Slashdot Mirror
Assange Makes Statement Calling For an End To the "Witch Hunt"
An anonymous reader writes "After a statement from a window at an upper floor from the Ecuadorian Embassy, Julian Assange '... called on US President Barack Obama to "do the right thing" and for his government to "renounce its witch hunt against Wikileaks."'" However, the U.S. issued the following statement regarding Assange's stay at the Ecuadorian Embassy, "The United States is not a party to the 1954 OAS Convention on Diplomatic Asylum and does not recognize the concept of diplomatic asylum as a matter of international law,"
Not recognized, huh? Kinda like the multi-trillion dollar deficit, eh?
What a crock of shit.
He tricked the Police:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu1TZVX72Aw&t=4m9s
Also applies to himself regarding facing up to the charges against him in Sweeden.
"The United States is not a party to the 1954 OAS Convention on Diplomatic Asylum and does not recognize the concept of diplomatic asylum as a matter of international law,"
hey, where's that coming from? The obama administration? could it be a proto-tyranny?
Oh you're right, people shouldn't know what their government is up to. What ever was I thinking?
All the kings horses and all the kings men...
Couldn't put humpy dumpy back together again
Thank you
[[i]from the Ecuadorian Embassy, Julian Assange '...[/i]
"He isn't the messiah, he is a very naughty boy!"
Jules COULD HAVE gotten some people killed.
The actions described in the leaked cables and classified information show that the US government DID kill innocent people. Then tried to cover it up.
Meanwhile, Anonymous threatened Slashdot editors that if they continue to neglect their responsibilities, the consequences will never be the same. Here's Tom with the weather.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Assange spoke today -- Sunday. That statement by the U.S. was released two days ago in response to Ecuador calling for a meeting of the OAS. It was *NOT* in response to Mr. Assange's speech, as the summary implies.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
The dirty deeds done in the dark by dirty people who assumed it would always be dark... got people killed. Wikileaks just turned on the lights.
We don't live in a world of secrets anymore. Human communication is too rich and evolved for that kind of thinking. Finally, we can have some honesty and progress.
firstly, why are you talking like that? i can't tell...
secondly where does your impression that wikileaks puts lives at danger come from? the US maybe? i don't know whether it has or not but if i were anti wikileaks and wanted to smear them to drum up support. that would be my go to argument.
also this: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110105/04094912528/debunking-wikileaks-puts-lives-danger-zimbabwe-myth.shtml
wonder how they don't recognize it now..
for example in 1956, the US granted political asylum to cardinal Mindszenty at their embassy in Budapest, Hungary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu1TZVX72Aw&t=4m9s
This may be of interest:
http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/svenska-dagbladets-fact-check-assange_6717619.svd
Some more progressive country would had settled this silly dispute by giving Assange a little polonium cocktail, and whole issue would had been buried long ago.
Every TV cop show says that if the suspect makes it onto embassy property they are untouchable! ... my reality is ruined!
The TV lies
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Not very "upper" about that floor, it was from the first floor judging from the video and pictures where you could see the whole building.
c++;
Good god, what is happening to AC? This is like the third time this week AC has slapped down a named account with a frank and accurate comment.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
you seem to have a blind spot, an out of contorl government in the pockets of wealthy elite killing and maiming innocents is DEFINETLY putting people at risk
We all know there was no sexual assault, it's just a bunch of corrupt countries trying to quietly silence an individual that has exposed their corruption to the world.
Unfortunately, Assange is pretty screwed now. The countries he embarrassed will most likely get him by fair* means or foul because, after all, it's what they're good at.
*By fair, I mean they'll simply assassinate him and make it look like he suffered a stroke or something, rather than simply storming the embassy and shooting him.
Summation 2
From the Convention on Diplomatic Asylum, Ecuador should not have provided Asylum:
Article III
It is not lawful to grant asylum to persons who, at the time of requesting it, are under Indictment or on trial
for common offenses or have been convicted by competent regular courts and have not served the
respective sentence, nor to deserters from land, sea, and air forces, save when the acts giving rise to the
request for asylum, whatever the case may be, are clearly of a political nature.
Persons included in the foregoing paragraph who de facto enter a place that is suitable as an asylum
shall be Invited to leave or, as the case may be, shall be surrendered to the local authorities, who may not try them for political offenses committed prior to the time of the surrender.
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,4565c22517,4565c25f203,3ae6b3823c,0,,,.html
No doubt, this probably has at least something to do with the charges against Assange.
I fail to see how the US could pursue a case against Assange, as he is not a US citizen and not bound by US law. On what charge could he be extradited under?
The US does not adhere to International law and cannot really make any claims under it.
The following claims are made in some articles:
"Despite this, and apparently on the basis of still classified off-the-record discussions with US officials and private legal experts, the embassy reported the existence of the grand jury as a matter of fact. It identified a wide range of criminal charges the US could bring against Assange, including espionage, conspiracy, unlawful access to classified information and computer fraud."
This is complete nonsense. US Federal law only applies to US citizens and cannot be applied to a foreigner without consent.
that would be breaking laws of evil countries not his own?
Seems to me that Assange did not break any law. Not in the "cablegate" case at least. Manning might have, which is why he's being held in the U.S.
c++;
In fact, some U.S. laws do apply worldwide. Just like some Swedish laws apply worldwide and some Ecuadorean laws apply worldwide. It's called "extraterritorial jurisdiction", try Googling it.
firstly, why are you talking like that? i can't tell...
It's a line from and reference to Mandy Patinkin's bad accent as Inigo in "The Princess Bride"
Don't you think he'd leak the radiation?
Bert
I personally admire the courage of Julian Assange standing up to the US Government. I don't know that I would have the same amount of courage. The US has a nasty habit of mostly getting what it wants through force, fear, and intimidation. It takes someone truly fearless and I hope that Assange prevails. It is episodes like this that really make me support Ron Paul!
You probably broke a lot of North Korean laws, why don't we extradite you?
Anyone who cared about democracy would follows his lead and demand that their government stopped prosecuting whistle-blowers who expose corruption and incompetence. Unfortunately more people seem to care about making cheap shots against Assange than they do about their democracy...
I've noticed this in many slashdot summaries lately.. either as a result of poor selection by moderators, or by deliberate selection of yellowish content. Lets tag such stories with 'inaccuratesummary', and hope the editors take notice.
http://dilemma.gulecha.org - My philospohical short film.
Is there any proof of people dead due to wikileaks?
I am an ACCA student. Got a query on Accountancy/Finance? Maybe I can help!
I still find it strange that wikileaks got burned by a NEWS agency that supposedly leaked the decryption key.
Why would a news agency shit on its own sources like that?
The whole thing smells like a covert operation designed to give the world a reason to hate wikileaks.
All wikileaks did was mitigate the danger by making the leak public and giving everyone at risk a fair chance at protecting themselves. They TRIED to keep it redacted, but thanks to the decryption key leaking thanks to the news agency, their hand got forced.
kill yourself, idiot
Hm...could have gotten people killed...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_industrial_complex
Palm trees and 8
The United States is not a party to the 1954 OAS Convention on Diplomatic Asylum and does not recognize the concept of diplomatic asylum as a matter of international law"
Once again the Obama administration shames us with its foreign policy. Let hope the Chinese don't remember this statement next time one of their dissidents shows up at our Embassy.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
What a freakin' baby.....it's always somebody's fault other than his. He was probably the kind of kid that poked a wasp nest with a stick, and then blamed the wasp when he got stung.
Ok. I got it. US is not a democracy, it's govt. no longer believes in the state of law, it's... you know... just a wasp nest.
No wonder many developed such an allergy to US govt.
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
In principle, exposing the murder and cover-up of innocent people actually helps save the lives of innocent people in future, as it discourages such behavior.
Why would a news agency shit on its own sources like that?
s/malice/incompetence/
Most news agency have no clue about computer security or cryptography. Wikileaks is one of the few places that does a reasonable job of protecting whistle blowers these days; major media outlets are clueless, still applying techniques that worked decades ago.
Palm trees and 8
censored spot, more like.
We americans aren't all blind to what's happening. There's also this thing called learned helplessness where fighting to change things at best wastes time and at worst backfires and makes us regret resisting.
I wonder how people like you can even be serious. I would like every government documents to be public..
