Slashdot Mirror
Photo Reveals UK Plan: "Assange To Be Arrested Under All Circumstances"
politkal writes with the lead from a CNN story: "A policeman in London appears to have accidentally revealed an arrest plan for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, in what UK media have branded an embarrassing slip-up by London's Metropolitan Police. Clearly legible in a zoomed-in view of the clipboard, on a sheet of paper headed 'Restricted,' are the words: 'EQ Embassy brief — Summary of current position re. Assange. Action required — Assange to be arrested under all circumstances.' It goes on to suggest possible ways in which he could exit the building, such as in a diplomatic bag or vehicle."
He's stuck living in some guys office, sleeping on an air matres. And from what I hear, he's a really bad house guest. Leave him there, its punishment all around.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Then watch the machinations.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/24/police_plan_for_assange/
Please try to keep up.
Right here http://couragetoresist.org/donate/bradley-manning.html
Since you're so concerned about the guy, maybe you should stuff your self-rightousness up your ass and go donate to his defense fund.
First of all, kudos to the witty chap who zoomed in on that clip board after taking the photo. But really, who are we kidding? Assange has always been 5 steps ahead of any dignified authority who is after him for all of this. I think it would be a little naive to assume he hasn't seen this coming and doesn't have a plan (and/or successor) to continue on.
Instead of exhausting resources on trying to figure how to get to one man in an embassy, why not shift those efforts to his network and minions doing the heavy lifting for him? This is starting to feel like a '24' episode right now... WWJBD.
How is the fact the the London police wish to arrest law breakers news?
Are not the vehicles considered extensions of the embassy itself? I thought that the power the embassy wasn't restricted to the physical location, but also extended to the belongings and methods of transport which that country owns. If they did smuggle him out in a box labeled "Diplomatic papers" England wouldn't have any authority to seize or inspect that package it's considered soveriegn property. It would be the same as the England invading Equidor. I mean what does England think they are the US?
Ecuadorean diplomats should now regularly ship moving crates, boxes, novelty oversized cakes and so forth out of the embassy on a daily basis.
The Wolfpack Project: BitCoin + Crowdfunding = Political Accountability
how many rape victims would like that kind of police commitment to arrest their aggressors?
You must be reading Assange's PR bs ...... the "recanted" has being disproven time and time again.
You really are too stupid to be on internet:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/13/wikileaks-bradley-manning-defence-fund
WikiLeaks delivers contribution to Bradley Manning defence fund
Website honours pledge made last July to help pay legal fees of soldier accused of leaking US embassy cables
And given the current financial blockade against wikileaks they were lucky to get that out to the BM fund.
really... do the police think they will cut him up and smuggle him out piece by piece?
Treason? The only treason I see having been committed was by the officials who did anything so embarrassing that it needed to be leaked. Maybe if politicians and bureaucrats weren't such unethical, scheming, corrupt slimebags there'd be no reason for people like Assange and Manning to do what they're doing.
need more lube for U$A action?
This is hilarious. You two need to touch weiners, or something.
I read an interview with Adrian Lamo once where he said that when he turned in Manning, he didn't think Assange would actually go through and release the State Department cables. He thought Assage would put Manning's safety above releasing the cables.
Nobody "accidentally" carries a restricted document outside on the front of a clipboard. Good for those coppers. They can't publically declare their support for Wikileaks and Assange's movement to Ecuador, but it's awesome of them to be helping out where they can.
You think Wikileaks is a big money-making venture?
It's funny how people believe anyone whose name is in the news must be rich. "Hey, did you see that guy who got a million hits on his YouTube video of his dog who skateboards? That guy must be like a millionaire or something!"
"Hell, man, Wikileaks must be rolling in it if Assange is in the news for trying to avoid arrest! Maybe they should spread some of that wealth around, you know? Oh, and Go Romney!"
You are welcome on my lawn.
That sounds like treason talk Mr BoberFett. Your comment will be brought up at the next House Un-American Activities Committee meeting.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
That's more believable than the UK media.
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
yes, either site some sort of evidence, or can someone delete. I'm not about censorship, but if this is an outright lie it doesn't belong here. shame on you.
