount of data to analyze would take years to make some of those determinations. They released diplomatic correspondence that raised the level of tension and distrust between nations. The release of all the Afghanistan after action reports were a gold mine to those looking to profile US military responses under certain scenarios. Tactics, troop numbers, and weapons data were all there for the taking. I think the release of the Windward and Bernstein Nixon tapes would count as leaking data even though the Internet was not used. So claiming Assange "invented" leaking data is absurd.
Manning allegedly violated military laws. When you join the military you voluntarily acknowledge that some of your rights are limited and that fact is not in the fine print. Leaking commercial data might get someone in trouble if they signed an NDA or signed other privacy agreements with their employers but releasing that type of data would give you a chance to justify your actions under the "Whistle Blower" laws. The military on the other hand is not as pliable. Plus the guy was a moron based based on how he decided to distribute the data. He chose to confide in someone who he had few e-mail communications with. I don't beleive he should be charged with treason or espionage. Both charges carry life sentences or potentially the death penalty on conviction. There was no top secret level data released so that should be taken into account. The chance of him not being judged guilty on the charges leveled against him are pretty low but the penalties should be moderated too match the actual impact of his actions (which was really nothing). If convicted of the charges he will still most likely receive a jail term of 10+ years.
If you are going to operate a system to distribute data previously unknown to the public it should be the same data you receive. In Assanges case he made himself the gate keeper of the data. His actions are no different than any other news outlet that stage manages data releases to support a particular editorial line. Who appointed him the god of truth and justice? He allowed his personal opinions to dictate how he handled the data and while he is entitled to his opinion he should release the data as is. If someone gets killed I am sure he wouldn't personally give a shit but at least it would make people understand that there are consequences for your actions and right now the world is drowning with people who never take personal responsibility for their decisions.