And why on earth does that matter? He's in Britain! It's just an empty threat
'WikiLeaks did not disclose any sensitive intelligence sources or methods, the Department of Defense concluded.'
http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/10/17/170227/dod-study-contradicts-charges-against-wikileaks
You didn't spend very long thinking about that statement. There are many things you don't want to be public, besides national secrets and all, such as your tax information and various other private records.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
You waking up this morning could get someone killed today, you arrogant asshole. Maybe you should stay in bed so that none of the rest of us have to read this idiocy.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Assange is Wikileak's best enemy. The Guardian did not leak the key. Wikileaks was signing multiple files using the same key. You're supposed to use the key once for Mitra's sake! See here and here
Again if Assange wasn't being an asshole with various girls, he would have never ended up in this extradition scenario.
Wikileaks should be forked and Assange should answer to the charges. If he is not guilty as claimed, excellent. All of that "but he is not charged with anything" bullshit is just misinformation (fnord) and not understanding how an other country's due process works.
This is an issue between Great Britain, Ecuador, Sweden, and Australia. The USA is not party to this dispute and should just keep their mouths shut. Assange isn't alleged to have raped anyone in the USA.
Yeah, right. The US, in stating its legal position and opinions is providing the prima facie evidence that Assange has a fear of extra-legal activity by the US and the need for asylum.
If the USA has a case against him, file charges and request extradition through legal channels.
Have gnu, will travel.
Here's a guy saying that we should stop paying attention to the fact that he and his team helped deliver to regimes like Iran and North Korea thousands of sensitive documents having nothing in common other than the fact that a wish-I-hadn't-joined-the-military drama queen stole a giant, un-focused heap of them in a fit a pique... and then he spends months trolling through them looking for anything he can find that might make his idealogical opponents look bad, no matter the consequences for people under cover or working against oppressive regimes ... and then he says, "the witch hunt must end!"
He wants the "witch hunt" (what which hunt? the one where we already know exactly what happened and who did it?) to end so that he can continue his own actual witch hunt in peace and go back to having contentious sexual relations with groupies and getting fawning media coverage from his designated approved media desciples.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Don't you think he'd leak the radiation?
Unless you are going to ingest what he'd leak, you should be safe (alpha radiation, not even penetrating the skin).
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
So the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press ends wherever you decide. Yup. Nice one.
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
He was probably the kind of kid that poked a wasp nest with a stick, and then blamed the wasp when he got stung.
Close but no cigar: when he used the handle Mendax he used the break signal -- the Amiga key and the character B pressed simultaneously -- to break into Telecom's Lonsdale Exchange, the eventual result was on 5 December 1996, he pleaded guilty to six charges, and had to pay reparation of $2100 with a three-year good behaviour bond.
Bullshit.
Obvious shill is obvious.
I assume we do recognize immunity? If not, our own representatives are at risk everywhere across the world, and a bit hypocritical too.
Sort of amazing how much energy is being spent to catch this guy, while true threats to the country walk around without any heat at all.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
+1, Funny :)
Most US citizens live at a pleasant level of luxury with a sufficient sense of security and sufficient hope for a better future. Because of this, they would rather not get involved in politics very much at all (mostly they just vote to impose their morality on their neighbors, or to resist having their neighbors impose their morality on them).
The American public finds it very comforting to believe that they are safe and free and an example to the world of how to do governance properly. This belief is not challenged by their circumstances (as mentioned above), and so it persists despite the right-out-in-public actions that directly contradict this belief, and that the American government continues to take without hesitation or remorse.
In fact, the unchecked tyranny of the American government actually benefits most of the American people, as it ensures that Americans can continue to have their cheap goods and relatively steady jobs and not have to make any sacrifices to pay down the beyond-their-capacity-to-envision national debt.
Therefore, anyone who points out the real injustices perpetuated by the American government, most Americans just write it off as conspiracy theory nonsense, without expending the slightest modicum of effort at checking the facts. The problem isn't just that they don't know, but that they don't want to know. And they sure don't want to put themselves at risk, or make any kind of sacrifice, to protect those other people in other countries from their beloved government. Nor do they want to protect those boat-rockers right in their own country, as such boat-rockers seem to be spewing nonsense and offer only to make things worse for the very people of whom they are demanding action.
Until the majority of Americans feel the pain of their Government's actions, directly, they will NOT get up and hold their government accountable. They will just vote for the next charismatic man who uses words like "hope" and "change" and feel smug about having voted, as usual.
Sometimes change required a world war and occupation.
Sometimes it was be done by (non-)violent revolution.
Democracy is something you have to defend all the time.
And waiting until shit hits the fan is something very undesireable.
I'd say you can still repair the damage in a non-violent way and should do so now.
Our actions and decisions are what shapes the course of history.
people shouldn't know what their government is up to
You're right. I suggest that we publish the names and photos of all undercover cops working against organized crime. Also, home addresses of the wives of people working covertly in places like North Korea or Yemen. Also, we should circulate a spreadsheet showing the schedule and routes of moving nuclear material. And when the government acts to put someone in protective custody or witness protecction, such covert activities - where the public doesn't get to know where the person is and what they're doing - should definitely be considered the sleazy act of an insufficiently GNU-Open-Secrecy-Is-Bad government.
Or is it possible that there are benefits, when doing things like talking to political parties in countries that are on the brink of a civil war, in being able to assure such a group that they can speak frankly while policy matters are hashed out?
What ever was I thinking?
Don't beat yourself up about it. Most other people don't think about reality, either.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Good luck trying to get your government's Foreign Policy department to function properly if all the correspondences with foreign sources have to be made available to the public.
How long before that happens?
(Or maybe for a small fee one of those Olympic missiles might accidentally misfire.)
If the Swedes want to charge him with a crime then let them go ahead and prosecute.
He can be tried in absentia. I'm sure his lawyers will make the prosecution look very shaky so that's what the Swedes can't possibly do.
And that's how you know it's a scam.
...plain and simple. Maybe we should ask someone who actually experienced the Soviet union. ... but as far as I know still legal in the US.
Europe as the poster child of free speech? That is a good one. Try to say something that offends a religious institution, has a different view on the 2nd world war, is disrespectful against the president, or burn a flag. All of that is outlawed in Austria, Germany,
Someone who deliberately publishes secret government documents will be charged in any country...
Free WILLY! Support WIlliLeaks
Get rid of assange, he is nothing but a liability to Wikileaks, there should be NO single person in charge of wikileaks. That is the problem.
He is in it for his own ego.
Glad Visa blocked me from donating, I won't be donating to WIlliLeaks while Assange is doing his ego trip.
All stopped clocks show the correct time when Julian Assange is in the room.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
The United States of America has made several public statements connected with this case that reveals its policies and practices. Of course those policies and practices are applied to all cases, not just this one. That is instructive. The US actually expects to have jurisdiction over foreign citizens in foreign countries for acts conducted entirely in foreign lands.
The fact Sweden is using a rape charge based on legal principals not applied or acceptable in any other country as the basis for extradition is just a detail in the case., The fact Sweden does not extradite persons subject to charges that would result in death is a distraction. The extradition we all know is planned because, ironically, of leaks of secret grand juries, secret indictments, and secret rendition orders.
The fact he would certainly be extradited on the basis the charges are not death is a detail not worth debating. We regularly convict persons who leak classified materials to life in prison. And it is also clear we do not care what the citizenship or jurisdiction is. Ever since the Patriot act anf the "War on Terror" and the expansions of DHS, we claim jurisdiction over all persons and locations for our purposes.
We even invade sovereign countries and bomb people, kidnap (rendition) them, kill them on sight, and otherwise help ourselves.
The leak was facilitated by weak information control practice of classified information. Where are the convictions for the foks who allowed and facilitated those policies and practices? None.
The leak itself is protected by whistle blower laws in the US. Yet because this particular leak was of classified documents that law is not "being applied by prosecutors" under some variant of prosecutorial judgment.
This is justice by fiat, with the executive branch of one country exercising unilateral control. We used to have a perjorative name for that. Now we just call it "justice". That is propaganda to cover what it really is.
It in no way resembles the words in the Constitution and thus the persons conducting the policy are violating their pledge to the Constitution, and are in violation of their scope of authority.
Crime under color of authority is a "heneous" crime. Cooperating to do it is "conspiracy". Where's the Grand Jury for that?
Citizens are precluded from seeking redress under Grand Jury rules. Only Prosecutors are allowed to bring evidence, yet it is the Prosecutors themselves involved in this practice.
There is no "internal affairs" department for this layer of Federal criminal conduct.
There is political cover to openly and widely violate the Constitution.