America was founded on many acts of treason. If the men and women committing these acts of treason, against the king, were caught, they'd have been put to death. Since the rebels won, we Americans consider these treasonous rebels brave heroes and patriots. The Tories - not so much.
Treason is in the eye of the beholder.
You really are too stupid to be on internet
Hmm, maybe you're from the past. Hello, time traveller! On today's internet, that level of stupid simply places him in the 80th percentile. I hope you enjoy 2012, but you'll probably want to pick a different decade for your final journey.
When confronted with one problem, some think "I'll use recursion". Now they are confronted with one problem.
The road where they are driven ... NO.
He gets in a car, gets cornered and instead of being stuck in an office, he is stuck inside of a hot car with no food, water or bathroom.
keep licking those boots. mmmm, good!
of course, you have it backwards. the ones who did the *larger* bit of crime are the ones manning reported on.
that doesn't bother you but the party-line is all you can repeat.
(let me guess; republican, right?)
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
America was founded on many acts of treason.
I disagree. George III was a Hanoverian usurper.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Doesn't seem to include "assassination" in the list of options.
Sure, if you just wanted to be rid of Assange, that would be easy. Snipers. Bombs. Even just a guy with a pistol.
Problem is, you have him killed in any way that looks deliberate, and he becomes a martyr. I would hope that anyone in power is smart enough to know that, but I've also learned that you can never underestimate just how stupid people can be.
Now, you could try other ways. If he was just in hiding, not causing an international incident in an embassy, you could stage a "mugging gone wrong" or even just a car accident. "Problem" eliminated, but it doesn't look like you did it. If you were really good, try to make it look like it *was* deliberate, but a plan by Ecuador from the beginning to kill him for... some reason. Has to be a good reason, obviously, but it's plausible.
But even then, he dies "fighting". It's obvious that they want to first assassinate his *character*, not the person himself. Assange the man is a nobody, a mildly egotistic anti-authoritarian who started a website almost anyone could make. The problem is Assange the concept, Assange the idea. The lone rebel trying to show the evil empires for what they really are.
That's who they need to eliminate. They started with the rape allegations. Perhaps they simply embellished what actually happened. Perhaps they twisted what was said, what was done. Perhaps they made the whole thing up. They've blurred the charges so much that I can't even tell what he's actually charged with anymore. But they did a good job of it - Assange the Idea, at least to some, is gone, replaced with Assange the Man, a man who (at worst) is a hypocritical rapist scumbag, or (at best) a regular guy who made a few mistakes on par with public intoxication.
Their next step, obviously, is to milk the "common criminal" idea for all it's worth. I don't think they'll even extradite him to the US to face some vague treason charge - that brings back discussion of the leaks, the rebel and the big bad empire. No, they'll try to avoid even mentioning that. They'll hit him with rape charges to make him scum (rape is often considered the worst crime, worse even than murder). They'll probably bring in charges like shoplifting to make him seem petty, small. Then when they've finished their show trial, they'll lock him away and try to shut him up. Only once he's in prison will they think of trying to kill him, again while avoiding martyrizing him (if it were an American prison, just staging a prison fight and shanking would be enough).
As he should. There's a reason why treason is treated so seriously. Unfortunately, prosecutors don't intend to push for execution.
Execution for those chopper pilots shooting ambulance and rockets at children and then laughing on comms like they were playing CoD.
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
America is doing evil things. Those who do evil things deserve to die.
Fuck trust. How about transparency?
And we're just supposed to take your word for that, right? Or if not yours, someone else's?
That's probably a good place to start reforming the "justice" system.
. . .in order to shed light on government abuses of power, secrets which he probably didn't know he'd be required to keep when he was making his oath. So whose trust was really violated here? And do you honestly think violating trust is the worst offense a man can commit? If that's the standard we should all be executed.
Assange is the new Bin Laden, another lie.
.And in doing so, create a martyr.
I am John Hurt.