I aggree it's time to end the "witch hunt against Wikileaks" and time for the proisicution and executions.
Ask somebody there in their 20s what happened there in 1989. Their resposne "nothing I know of."
Tell them that you are going to get on a plane and visit Thailand for the weekend and ask if they want to come along. Their response will be, I have to go down to the police station to apply for a visa.
Just because the USA doesn't support your view of "anarchy" doesn't mean that it isn't the "land of the free."
Since Sweden has a much stronger extradition history than UK ...
Oh wait ... they DON'T have any extradition deals with the US.
The entire thing is nothing more than BS created by a serial rapist.
Don't beat yourself up about it. Most other people don't think about reality, either.
You've touched upon a large core of slashdot readers. I always thought that people who were smart enough to understand engineering/technology/etc. would be more realists. This still may be true, but slashdot seems to attract the anarchist crowd. Yeah ... I remember when I was in my teens and early twenties -- in the end, they'll figure it out.
...when they could have shot that asshole at anytime?
This is Slashdot. Obama is to blame for everything. George W. Bush was wonderful, but even if there was any little tiny thing that was bad about Bush, Obama is to blame for that too!
Due process my ass.
Are brain cells somehow becoming an endangered species even here on Slashdot?
Swedish legal protocol has been compromised so badly in this case it's hard to imagine a trial happening even if the guy IS guilty, but don't believe me, here's the considered opinion of a retired Swedish prosecutor. Read it... it's informative. This situation could EASILY be solved by interviewing Assange in the UK according to Sven-Erik, and according to evidence on the public record. Why the insistance on extradition in this case? The guy might be an asshat sometimes, but that doesn't deserve a ticket to gitmo... and this whole thing feels very bad. I think the average citizen in the west has been lied to enough that some healthy skepticism is long overdue, and frankly I'd be happier to see it err on the side of paranoia than apathy.
Oh puhleeze... mod parent informative.
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
I still find it strange that wikileaks got burned by a NEWS agency that supposedly leaked the decryption key.
Why would a news agency shit on its own sources like that?
Out of a total lack of respect. Should we pretend to be surprised?
Except he didn't rape anyone.
If not for the arrogance, the egoism, the sexual immorality, and the douchebaggery, Assange would have made a much more sympathetic figure. But as it is, he is acting like a spoiled child, refusing to accept resposibility for his actions, manipulating the public into believing he is a victim somehow, when, bullshit aside, it appears he is merely trying to avoid facing the extremely minor charges against him in Sweden, regardless of his irrational paranoia. He has made a fool of himself and the Ecuadorian government, and needlessly insulted the governments of Great Britain and Sweden, and continues to insult the intelligence of the world. Any attorney worth their salt would tell him, and very likely already has, he needs to face the charges in Sweded, then return to Britain and face the new considerably more serious charges there, and he can likely have his life back within a year. He needs to eat crow, and for desert, a piece of humble pie.
Assange has changed the game. People run governments and Assange has exposed that they are vulnerable when they don't act in the interest of their people. The cat is out of the bag at this point.
Yeah. It could have gotten people killed that EVERYBODY but the US government and their deluded followers consider TERRORISTS.
Terrorists who worked hard to mass-murder HUNDRETS OF THOUSANDS of innocent people in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.
Terrorists that destroy America and transform it into a totalitarian fascist dictatorship. (Ok, most if it is already transformed. Not much left.)
So BOO-HOO, NOBODY GIVES A FUCK. In fact they deserve to die.
But of course, since you live *inside* the delusion, you'd rather die than admit it... even to yourself.
This editorial from today's Sydney Morning Herald is of interest. Key quote: "The case is a dark hole of legal and human rights suspicions that needs the light of transparent judicial process." Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/editorial/assange-the-superpower-and-the-little-nation-that-wont-give-him-up-20120819-24gc7.html#ixzz240iu0lzQ
Simple: You and parent commenter are forum spies, spreading US bullshit propaganda.
Don't think we aren't on to you.
This might be the worst post I have ever seen. I wish there was a 'best of slashdot' forum or something where we could highlight this dude's idiocy.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
Why? Who really cares how much you pay in taxes or how much you made? I certainly don't. Maybe a vengeful ex-wife would, but then it is your own fault for hiding it in the first place.
The only thing that should be eligible for classification is material that WILL BEYOND ANY DOUBT get someone killed or significantly weaken the security of the country if it is made public. This information was not either of those things, and is only being treated as such because it was embarrassing to the administration in charge of most of the hideous things on the leaked information.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
No one with a brain cares what you think, you bootlicking moron.
Good god, what is happening to AC? This is like the third time this week AC has slapped down a named account with a frank and accurate comment.
"What a shit country it is. It has no rule of law"
I just saw THAT get +5 Insightful. /. needs to stay out of politics or throw away the moderation system. Giving random expiring mod points does not work with these topics, everyone has an opinion and it goes straight into +1 Like -1 Hate mode sucking up mod points that could have been used on better topics that day.
You would think we just invaded Ecuador and bulldozed their embassies in other countries.
On the other hand, maybe it increases the quality of moderation done to surrounding articles by taking away points from stupid people? What a quandary.
Tax information is public in Finland. Yes, you can find out how much money your neighbor makes!
...don't do the crime.
As bad as the US may be vs. how it used to be and/or what it claims to be, do you really think that FBI rises to the level of the NKVD or that Robert Mueller rises to the level of Lavrentiy Beria?
If that's all he'd done nobody would care. But:
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/09/15/whats_happening_to_those_named_wikileaks_sources
You will note that while Assange sits in a comfortable flat in London, complaining of 'witchhunts' because a government he dislikes might possibly consider charging him with crimes, that might eventually include one carrying the death penalty; those two generals in Zimbabwe are actually charged with crimes carrying the Death penalty.
Umm, parent and I are both clearly anti-US.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
And in addition to my other comment, my UID and comment history will probably suggest that I predate COINTELPRO thinking.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Stalking and Harrasement against his alleged victims ?
That would do more to rescue his credibility than todays drama.
... before the controversy.
Let's assume that the conspiracy theories are right for a second. Somehow U.S. agencies are behind the charges against Assange in Sweden and believe they have enough control over the Swedish judicial system, and in extension the Swedish government, to get him delivered into their hands.
Even if we assume that Sweden is an U.S. lapdog, we're still talking about a relatively open society, so this might be harder to do than in some other countries, but for the argument's sake: They really want to get Assange.
Knowing all this, what does Assange do? Try to escape to Ecuador, of course, because the same agencies who managed to arrange the situation in Sweden will have no chance of getting to him there. I mean, who have ever heard of U.S. clandestine operations in South America? And of course the government and courts of Ecuador is much less corrupt than those of Sweden.
Anyone else see a problem with this theory?
That's a nice story, but those things weren't in the Wikileaks cables. Try again.
You're right. I suggest that we publish the names and photos of all undercover cops working against organized crime
What cops working against organized crime? The biggest organized crime syndicate in the world, the finance industry, steals billions out in the open and law enforcement never bothers to do anything about it.
So what do we actually stand to lose by complete and utter openness? Law enforcement and military actions are completely ineffective at doing anything good for the people. Actually, they've been outright harming the people for decades. If we make them totally impotent through openness, it will be a win for freedom in America.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
There are many things you don't want to be public, besides national secrets and all, such as your tax information and various other private records.
I'm willing to make that trade. We have a lot more to gain from openness than we have to lose.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
One of the stated reasons for the US revolution was that the British Navy was impressing "American Citizens". What they actually meant was British Citizens who had naval duty and were escaping it by becoming Americans, and the Brits were stopping ships and grabbing them.
It's one of the very reasons their country was created, but of course, that logic doesn't extend to any other country. I imagine they are arguing the exact opposite direction a thousand times over at the same time, for cases where someone is escaping TO the US.
Ken's cancer has just recently begun to spread to his right lymph node but his Oncologist has assured us that this is 80 percent curative if he gets the needed surgery in time.
Unfortunately, his 1100 dollar a month SSI disability disqualifies him for Medicaid care and the local county low-income insurance he was receiving. This leaves us with about 2 weeks to either raise enough money for at least the OR for the surgery (we are hopeful of finding a surgeon to do the work pro bono) or raise enough money for the entire procedure. We've spent hours upon hours researching and contacting the links some of you have provided but they are so limited in scope that 90 percent of them are not helpful at all.