It might be true that he sex without a condom against their will and possibly while one of the women was unconscious. But that shouldn't matter because it's not legitimate rape. If the rape was legitimate the women would not have invited him over to dinner. Also I read on /. that the female body has ways to shut itself down to prevent any penetration during legitimate rape.
How does a non-citizen, non-resident commit treason against a country he owes no allegiance to?
"Unfortunately"? You're a disgusting imbecile obsessed about revenge.
Wake up, hysterical lies is the basis for an entire political platform in the US.
Take the Red Pill.
Not to mention, if you want to see real treason, you need look no further than the Obama administration, which leaked information about the Osama bin Laden raid to try and shore up support for his reelection.
Leaks which, unlike Wikileaks, DID get people killed. Leaks which compromised those who provided the intelligence that led to Bin Laden, getting them caught by foreign forces.
But do you think anyone is going to get in trouble for those leaks? Of course not, it allowed Obama to announce that he had killed Bin Laden!
Go Romney!
I'm going with O'Bomney... He's Black Irish, right?
That's actually a good idea. The death penalty is barbaric.
Assange is NOT a diplomat for any country. He is just an accused criminal hiding in an embassy.
If so, then what exactly is the USA case again Assange? He is neither subject to US laws, nor is he as a non-citizen, non-resident owed anything to USA to protect its so-called secrets, since it is a country he owes no allegiance to. Please decide if you want to have your cake or whether you want to eat it.
You're missing a number of rather important details.
First off, the founders of the USA made an open statement of their problems with King George, having worked to resolve them.
Second, instead of publishing who King George had agreements with, or who his spies in France are, or some other embarassing detail, they simply started their own country and said: if you don't like it, this is who we are; come get some.
Third, they took up arms and resisted the people the King sent after them, when he did indeed come after the people who signed the Declaration of Independence.
If you're trying to say Bradley Manning has the balls or integrity to do any of the above, then you're not paying attention or you're willfully lying.
He's a little jag who had a temper tantrum because his boyfriend dumped him, and then got demoted for having that temper tantrum at work. Since he was demoted, he grabbed everything he could get his hands on and gave it to where he thought it could do the most damage, while trying desperately to stay anonymous.
Bradley Manning is a coward, a whiner, and a drama Queen. And you are an idiot for comparing him to anyone who ever actually put himself on the line for anything.
I have bad news for you, if you think that soldiers regularly fight battles without trying to dehumanize them. If they had been correct in their identification, their actions would probably have not been noteworthy at all; the issue is that they misidentified the targets.
Bradley manning is not only a citizen and a resident, he is a member of the armed forces-- hence why this is being handled in military courts.
> some actually died due to Manning's treason
citation needed.
First off, I wouldn't vote for Romney if you put a gun to my head.
Second, they should send every penny they are sending to Assage to the Manning defense fund.
*chuckle* Much like nobody got in trouble for leaking the fact that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent, thereby endangering her.
Yes, your comment deserves to be modded up because you're right. No matter who it is, when the leaks serve those in power, it doesn't matter if anybody is hurt, nobody is prosecuted.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
I wonder how long the people of London would stand for it if 50 small trucks a day started pulling into the embassy garage, then pulling out again and heading for Europe. What kind of police presence would it take to search every one of them on a daily basis?
Maybe once in a while, just for a laugh, have somebody approximating Assange's physical appearance hop in for a ride around the city.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Diplomats are not created by the guest country, but by the host country. The guest country says "We have this person here that we wish to represent us to you," the host country then says "We accept that person as your representative and confer upon them status as a diplomat." There are various level of official ceremony that go along with this, depending on the rank of the diplomat (for example in the US an ambassador meets with the president and presents formal credentials and so on, whereas a junior lackey gets little more than an ok from the State Department).
You don't just get to declare someone to be a diplomat at any time because you feel like it. Remember that the whole thing is a treaty between countries, not a unilateral deceleration enforced by some higher power. This is also why diplomats can be expelled by the host country. They say "This person is no longer welcome here." In the event said diplomat doesn't leave, they lose their diplomatic status and can be subject to arrest and so on.
So no, Ecuador can't just say "Oh ya, he's a diplomat," the UK would simply say "No, sorry, we haven't recognized him as such."
Also even if they could there'd be the problem of diplomatic fallout. Not only with the UK, but other countries as well. Many nations might decide they weren't interested in having an diplomats from a nation if that nation would decide to make criminals (Assanage is a criminal in Britain, he skipped his bail) diplomats when it suited them.
Err, you can be subject to US laws even if you are no American and never set a foot in America. All you have to do is break US laws.
Now, treason charge is quite impossible, for obvious reason. But there is no reason why they can trump up a bunch of BS like "aiding the enemy" or "encouraging and materially aiding in acts of espionage" or "conspiracy to commit theft of state property" or similar.
There is enough laws to hang Assange in the US, even if treason is not one of them.
Aren't modern laws great? You can always make them "work" if you put your mind to it.
The second girl even had a fingering session in the back of the cinema before the actual sex. The other said "may as well" on her account. You do not need a contract to have sex in Sweden, consent to sex is not required to be in the form of a verbal or written contract.
"The women appealed to have the charges reinstated."
After the second prosecutor convinced them to.
The extra evidence that came to light was the blog entry where girl 1 said she could use this law to get revenge on a cheating boyfriend. The second piece of evidence that came to light was the foreplay, and the third piece, the fact the girls had tried to sell their story to the papers before making a claim to police.
He did not 'flee' either, he asked if he was needed as he wanted to go to the UK and was told not, so he left. Only then did she issue an international arrest warrant citing his 'fleeing' as cause. This is a demonizing move, the 'fleeing' is to pretend he had something to hide. He was a man facing a nothing charge from tainted witnesses that in any other circumstances would face investigation themselves (for making false claims in order to profit from a news paper story).
Instead he became an criminal under the serious crimes, expedited extradition treaty that is only supposed to be used for major crimes like terrorism.
It stinks to high heaven.
Seriously, Bober, you're giving unethical scheming corrupt slimebags a bad name by roping them together with politicians. It's like the difference between a carp and a politician. One's a scum sucking bottomfeeder and the other's a fish.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
what good has his uncovering done?
Are the now-well-informed people demanding those responsible be punished? Staging protests? Taking legal action?
Or is life just kind of going on as usual for most of the world, including the criminals that call the shots?
Assange could be arraigned on espionage charges. That's kind of what happens when you dump hundreds of thousands of pages of classified documents into the hands of every national enemy on Earth. Think of it this way: Assange could very well be the most blatant spy the world has ever seen. Most spies operate in the shadows, this one operates in broad daylight, with global television services beaming his every word all over the world.
This guy is toast.
The man violated the trust placed in him.
Manning betrayed the people who betrayed their countrymen. Manning is guilty only if you have no allegiance to your country.
Exposing a criminal is treason only to criminals.
What was the name of that CIA chick the Old Regime outted?
That's why whistleblowers are supposed to be protected by law, which is what Manning should have been.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
You sign away your rights and freedoms when you join the military. You, as a grunt, such as Manning, have signed their lives away willingly to do what the Army asks them to do. And to follow orders.
Unless punishable by a international war crime trial due to following the order, its the duty of everyone who volunteers to join the military to carry out their orders to the t, and not to question them.
Everyone has known this for centuries about the military, and if you, like Manning cannot man up to your obligations you agreed to when you signed the dotted line to serve your country, when you violate the trust they put in you by acting like a traitor, well you deserve to be punished under the full extent of the law. It is not your place to decide when transparency is to be applied or not.
"Say what you want but a lot of people were put in danger and some actually died due to Manning's treason"
Maybe you could comment on how many of Valerie Plame's contacts were put in danger by Cheney's deliberate treason in identifying her as a CIA agent handler. Actually, Cheney placed any foreign citizen who had ever shaken hands with her in extreme danger.
The Bush administration set the standard and since none of the people who were involved were ever charged with anything, the same standard should be applied to Manning. And by the way, none of the criminals like the helicopter gunmen who blew away the Reuters reporters were ever charged with anything.
When there is no rule of law, there is no rule of law.