We are looking at two weeks, maybe three before the cancer spreads past the point of surgery being an option. After that, we've been told just to make him as comfortable as possible until he passes. I'm not ready to accept that.
Stupid, the Medicare exclusion. Pitch in if you can.
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
time to boot all american embassies out of each of our nations. Enough of this and when they want to sign or recognize stuff then fine , there time is running out for the patience of normal regular people.
Every time they open their mouths what people are hearing are western governments screaming we hate Assange and we will do anything we want to him because we have power.
This incident is making near headline news worldwide and Ecuador has already put their pride on the table.
Every day that goes by western governments look more and more like corrupt shit and Assange the victim.
By opening their mouths and saying they don't recognize *** the US just keeps on digging.
Regardless of what you think of Assange either personally, specific or aggregate effects of his efforts the state department needs to learn when to shut their fucking pie hole.
winks*
The fact his example will influence the future of disclosure of truth in our future is reason enough to support his well being. CAN YOUR EGO GET THAT FACT?
1) Ego. An easy attack against anybody who stands up openly to get pounded on by the giant. MLK was attacked in the same way. They all get the attack and it sticks to various degrees depending upon how they come across and what kind of person they are (appearance being most important.) I do not find his Ego any bigger than a newspaper editor (so then it is larger than average. )
2) the US planned to attack wikileaks by undermining its image to supporters; it was leaked. A good smear distorts or reframes the truth. Also, EGO is an old attack that always works well on activist groups. You should know this, right?? Idealistic groups' values system makes ego into a sin or blasphemy against their ideals. You undermine from within as well as their making their outward message look insincere, inauthentic, and self serving. It is the BEST attack for such groups. You don't have to be an expert in the CIA to use or know this (but they are the experts and he falls under their jurisdiction as well as the state dept.)
3) Americans have a simplistic view of political issues. For a democracy, they tend to limit their views to only authoritarian hierarchies! Wikileaks would have a "head ringleader" even if they did not have one. The US media and politicians still have a hard time grasping the occupy movement desperately trying to find some figurehead or make/find 1 volunteer to symbolize as a single representative for the movement. Notice how we always kill the #2 and now #1 man in the boogie man terrorist organization despite it hardly qualifying as an organization; if a terrorist lived he'd probably not know about his promotion until the news reported his death.
4) Wikileaks is a really small organization; much of it is distributed to small players or hidden secret players. Assange has made himself the public face of wikileaks and due to (3 above) he is the #1 target so he gets priority over all the others (leakers are another dept.) Assange HELPS everybody by being the focus of attack and being a good example (being a dick doesn't help anybody; but they were smearing him before he gave them fuel-- works both ways, the USA is trying to make a negative example of him.)
A coward CEO suddenly forgets everything and shifts leadership to diffuse the damage to his peers-- pleading incompetent while still expecting the unjustified salary... Many groups decide who is going to be the fall guy. Assange as the founder/editor is the legal target and he knew it.
5) Surely, a wiseman would realize that nobodies are disappeared and who knows or cares?? As the final decider and founder HE GOES TO JAIL not his PR man. By becoming his own PR man and fostering celebrity status he becomes a known person in our celebrity obsessed culture which protects him as the legal fall guy as well as wikileaks AND it increases exposure as well as humanizing an organization that is bound to be subject to dehumanizing techniques. The WISE move is what he did ego or not. I'm not saying that somebody acting wisely or who is wise will be wise in all their actions for their whole life (or not accused of foolish behavior.) Righteous positions give people great power and it goes to anybody's head at least a little bit.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
STAY NOIDED!
since the typical strategy is (for example, against AQ):
1) disrupt leadership and
2) choke finances
having Assange under de facto house arrest should be having this effect.
If he spends the next 15 years in the Ecuadorian embassy, it's unlikely he'll be very effective. That will also be 15 years for the US to be able to lean on, overthrow, bribe or coerce the Ecuadorian government into turning him over. If Ecuador is willing to oppose the US by sheltering a high profile person like this, I'm guessing the CIA is already bank rolling the political and military opposition to the current government (e.g., Iran, Chile, Cuba, Afghanistan, etc). Which, even if it is not effective in regime change, will increase the cost of opposition to US desires for the regime in power (and so be a bargaining chip - turn over Assange and we'll make the guerrillas go away).
Also, the 'chilling effect' should be working: what is to stop new WL from popping up? Why aren't there a hundred or thousand other leak sites? By harassing assange they make sure to send a clear message to those who would follow his example that life will be unpleasant.
So it would seem that 'Operation WikiChill' is succeeding on some level.
Pentagon Papers
Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell. —Justice Black
NEW YORK TIMES CO. v. UNITED STATES, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=403&invol=713
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
That's a nice story, but those things weren't in the Wikileaks cables. Try again.
Not even a good straw man complaint, there. I'm replying (as you obviously know) to the GP's implication that government shouldn't do things in secret. Which is nonsense on the face of it. And you know that, but you're trying to change the topic so that reality doesn't get in the way of your politics. You try again.
Oh, and just in case you don't know about (though you do, and you're just asserting an alternate reality for bogus political points), the leaked cables absolutely do give up details of all sorts of covert operations, quiet conversations between nations, at-risk protesters with families living under brutal regimes like Iran, etc. Exactly the sort of stuff that's kept out of the public discourse for a reason. It must me relaxing to think there's nothing at stake in the world, and that none of people who risk their necks to get things done are of any worry to you. But then, that's what it's like to be in junior high school, right? Let me guess - 9th grade? Ah, those were the days.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Not your decision to make, that. Unless you were there, and you've keeping quiet the whole time - in which case, you are some kind of fucking cunt.
in this matter. Rove was internationally infamous, so it can't be a simple case of foreign political blindness on the Swedes' part.
Every policy or alignment is subject to change with each new generation and Sweden is no exception. In fact they have a recent history of supporting US Neocon adventurism including illegal renditions of asylum-seekers to Egypt.
You deliberately ignore the odds of him fleeing as a result of the interview.
So what's worse?
1: Killing people
2: Putting people at risk by revealing they killed people?
Your argument seems to suggest killing people is fine as long as nobody else finds out.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
And why the hell are US agents working coverly in Yemen to begin with? Maybe if the government kept its nose out of other countries business the safety of US spies wout be a moot point since there wouldn't be any.
"The United States is not a party to and does not recognize the ."
Standard US government form reply when dealing with anything.
This situation could EASILY be solved by interviewing Assange in the UK according to Sven-Erik, and according to evidence on the public record. Why the insistance on extradition in this case?
So they question him in London ... and then what happens if they want to charge him following this interview? You assume that the situation can be "solved" by adopting procedures that would mean Assange is immune from the possibility of being charged and tried. However if Assange can't, as a matter of practical facts, be extradited to Sweden or face trial, what would be the point of investigating the case any further? Assange is either subject to Swedish law in respect of his actions in Sweden, or everyone may as well go home.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Cold_War_pilot_defections
An asylum person is someone who has left their country of origin for fear of persecution. They've asked for permission to stay in another country and are waiting for a decision to be made on this.
On May 28, 1987, Cuban Brigadier General Rafael Del Pino Diaz defected to the United States in a Cessna 402 airplane of Aerocaribbean, with his third wife, his daughter, and his son Ramses, an ex-MiG-23 pilot. Del Pino Diaz remains the highest-ranking Cuban defector.
Sure, we recognize Diplomatic Asylum. Just not any asylum that blunts our pitchforks and snuffs out our torches. Its pretty obvious Julian Assange if not granted Asylum, would be eating that world renound lemon pepper fish down in Guantanamo.
let the whitehouse finish a few slices of humble pie this time.
Good people go to bed earlier.
1. There shouldn't be any government undercover cops working against organised crime.
2. There shouldn't be people working covertly in places like North Korea and Yemen.
3. People should know precisely everything about every nuclear load that various agencies, including government move around them.
AFAIC all the things you mentioned shouldn't even happen, and if they do happen and somebody leaks this information - good. Everybody must know what governments do.
You can't handle the truth.
Or it creates a shitstorm of ass-clenching emotional drama that is used to drive political ambitions.
In other words, you're all tools.
Innocent people died in a war zone? Holy fuck, you're kidding me right?
But with Assange not being a US citizen they don't have much to throw at him, so it has been receiving no publicity (yet). When/if that case does hit the CNN/FOX news cycle, at that point the Brits would have some pretext to rendition him.
The UK authorities have nothing to act on until then.