When you are dancing with wolves, never limp
I thought the ring of police stationed 24 hours a day around the Ecuadorian embassy in London was evidence enough of the UK government's intentions!
There is no US case, nor any US charges. And obviously there are not likely to be any because the New York Times and The Register both published the same material.
Manning is obviously guilty of violating the Espionage Act because be had a security clearance and gave US secrets out where he knew that they would be posted publicly where anybody, including legitimate enemies of the United States, would have access to them. That could be punished by death, though life is more likely.
Assange, however, not being a US citizen, not having been granted any special access to secrets, not having extensive activities or presence in the US, not being in the US when he received the materials, and clearly being a journalistic source considering that much of the material was initially released by other (mainstream) media outlets that he had partnered with, is totally outside US jurisdiction and if he was in US jurisdiction he would be protected under US law. The US making statements that they would enjoy arresting him for something and that he is a bad awful guy is not the same thing as there being actual accusations against him.
There are many ways to die. Many of which are barbaric. There are also some that are very humane. Electrocution is barbaric. But a 50cal sniper round through the cranium isn't. For the later would be quick and painless as the bits of brain matter would be long liquified before the neurons could register pain or a conscious thought. If anything, it would be a bloody mess to cleanup for the living. Wouldn't want that job.
it would appear the OP is pointing out the unusual tenacity with which they're pursuing someone for a rape charge,
Perhaps you noticed that the "unusual tenacity" came to be when Assange became a fugitive from justice? Think about it. ... What did Assange do? Broke his bond and fled the police.
No bond was broken, no fleeing occurred. Assange left Sweden weeks after the incident in question, with the express permission of the prosecutor's office. For that matter, he isn't even wanted on a rape charge, he's wanted for questioning in relation to a possible charge. He has offered numerous times to talk with the Swedish prosecutor or a representative while in the UK. None of this is terribly consistent with the actions of someone purportedly on the lam.
Worth noting, from a transcript of a Democracy Now discussion, emphasis mine:
"...Sweden and the United Kingdom both refused to provide assurances that once matters were dealt with in Sweden, that Julian would be permitted to leave the country and would not be extradited to the United States. They refused to provide those assurances."
This is probably the more salient point regarding Assange's reluctance to step again on Swedish soil.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
The sad thing is most Americans wouldn't vote for anybody even if you put a gun to their heads. Until you all get off your arses and vote you'll just get the people that help out their donors instead of people that are worth voting for. I know it's stupidly on a Tuesday and their are hoops to go through instead of easily registering as a voter at 18, but in most other democratic countries and the early USA it was seen as a duty of a citizen to vote. If hardly any of you can be bothered you'll get one extreme or another nearly every time.
I read an interview with Adrian Lamo once where he said that when he turned in Manning, he didn't think Assange would actually go through and release the State Department cables. He thought Assage would put Manning's safety above releasing the cables.
Did I just read that right? The man who betrayed Manning blames the man whom he claims respected his wishes?
Or maybe it's Opposite Day and nobody told me. Again.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
Good.
We'll be bringing that up in our meeting re: lighting YOUR meeting building on fire.
You sign away your rights and freedoms when you join the military.
Well, that may be the way it is now, but it's definitely wrong.
man up to
Anyone you don't agree with it's a True Man! No True Man would do anything I dislike!
to your obligations you agreed to
Not all contracts or laws are valid or ethical.
I'd say since he was a serving member of the military in a war zone he has more balls and most likely more integrity than you are putting on show.
(let me guess; republican, right?)
I think it's cute that you believe this issue doesn't span party lines.
Everyone's got the disease, now, not just the Repugnants.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Except that, right after you sign those rights away, they go about pounding the words "honor" "loyalty" and "integrity" into your skull.
Then they get pissed off when you apply those words where they were meant to be applied.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
http://mashable.com/2009/10/19/cia-social-media-monitoring/>Perhaps like this?
'nuff said.
What century are you from? Soldiers, while having different duties from civilians, are people too. The military is not legally allowed to kill whoever the fuck they want. Centuries ago, sure, a general could cut off the head of any soldier he wanted, but not anymore. What Manning exposed was that the military, like most who are in power, doesn't give a shit about the law (except when it suits them) and while many of them deserve to die Manning is not one of these.