Karl Rove and Co. seem to think that shaming him with the Swedish accusations is the best way to proceed for now; he is even advising the Swedes on this matter according to one government official.
If an extradition to Sweden were somehow to go ahead, I believe an abduction is in the cards so that the US military can try to lump him in with Bradley Manning as a co-conspirator. (Remember, you're only a "conspiracy theorist" if your suspects are rich and powerful members and hangers-on of the US establishment... otherwise, suspicion is passionately encouraged.)
I don't think reasonable people advocate knowing *everything*. On the contrary, we just want to know the potentially illegal and unethical stuff; witness protection and undercover cops are neither illegal or unethical. If the only reason a certain piece of information is classified is to prevent some power-tripper from having egg on his face or getting thrown into jail, that's abuse of secrecy power and deserves to be publicized.
:(){
I should have said the UK authorities have nothing else to act on until then.
I disagree, I think personal income records should be public record if we all truly believe in the "Free Market" and allowing competition to chase profit.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
He's going to end up getting what to him is the worst fate of all; anonymity. He doesn't matter. Never did, never will.
Why won't a court issue the extradition request?
Why won't the police interview him in the UK?
If the answer to these is "Its not done that way in Sweden", then I'll doubt it with good reason.
In the case you refered to they wanted to arrest the defendant in absentia, which the courts declined. In Assange's case the court has ruled that he should be arrested in absentia. Probably because they are harder on sex crimes (the state feminism of Sweden is quite draconian when it comes to sex crimes).
Furthermore, in the summary of the case you refered to the court says;
"Med hänsyn till gärningarnas omfattning och karaktär får det anses befogat att L.O.K. är personligen närvarande vid det förhör som nu skall hållas. "
Which means that they think it is justifiable that the defendant should appear in person for questioning. In other words, the same finding as in the Assange case. So this case doesn't support your arguments at all! (Perhaps this was changed on appeal or something, but nothing indicates that this should have been the case in the finding you linked to!)
Also, in the case of Assange, we are talking about a sex crime. There might be other reasons for wanting to have him come in for questioning, such as making a request for DNA samples or something. I haven't actually heard that this should be the case, but it is not unreasonable considering the allegations against him.
I think that Sweden's sex crime laws are draconian an contraproductive. But, in accordance with the law we have today, the treatment of Assange is quite correct. Whether or not they are reasonable is another matter, but they are following the law such as it is. Believing that this is a honey trap with the purpose of extradating Assange is just silly. Sweden's sex laws are very hard and if you are in Sweden you have to obey them and ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law.
alot of 7-digit usernames and AC's on this thread....
Thank you Dave Raggett
I do not think that word means what you think it means...
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
witness protection and undercover cops are neither illegal or unethical
Unless they are, right? What if they're being paid off to protect (or betray) the wrong people? If you say there's nothing unethical about lying about a person's identity, giving them other people's tax money to buy a house, start a business, and get a fresh new life ... but that there is, by definition, something unethical about having off-the-record diplomatic exchanges with, say, the leader of a pro-democracy movement in Iran - then what standards are you using, exactly, to define "ethical?" Should we choose Julian Assange to be the arbitor of that, case by case?
So you've got standards about what you think counts as appropriately covert and inappropriately convert communications and record keeping. But you're not saying how you would decide when it's being handled correctly. You obviously don't trust people like Nancy Pelosi to be honest about her take on what she's been briefed on, and you clearly don't trust elected executive-branch people to make the right call. So, how do you see that working? The government can appropriately handle sensitive matters only as long as they run it past you, first?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
And why the hell are US agents working coverly in Yemen to begin with?
They're working to understand and push back against groups operating there - you know, groups who've said it's their sacred purpose to destroy western civilization, or to at least kill members of western civilization whenever they have the chance. By, you know, doing things like sinking ships, flying aircraft into buildings, getting their hands on WMDs for use in western cities, blowing up trainloads of people in Madrid or London for the sin of being insufficiently Islamic and allowing women to read - that sort of thing. That group has had its cozy Taliban-hosted summer camp taken away from them, and they're looking at places like Yemen and Somalia to set up shop again.
... rather than face that, you're opting for la-la-la-if-we're-just-nice-to-them-they'll-be-happy. Which is a joke.
You'll recall that a well known recruiter and PR mouthpiece for that movement - the guy involved in helping to plan and stage the attempted destruction of an inbound airliner over Detroit - was operating out of Yemen. Not to bother you with any details or anything. They didn't send that guy to try to kill a few hundred people so we'd stay out of Yemen. He did it because he thought that western civilization should cease to exist, and that his vision for a global Islamic culture should rise - killing off contemporary liberal non-Islamic democracies with death by a thousand cuts over time. You know, that guy operating in Yemen. Hence our working with people there to attampt to shut him down.
Of course, you already knew all of that, but rather than deal with the reality of the existence of people who don't merely want to be left alone, but who want to see your culture and lifestyle cease to exist
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
There shouldn't be any government undercover cops working against organised crime.
Because ... you like groups that murder, extort, enslave young girls in the sex trade, deal in narcotics, and use force and threats to corrupt government employees? What's your agenda, actually, in looking to make life easier for such people, rather than seeing a solid case built against them, and a successful prosecution of their crimes? Oh, I get it. You're a libertarian purist gone wrong, and think that there's no such thing as crime, and would just shrug your shoulders if your own sister or daughter was the one having to do strangers at gunpoint.
There shouldn't be people working covertly in places like North Korea and Yemen
Because you like the idea of a Stalinist state that starves millions of people in labor camps, and like the idea of Sharia law and undamentalist wackos shooting school teachers in the head for daring to teach girls to read? You're painting a very flattering picture of yourself, here.
People should know precisely everything about every nuclear load that various agencies, including government move around them.
Including where and when they can put an IED or twelve in order to destroy the trucks carrying it?
You have some really twisted priorities.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
If we wanted to split hairs -- a LOT OF PEOPLE could be brought to justice. I don't see the people who ran Wachovia while it was laundering Mexican drug money being dragged anywhere. We've got pedophiles and war criminals who never had their pay pal accounts held.
A guy who broke a condom and the accuser is no longer pressing charges has to have the Ecuadorian embassy broken into and all diplomatic precedence stomped on? Really? You really expect anyone but a Fascist to believe this shit? You still expect people to think that Marijuana is illegal because it's bad for you - -and yet we've got Pink Slime in school lunches and Silly Putty in Chicken Nuggets.
It doesn't matter how much information some people stuff in their heads -- they are still dumb asses. Nobody swallows the rationales behind going after Assange. Iraq was invaded for resources and making contractors wealthy, Gadaffi was killed because they didn't want the World Bank and wanted to stop trading in Dollars. And Assange is enemy #1 because he embarrassed people pretending to "secure us". When every time we look behind the curtain -- we find we've been lied to -- why is their a presumption that "Trust us, the Justice system cares about accusations of broken condoms." Wikileaks showed that a lot of our "vaunted" security information on US citizens gets sold to security agencies, who happily lap up data from the NSA and CIA. Then that data is sold to China or whomever. If these "external threats" that justify this farce were real -- that would be treason.
Only it's not illegal to sell secrets to the ENEMY. It's not illegal to lie. It's only illegal to tell the truth.
Get back to me when something is done about 30 years of rigging the LIBOR rates so billionaires could make billions and then tell me that there is an interest in "justice."
"This is the deadening consensus that crosses party lines, that dominates our major media, and that is strangling the liberty and prosperity that were once the birthright of Americans. Dissenters who tell their fellow citizens what is really going on are subject to smear campaigns that, like clockwork, are aimed at the political heretic. Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Dr. Ron Paul
From what I understand, the maximum penalty he could receive is less than the time he already served "in custody" in the UK, plus a rather small fine, relatively speaking. Also, he is not wanted for a trial, but only for questioning. The Swedish police so far have not taken up the invitation to question Assange in the UK, personally, via teleconference or in writing. Even if he was extradited and went to trial in Sweden and indeed found guilty, they could only make him pay the small fine, since the time he spent in custody in the UK will count as well. The whole "witch hunt" has no merit, he already went to jail, is being restricted against his will for a long period and I doubt that he'd mind paying the fine if the result would be that he'd be able to walk around free again. Things just don't add up, there must be an alternate agenda behind all this. Don't get me wrong, this is not about Assange being right or innocent, this is about an extradition request that makes no sense.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Even Assange does not want Obamacare... :)
Wikileaks used to be stronger for his leadership. Now he's accused of being a rapist, and the accusations aren't going away. If he secures his freedom without facing these allegations, Wikileaks will never be respected again.
Assange claims he can't face these allegations because he will be extradited to the U.S. and I expect that is correct. That either means that they beat him, or that he really is a rapist. So what if we gave him the benefit of the doubt? He has still been beaten. The question is whether beating Assange also means they have beaten Wikileaks.
Openleaks sounded like a total pile of crap when it first launched. I hope that there are other capable people that share the core values of Wikileaks. Every day until Assange hands over leadership and control to those people, Wikileaks is further diminished.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
But I suppose you've forgotten that they're different.
Parent raises some interesting points.
I think you have a bit of a skewed version of the events. There has been no massive level of hunting going on, only normal legal methods, that have then gotten drawn out by his behaviour.
So it starts with Assanage going to the UK. Sweden then says "We want you back here for questioning regarding these charges." He says "No you can question me remotely, but I won't come back." They say "That's not ok, you have to come here in person." He refuses. This is all consistent with not only Swedish law, but pretty much anywhere. Cops like to interview people in person for many reasons and you'll find that if you say "No, just call me and interview me that way," they will make the in person thing more compulsory.
So Sweden files for extradition. This is normal between countries. If a country has someone you want, you have to formally file for extradition. In Europe it is even more common given how many countries are close to each other, they have a fairly streamlined setup, agencies like Interpol and so on. Pretty much have to unless you want criminals evading justice by skipping national lines.
This is just a pro-forma thing, the extradition treaty is such that this is a legit request. So Assanage is held by the British Police to make sure he doesn't run (as the treaty specifies) and is released on bail (as British law provides). However Assanage's legal team then fights this extradition tooth and nail over any issue they can. It finally goes all the way up to the British High Court who rules that this is a legal extradition request per the treaty and thus is going to happen. Remember they aren't concerned with the validity of the crime, that is for a Swedish court to decide, just if the request is a legit one per the treaty.
Well then Assanage runs off to the Ecuadorian embassy. At this point, he's now a criminal in Britain: He skipped on bail. Prior to that has was in no trouble there, they were just watching him because of the extradition request. However when he skipped bail, he broke British law. So now they have a criminal complaint against him, and are probably fairly angry. The whole idea of bail is you promising to appear as required, and as such being allowed to go free until then.
Ecuador then granted Assanage asylum, which is a slap in Britain's face. Part of being a diplomat in a foreign country is you are a guest and you are supposed to obey their laws. You don't shelter criminals or the like. So now the UK is quite angry, and understandably so. It is a major diplomatic breach and they are threatening retaliation. This is legal. Embassies are not some complete inviolable entity that some people seem to think. They can be dissolved unilaterally by the host country. The diplomats and their papers must be allowed to leave without hindrance, but the embassy can be dissolved. Also there are provisions for the police to enter and get someone. They can't arrest any of the diplomats, nor touch any of the papers, but they can arrest a non-protected person in there.
So this really isn't that unusual except in the lengths that Assanage has gone to in trying to avoid going to Sweden. If the police in a country, particularly in the EU, want to talk to someone in another country and that person won't come in, an extradition request is how you deal with thing. For example the UK received about 4,000 extradition requests from other EU countries in 2011. It is quite a standard activity.
Now they are just angry because he has broken UK law by skipping bail, and they are angry with Ecuador for pulling this stunt. There really isn't anything witch-hunty going on unless you consider the original charges in Sweden to be that. All the stuff in terms of extradition and the UK are quite normal.
Right now, Assange is charged with sexual misconduct by Sweden. The idea that there is some grand master plan by which the US is pulling the strings to have Assange extradited to Sweden in order to nab him, charge him with espionage, and then execute him exists only in Assange's head.
In different words, there is no "witch hunt" that could possibly be ended. For now, it's just Assange and the rape charges he faces in Sweden.
Manning *did*, having had a security clearance I quite well would *expect* legal problems/charges for violating the terms/trust given me when I signed that agreement (and when I left that job, the agreement I signed saying I would never discuss anything I knew... which of course the proper response is "what stuff?" ::)). My signature, though, is on a piece of paper saying I won't - its a contract, and I would fully expect to wind up in court for violating that contract.
Assange signed nothing, isn't a US citizen, and broke no laws of his own country or the country in which he was residing at the time (at least as far as cablegate).
The US killed people in the Iraq war, including civilians. That's part of war and if what Assange "revealed" was anything new to you, you were pretty naive.
Is that OK? Given the large number of people Saddam Hussein was killing, the war probably overall saved lives. However, it wasn't America's responsibility to get its hands dirty in this war. We should have stayed out of it out of simple self-interest. Let the people in the Middle East take care of their own problems.
I suspect that Manning will be convicted and spend several years in prison. He seems to be a sympathetic pathetic character to me. If, as what I read suggests, he broke the promises he made to get a clearance, broke the law, and his action damaged US interests and endangered lives, then serious punishment is appropriate.
US claims against Assange seem less clear. I don't know what US law he violated and I don't know how the US can claim jurisdiction. I found reference to a rumor of an indictment at wikipedia, but I'm not sure that the US has charged him. The Swedish charges seem plausible and unrelated.
I have more sympathy for Manning than Assange, perhaps because the case against him looks clearer and more serious.
And let the journalists worry about the government. Openleaks is better on a conceptual level, it's decentralized.
The way to avoid witch-hunts is not to build a centralized leaking service and then put one guy at the top of it to be beheaded.
The way to avoid witch hunts is simply to write the code, build the concepts, do the theoretical work, and separate that work from the practical implementation which requires a completely different set of skills. Hackers don't make good journalists and don't navigate the political world very well. Hackers should focus on helping good people do good things in defense of human rights, develop the technology just like Bitcoin or Tor or whatever and let the people decide what to do with that.
Going on TV giving speeches isn't as efficient as connecting journalists to a secure Anonymous Pipeline of leaks. Create the dumb pipe.
This may sound like an ignorant question but what exactly does Julian Assange do in relation to Wikileaks? Does he actually get these "cables" (are those telegrams?), if not where do they come from? Does someone in the US army (or wherever) call him up and say "I got something of interest."?
Thanks in advance.
Mr. Pres. Barak Obama is once again shown to be impotent in administration of his 'Kill List' and incapable to comprehend nation and international law.
However, drones and remote-control and communications equipment are in-route to Colombia where the US Air Force and contractual
technicians are preparing for killing mission on the Ecuadorian peoples in general. This is a general US policy action and not related to
the event at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Already 'in-country' are US Army kill squads whose mission is to terrorize the population.
This is Mr. Pres. Obama's plan for the USA, but the methods of killing need to be tested and Ecuador is the 'test tube' sad to say.
At a Cabinet meeting where Mr. Pres. was, well attempted to be educated regard to national and internal law, Mr. Pres. blurted, "What the
Fuck! Am I not the President of the United States of America?! KILL THEM and kill all of them I don't care and your family will live because
you SUCKED MY PRESIDENTIAL DICK."
The Mr. Pres. and the 'Questioning' Cabinet Secretary then retired to an adjoining room to the Oval Office. Attendees then heard the sounds
a fight, shouts, mourns and pleads for mercery then sounds of 'sucking'.
The Obama Press Sec. then entered the Oval Office to adjourn the 'meeting' and as usual to require all to sign a statement of nondisclosure
on forfeiture of life regarding the events.
So perhaps the events of the day in the Obama Oval Office are a reflection of, 'if the President does it, then it is legal'. In which case there is 'Legal Rape' and 'Illegal Rape' in the eyes of the Law.
A sad day indeed.
Wizard calls for end of witch hunt. Film at 11....and once again at the stroke of midnight.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
If organized crime was legalized, then there would be no organized crime. Actually, wait, that's precisely what government is, organized crime.
Name one way the documents have actually helped Iran or North Korea or actually helped the United States. You were you (or your father) also bleating that the Pentagon Papers 'helped deliver sensitive documents' to the Soviet Union?
Nevermind that the Assange-hating DOD can't even come up with a single example of that, of course.
And of course nevermind the callous corruption revealed by those documents. What a good little fascist ostrich, you are.
Leak the sealed indictment from the U.S. and we'll know.
Which makes it obvious that the UK ignoring centuries of precedent on diplomatic immunity and the refusal of Sweden or the U.S. to agree to not extradite him to Gitmo is in fact evidence of a witch hunt.
Go Cardinals!