Thanks. That you think exploding someone's skull is humane or not barbaric speaks volumes.
I'd rather sit sedated in a chamber and have 100% nitrogen pumped in. Nicer for everyone. Little cleanup, and I'd just drift out of consciousness and be gone.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
You're missing a number of rather important details.
First off, the founders of the USA made an open statement of their problems with King George, having worked to resolve them.
Second, instead of publishing who King George had agreements with, or who his spies in France are, or some other embarassing detail, they simply started their own country and said: if you don't like it, this is who we are; come get some.
Third, they took up arms and resisted the people the King sent after them, when he did indeed come after the people who signed the Declaration of Independence.
If you're trying to say Bradley Manning has the balls or integrity to do any of the above, then you're not paying attention or you're willfully lying.
He's a little jag who had a temper tantrum because his boyfriend dumped him, and then got demoted for having that temper tantrum at work. Since he was demoted, he grabbed everything he could get his hands on and gave it to where he thought it could do the most damage, while trying desperately to stay anonymous.
Bradley Manning is a coward, a whiner, and a drama Queen. And you are an idiot for comparing him to anyone who ever actually put himself on the line for anything.
Truth.
Though, clearly you didn't get the memo. Since the US == Supreme Evil of the Universe it only makes sense that anything that may possibly put it or anything it stands for in a good light is bad, unless it can be tied to someone/something the group think has deemed as "good". In which case the US was only doing whatever it was out of some 'evil' self interest.
Also, we're supposed to worship the drama queen Assange and anyone or anything associated to him. Sorry, the people responsible for getting you your memos will now be sacked.
I was raised on the command line, bitch
"Nemo me impune lacesset"
Ever heard of the Nuremberg trials? The Allies hung plenty of people who were following orders. Talking about international laws as if they magically make things right and wrong is stupid beyond belief. You do what you feel is right. If your government is corrupt, you out them. If your orders are immoral, you don't follow them.
So, in order to say "hey we did it!" we had to point out the informants? Bullshit. We had plenty of other proof we could have offered up.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
What he did is more important than why he did it.
Aside from Antarctica, I don't think anyone can make a Petertopia unless they want to go 3rd world where they will likely get themselves killed without support.
You,Sir, are an idiot!
Delta-Mike November Bravo Tango
What's really sad is that this isn't some random general-population site on the internet, this is supposed to be the home of geeks and nerds, people who are supposedly smarter than the average. Even so, your words are true; this level of stupidity is normal here in 2012. The intelligence level here on Slashdot, like everywhere else in American society, has fallen greatly in the last 10 years or so.
Oh, and a psychopath!
Delta-Mike November Bravo Tango
Getting out and voting doesn't make a difference here. In case you haven't been following things, the elections are highly controlled so that you end up with two really shitty choices for President (and the other elections aren't any better), thanks to our first-past-the-post voting system that hasn't changed since the 1700s, rather than the proportional election systems you Europeans use. There are some exceptions at the local level, where there's proportional systems, runoff systems, etc. used, and those are indeed better, but the chances of any of those ever being used in national elections is nil.
Yes, and America belongs to Spain, in the first place ... out with you, English Scum!
Delta-Mike November Bravo Tango
Thank you, that needed to be pointed out. Remember, who's been President during this whole Wikileaks saga? A democrat.
"House Un-American Activities Committee meeting."
That's so 1950's. Now they just send SMS's.
You sign away your rights and freedoms when you join the military. You, as a grunt, such as Manning, have signed their lives away willingly to do what the Army asks them to do. And to follow orders.
Exactly. And if the Army orders you to throw people into gas chambers, that's what you need to do. Great to see that everyday Americans are no different than the Nazis.
how did we ever allow something so retarded to exist on our planet
"We had to destroy the Republic in order to save it"
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
I've never heard of it being OK to shoot wounded soldiers or people who are trying to take them away to get medical attention, and certainly not when there's children in their car (since they don't have the resources for proper ambulances and such).