He says "No you can question me remotely, but I won't come back." They say "That's not ok, you have to come here in person." He refuses. This is all consistent with not only Swedish law, but pretty much anywhere.
Poppycock. What is "normal," though not in Sweden obviously, is that any interview prior to charges being laid be voluntary. They could have interviewed him, seen his responses and even recorded it ... all remotely. The fact that the refused this offer suggests that the interview was only of secondary importance.
So Sweden files for extradition. This is normal between countries.
There is nothing "normal" in extraditing people who have not been charged with any criminal offence. That the UK complied is a result of the extra-ordinary interference with due process introduced via an EU treaty.
There really isn't anything witch-hunty going on unless you consider the original charges in Sweden to be that.
Let's see the two women go to the police station to see if they can compel Mr Assange to submit to an STD test. When the police tell them they want to charge him with "rape" (bad translation I know) the younger breaks down calls out "No, No, No" and runs out of the station. One wonders what pressure has been applied to ensure her compliance. A case is prepared, it is dropped, it is reopened again ... by a judge on what we are to believe is a personal whim. Now IAAL, but in a CL jurisdiction, so maybe this is normal for an inquisitorial jurisdiction, but Mr Assange would have to be on the foolish side of naive to believe they simply want to "interview" him (in Sweden that is).
So why didn't the idiot state that in the first place.
Since the government of the USA has been established and supported by the people of the USA, it could be argued that broad policies are indeed established by the people of the USA as well.
Or perhaps he is stating that America no longer recognizes popular dissent over such policies and that the system is so corrupt that it has become a kleptocracy.
Regardless, the anti-American tripe was so awful that it can only be considered an insult to all Americans as well as the government. I sure as hell am not apologetic.
Because ... you like groups that murder, extort, enslave young girls in the sex trade, deal in narcotics, and use force and threats to corrupt government employees?
in the case of roman_mir, the answer to all those (and more!) is ayes. he supports abolishing all laws that prohibit the practice of acts like those that you just described - amongst others - as he sees such laws as impediments to his pursuit of happiness. and of course, by happiness he means profit. if someone can make - or save - mone by enslaving children, he is at least 235% OK with it. give him time and he'll tell you how slavery is itself the product of the us going off the gold standard. well, that is, until a freemarket cultist such as himself is caught exploiting slave labor, in which case he will tell you it is gods gift to the world.
Because you like the idea of a Stalinist state that starves millions of people in labor camps
stalin was friendly and warm in comparison to what roman_mir wants. he openly embraces the oppression of anyone who disagrees with him philosophically. he has no problem whatsoever with the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of exceedingly few people - or indeed down to just one person.
and like the idea of Sharia law and undamentalist wackos shooting school teachers in the head for daring to teach girls to read?
roman_mir is a religious fundamentalist, without a doubt. he sees murder and rape as freedom of expression.
"[Not recognizing] the concept of diplomatic asylum as a matter of international law" certainly didn't prevent the US to grant Chinese dissident Fang Lizhi and his wife diplomatic asylum in the American embassy in Beijing for over a year before shipping them off to the US for an upgrade to political asylum proper.
Assange should stop calling those women witches. He has hunted too many women and may have to suffice with Ecuadorian embassy pussy for quite some time.
If the UK or US government invades the Ecuadorian embassy, or better yet, if Julian makes it to Ecuador and then they still come in after him, this could mean war.
In Soviet Russia, dot slashes YOU!
I suggest that we publish the names and photos of all undercover cops working against organized crime.
That'd be interesting! Let's see how much enforcement is spent actually busting mega-crooks instead of throwing a significant proportion of the minority male population in jail over minor possession and petty theft.
Also, home addresses of the wives of people working covertly in places like North Korea or Yemen.
Cool! Wonder how that stacks up with those undermining democratically-elected governments in places like Bolivia, Palestine or Algeria? Or infiltrating peace and labor organizations stateside?
schedule and routes of moving nuclear material
Would actually like to know where Israel keeps all it's nukes, wouldn't you?
protective custody or witness protecction
Yes, wouldn't want to disrupt the delicate operations of the DEA and FBI allowing high-level criminals to carry out their business in return for fingering minor players ...
talking to political parties in countries that are on the brink of a civil war
Yes, like Syria, or Libya, where the US stands up for open dialog, and wouldn't think of arming Islamist militants or calling in air strikes!
I'd sure like to shine MORE lights on how the US is fighting crime and keeping the world safe for democracy!
As a Swedish citizent, I feel ashamed over that we cant send a cop over to UK to hear him. He should be heared regarding the offences he might have comited in Sweden (even tho I do wounder if he ever did). But that Sweden refuses to handle this case humanily, causing so much problems for him is for me a sign of that this is about something else. Im sure he will be deported to USA if he set his foot in Sweden. If this was not the case, Sweden would have sent over a cop for ages ago.
It's not really that ACs have become more intelligent, its that whenever someone seems to say anything truthful but damaging to some predetermined world view, they get all their comments down moded and their karma trashed by idiots who can't handle the truth or want to bury it in the score system. They generally use overrated as it doesn't get metta modded and they open your comments page and start going down the list. If your karma is bad, this will even stop you from posting too.
This means that a lot of otherwise logged in people will hit the post anonymously button to avoid those buthurt buffoons clown raping their posts. Of course ./ could stop that from happening by simply limiting the number of times someone could mod a specific account within a certain amount of time, but it seems the editors and staff are happy with the outcomes.
Julian Assange is the leader of a world movement for freedom of expression. He is an inspiration to many around the world. This movement is loosely coupled via Internet.
What we see in Egypt, in Moscow, in Virginia, etc. is the direct result of his work.
Julian Assange and Bradley Manning are the first western dissidents. They continue the humanity's work of freedom and truth together with such courageous people as Natan Sharansky, Andrey Sakharov, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
American and Australian people be proud that mother-nature sent them this time to those parts.
There is precedent.
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
The UK authorities have nothing to act on until then.
The UK authorities have a decision from their Supreme Court that says he can be extradited to Sweden, and a valid warrant from Sweden, in accordance with EU treaties. I also very much doubt that the US is going to abduct him from a Swedish jail cell.
You post is pretty much all nonsense, and diversion, mixed with hysteria. By the way, you do realize that Karl Rove has been out of government for years now, don't you? I'm quite certain that if the current Democratic administration wanted to influence the Swedish government they would find plenty of talent on their bench instead of using the despised Republican Karl Rove. Of course once you start mixing facts into the kool-aid, it doesn't taste as sweet, does it?
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
How can you go into bed with the south american bunch of opressors (opressing press, society, opposition) instead of trusting the countries which have been proven to have independent courts, time after time. Maybe Mr. Assange likes to speak freely in Equador. Oh, but be careful; insulting the president can give 2 years of jails there.
So from somebody who popularized the idea of free speech (other leaking websites predate wikileaks significantly), he becomes to a mascot of oppression. His speech reminded me of the speeches which we heard from eastern Europe during the cold war, includign the significant reveresal of roles.
The ironic part is, that after all he has said now, the worst thing the US and Sweden could do to him would be to let the transport to Sweden happen, and release him there direcltly after questioning him one time. This would annihilate his credibility completely; after that he could never state again that he was oppressed. The last two years of using Money which was given to him for another purpos, his clinging to the leadership of WL, going to bed and interviewing dictators (solely based on the fact that they also dont like the US) would appear in a strange moral light.
And so what WL criticised (very rightfully in my opinion), namely the fact that the US foreign policy has an neverending "The end justify the means" way of handling international affairs, could not be critizised any more. Once you saluted to Equador as an example of freedom it may get a little difficult to critizise the US for not condeming all of their "friends" of a similar kind.
Which brings me to the point: why would he do that? Sweden may not extradite anybody into a country where they may be punished by the death penalty. On the other hand, it is highly rational that inside the EU where you can travel freely, also extrations inside the EU must be possible. If this thing with Equadorian embassy personal works, then a new route of bussiness for failed states would be to offer this. So i could commit any crime, if i am getting caught, i go to London, pay a few thousand Euro to Equador, and get diplomat status.
The obvious abuse of the diplomat status makes the request for transparency, clarity, and honety, which WL was originally about, a farce.
So the only reason he may do what he does is: He wants to escape a fair trial/legal process in Sweden. The less evil assumption about him would be that he does that because he is paranoid (even if giving away the key to the encrypted data in a hand-waving way to prove the size of his balls, and thus losing control over the publicaiton process would indicate otherwise).