It's really pretty sick just how evil Americans are now, and what kinds of crimes they will defend. Americans make Nazis look not-so-bad.
You think Wikileaks is a big money-making venture?
It's funny how people believe anyone whose name is in the news must be rich. "Hey, did you see that guy who got a million hits on his YouTube video of his dog who skateboards? That guy must be like a millionaire or something!"
WikiLeaks Donations Topped $1.9 Million in 2010
Wikileaks has been criticized for their lack of transparency in handling of donations.
The controversial website WikiLeaks, which argues the cause of openness in leaking classified or confidential documents, has set up an elaborate global financial network to protect a big secret of its own—its funding. . . .
The linchpin of WikiLeaks's financial network is Germany's Wau Holland Foundation. WikiLeaks encourages donors to contribute to its account at the foundation, which under German law can't publicly disclose the names of donors. Because the foundation "is not an operational concern, it can't be sued for doing anything. So the donors' money is protected, in other words, from lawsuits," Mr. Assange said.
The German foundation is only one piece of the WikiLeaks network.
"We're registered as a library in Australia, we're registered as a foundation in France, we're registered as a newspaper in Sweden," Mr. Assange said. WikiLeaks has two tax-exempt charitable organizations in the U.S., known as 501C3s, that "act as a front" for the website, he said. He declined to give their names, saying they could "lose some of their grant money because of political sensitivities."
Mr. Assange said WikiLeaks gets about half its money from modest donations processed by its website, and the other half from "personal contacts," including "people with some millions who approach us and say 'I'll give you 60,000 or 10,000,' " he said, without specifying a currency. -- How WikiLeaks Keeps Its Funding Secret
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
a spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Police told CNN "the document is not related to the Julian Assange case."
That's cleared that up! Nothing to see, move along.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
"House Un-American Activities Committee meeting."
That's so 1950's. Now they just send SMS's.
SMS is so 2000. Now they just send Hellfires...
Nah.. It will look like a robbery gone wrong or something stupid like a drug overdose with plenty of witnesses talking about his slide into depression.
I suspect with something like the 80+% turnout the USA had in the 1830s you would have a very different political landscape and the actual mechanism of collecting and tallying votes would be improved and run professionally on a state or federal level out of necessity.
Delivering poorly designed machines to untrained volunteers on the day (and the million other utterly stupid stuffups) is not acceptable - something that important should be planned properly so that the volunteers know how to run the polling station before the day. Having a wide variety of voting methods within even the same state for no actual practical reason (Florida 2000 was a joke) is a barrier to getting a clear result and bit of an insult to the voting public that have to wait insane amounts of time in some cases. If there was some sort of independent national body that ran elections then they would go as smoothly as those that US experts run on behalf of the UN in some countries. You already have the people that could do the job, but I suspect there's too much pork, and possibly outright corruption, bound up in all that money that goes into local voting systems, to do it without a lot of resistance even if it was done at a state instead of federal level.
Treason? He is not an American. Will the term treason is used to describe the action against his/her own country?
You imagine the US would play by it's own laws on this? I seriously doubt that. If they want him, they'll get him. There are many ways to do so. They could make up charges for something unrelated, even fabricating evidence... like, for example, rape. Or they could simply disappear him to a secret prison somewhere - it's very Soviet, but I've no doubt the US has a few people that would be happy to make it happen. Or they could do the simplist approach: The show trial. Make it clear to the judge and every official that any verdict other than guilty means they'll never work in the legal profession again, and it doesn't matter what legal arguments he uses about jurisdiction.
The average person is so breathtakingly stupid that simply being "smarter than average" doesn't amount to much.
Huh? George the III was the rightful heir to George the II who was the rightful heir to George the first of Hanover.
Now it can be argued about whether George the first was an usurper, but the only one with a better claim to the throne was James Stuart the III and VIII, a Catholic, after the English had a revolution to stop the Catholics from being King (they believed in the divine right of Kings, very un-british).