Once a ponner time there was this kerfuffle in Britain that did immense damage to the local law enforcement agencies and it all could have been circumvented if the perp had just put his head on the block right at the start.
It's not as if he needed a fair trial or anything; he was king after all.
People had a bit of a skewed version of the events. There was no massive level of hunting going on, only normal legal methods, that got drawn out by his behaviour.
the leaked cables absolutely do give up details of all sorts of covert operations, quiet conversations between nations, at-risk protesters with families living under brutal regimes like Iran, etc.
The leaked cables certainly contained details of quiet conversations between nations, many of which were not in the best interests of their citizens. Take an example from the list in this article: an innocent German citizen was abducted by the US, and Germany was warned not to arrest the CIA agents involved. Germany should have made that public - and the US wouldn't have made such a shameful request if they hadn't been able to do so secretly. A few others are almost as bad; most are ambiguous, with no particular benefit or harm resulting from them becoming known. This is an area in which we can certainly debate the appropriate degree of transparency: I doubt that it needs to be total, but I would like to see more than we have currently.
I'm more interested, though, in your other two points. Details of covert operations? At-risk protesters with families living under brutal regimes? Accusations of this sort were all over the place a few weeks after the Wikileaks cables were released, and I've yet to see a single one - a single concrete example of harm resulting from the release - which actually provided a reliable citation. Given the amount of FUD on the issue, I'm afraid that I'll have to insist on a link to the actual cable on Wikileaks. Got anything?
Ecuador should just change its ambassador to a blond guy who looks like Assange.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
As I see it, either a) Assange did rape one or both of the women who have complained, in which case he will be found guilty, and rightly, serve a sentence for his crime. Or b) he didn't do it, and he was set up. If he was in fact set up, then it stands to reason that he was set up by somebody with the wherewithal to ensure that the case is solid enough to lead to a conviction. Either way, if he was to face potential charges in Sweden, I can't see a case in which he would be found not guilty.
Of course, this is all moot, because the US would have him trussed up and Gitmo-bound within 5 minutes of landing on Swedish soil.
releasing documents without ANY thought
WL released them in conjunction with three major newspapers in Germany the UK and the US, the four independent organizations worked together in secrecy for weeks to weed out informants names,etc. They then synchronized the publication so none of the newspapers could claim a "scoop". I'd say Assange, at least three major publishers, their chief editors, and four legal departments, all thought long and hard about what it was they were releasing.
But still, perhaps the people who were scanning the documents were sloppy. Let's assume they missed some stuff in their rush to publish. So now that everybody has had time to go through them with a fine tooth comb, where are the bodies piling up? All the millions the US and others have spent investigating this, all the macho chest beating in congress about WL and "harm's way", yet they still haven't shown us so much as a broken kneecap?
Disclaimer: None of this makes me an "Assange supporter", I am a "Free press" supporter. I don't like the majority of his personality traits, which is just one more reason I am reluctant to brand him a witch. "A dingo ate my baby" is no longer that funny to Aussies who were adults in the early 80's, it a reminder to me of how easy it is for an entire nation to burn the socially inept at the stake.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Just how can we as people (Regardless of origin or current whereabouts) punsh the United States of America's policy makers for their blatant attacks on our rights?
It is bad enough that the US government sees itself as an international private enforcement gang for some of the local organizations. But when it starts to come with blatant threads against other governments, what to do? Can anything be done? Or do we just have to accept that the US government can send it's troops into any of our homes and kill us, take us or our loved ones hostage, etc?
In Norway tax information is public. Some people don't like it, some people think it is OK to see what contribution others make to society.
Is not the ENTIRE "the US is going to lock me up if I go to Sweden to be questioned about rape" just a gigantic straw man argument?
Public sector jobs (or at least the ones I know) tend to all have wages (and I'd assume taxes as derived from such) listed as public information.
Isn't there a single US Congress man who can stand for Assange?
Casteism
So you are saying that if someone steals a car and gives it to me, and I drive it knowing it's stolen, I haven't broken any laws??? Seems that similar to what Assange did .. he knowingly received information that was stolen, and then published that information.
I have no sympathy for someone who is willing to attack others and then whines and moans when he becomes the object of attacks. He isn't a whistle blower as much as he is an attention whore. He is just as bad as Anonymous, a coward who hides behind others pushing his own personal agenda because of an overblown ego and overdeveloped sense that he, and only he, knows what is right.
Baby wasn't a good term to use. Spoiled brat is more appropriate.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Therefore, still stands: what law did Assange break?
... car ...
Yeah, but no one here stole a car so your thoughts about that are hardly relevant, are they?
c++;
Assange + Guantanamo = Perfect Together
Wikileaks "turned on the lights" on a rather select set of governments, and have, by their own admission, released data without even bothering to read most of it to discover if some of it will indeed get people killed.
Assange is a political animal who also happens to be a suspected rapist. But then again, the Europeans love Polanski, a CONVICTED child rapist, so I don't suppose their defense of Assange should come as a surprise.
If organized crime was legalized, then there would be no organized crime
So you're all for extortion, arson as insurance fraud, groups that target and steal cars for black export, groups that steal cabling from construction sites and find scrap metal dealers intimidated into buying it from them (or else!)... yes, we should definitely make it easier for that sort of thing to happen. And when someone decides to kill someone else over protection racket turf, and uses his organized group of criminal friends to present false alibis ... cool, right? Because if it weren't illegal for a group of people to conspire in the act of committing a crime, then those crimes wouldn't happen, right? You're an idiot.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
That link is a pile of lies. A "source" is where you got the leak from. A "source" is not someone named in a communication. There was a private communication that named multiple people, and one of the named people is getting pressure for content in the leaked content. That's not action against the "source". Unless that person leaked a damaging cable with his own name in it.
At no time do they talk about the person that delivered the content to wikileaks being under threat because of any action or inaction on the part of wikileaks.
Learn to love Alaska
The Pentagon Papers, were in depth on a single, controversial issue: The Vietnam War. A comparable leak would have been on the Iraq War and occupation. I would have liked a damning one, but regrettably, there was none.
The leaked US diplomatic cables were on a broad variety of issues, with not much depth. No gigantic revelations that would change government policy. Just a major theft of classified material that did not make the American public a single bit more enlightened. Of course low ranking soldiers are going to cover up accidental killings. Of course the United States has biological weapons. Of course diplomats can form secret opinions of the locals. Yes, George W. Bush is a dumbass.
If you leak classified material, it should be specific, on a controversial issue that the public has to make decisions on. For failing to do that, Bradley Manning and Assange should be executed.
The United States generally avoids being a law-abiding global actor. Ignoring the norms of diplomatic behavior is just one more example. Lying to invade Iraq is another.
They wonder why they now aren't trusted and have lost face.
Stupid.
That's a hell of a distinction. Two people actually get arrested and charged with treason because some asshole leaked their names to the world in plaintext, but it doesn't count because instead of saying "US Embassy Source cited in cable leaked by Wikileaks," it said "Wikileaks Source."
For the record the Generals in question are not gonna be shot:
http://www.zimpapers.co.zw/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6015:chiwenga-speaks-on-wikileaks-&catid=37:top-stories&Itemid=130
But I doubt the Belarussians are gonna be satisfied with anything less then jail terms in Stalinist Gulags, and the Ehriopians have already exiled a guy.
Wikileaks protects leakers. Wikileaks never promised to protect people whose crimes are revealed through a leak. That doesn't sound like splitting hairs. They've never promised that their leaks won't lead to prosecution or persecution of those doing "bad" things. If you didn't do it behind a closed door, Wikileaks wouldn't have affected you.
Learn to love Alaska
The US just confirmed they're just that.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
I didn't say Wikileaks were lying, or breaking their word, or anything like that. I said they were assholes who got the opponents of oppressive regimes locked up because their previous strategy (which involved editing the cables so names those folks couldn't be identified) wasn't getting Lord Julian enough face-time on CNN.
And yes, in Zimbabwe opposing the regime is illegal. Which means "freeing the information" that two Generals opposed the regime constitutes both a) exposing crime, and b) supporting dictatorship.
Or maybe exposing the idiocy of the dictatorship ends up saving millions? Some have attributed the recent spat of revolutions in the middle east area on leaks showing the dictatorships being verifiable bad, rather than just assumed to be.
Learn to love Alaska
Always will, always has. The difference is that they promote freedom and justice, but they are anything but that. 300.000.000 against 6.700.000.000 Do the math.