The actual usurper was perhaps William of Orange, who was invited (with his wife Mary, daughter of the King) by Parliament to take up the Crown usurping James Stuart the II & VII.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
USA really does not have case. He gave the info to US newspaper publishers. The publishers decided the public should know what US/other government did and help the transparency, which most of presidential candidates promised before they entered the White House.
He did some job we should do ourselves.
hahahahahaha... $1.9 million is rich now? Wikileaks don't pay their employees or for their datacentres?
Linking WSJ just shows how much you're willing to lap up the Murdoch propaganda.
Bradly Manning was exercising his constitutional rights, namely the very first amendment to the Constitution that said that Congress can not pass any laws restricting speech. How you can damn someone for exercising his rights I don't know.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Joe Wilson was part of the Old Regime?
Not only did they hang low ranking germans who were only following their orders, and who would likely have been executed or tortured by their own superiors had they not obeyed those orders...
But they didn't do anything whatsoever about the various atrocities committed by stalin and his followers.
As they say, history is written by the victors.
If you were an ordinary german at that time, and hitler gave you an order... Your choice was between obeying it, or face being rounded by by the ss and taken to a concentration camp as a traitor. Regardless of how immoral you felt the order was, your only other alternatives were either extremely risky (try to escape and defect, you might get caught doing so, or germany may win the war and recapture you), or involved certain torture and death.
It's very easy saying the orders they followed were immoral, but when faced with the choice of either torturing and killing total strangers, or watching your family being tortured and killed and then being tortured and killed yourself the instinct for self preservation usually takes over.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
You mean Richard Armitage?
Manning is a traitor who should be dealt as one.
Assange though, just a thorn in the side of the US.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Snitchin'
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Manning may have uncovered a lot of things that should never have happened. However, he did leak a lot of secret information. If you look at the sheer volume of it, most of it wasn't "wrongdoing" and should have remained secret regardless. So he also did do a lot of wrong here, even if he intended it to be "the right thing". True, not a lot of big secrets were revealed, but someone in that position should not be leaking information, period.
I don't think there is evidence that Manning tried to get the wrongdoers prosecuted using the methods that should be in place to do that. Is there? I'd love to read that. By exposing them without doing that first, he was judge and jury himself, leaving the execution to the lynching mob that the press is in this case. I'm not saying those people were innocent, but laws, judges and all that exist for a very good reason and he chose to ignore that.
The enemy of my enemy is just that, he is not my friend nor is he my foe. He may have believed he did the right thing, but he did a lot of wrong things trying to do so. That doesn't mean he deserves what he is getting now. Just like everyone else, he deserves a fair trail and a humane treatment. If there is an existing medical condition that made him act the way he did, or had a big influence on how his thought patterns work, that should be considered in that fair trial.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
... started their own country and said: if you don't like it, this is who we are; come get some.
Boston 'tea party': 16th December 1773
Battle of Lexington: 19th April 1775
Adoption of the Declaration of independence: 4th July 1776
Nice of you to re-write history but the colonies committed civil disobedience and terrorism before they became independent.
I read an interview with Adrian Lamo once where he said that when he turned in Manning, he didn't think Assange would actually go through and release the State Department cables. He thought Assage would put Manning's safety above releasing the cables.
You do remember who it was that leaked most of the cables, right? Hint: it wasn't Wikileaks.
No sig today...
Your system of broken beyond voting machine snafu's and other voting mechanisms.
You have an electoral system. You don't decide who gets to be president, you get to decide who your State thinks should be president. And that State gets a vote that is dependant on how many people there are (ideally). If 49% of people pick Republican, and 51% pick Democrat, then 100% of the electoral votes of the State go towards the Democrat. And because of this, other parties can't get a word in edgewise.
There have been states that have gone to vote for third parties (or independents), but these were barely even a blip because mainly it's Republican or Democrat.
Let's face it, the concept of United States is dead anyway; the federal government has seized so much centralized power since the Civil War, it's no longer a collection of states with a small central government. So either fix that, or don't pretend any more and go the full monty. National elections, where every vote is a vote.
They started their own country inside territory already belonging to the British Empire. How would you like it if for instance Alabama suddenly said they were independent? You don't just "start your own country" and not harm the country you previously belonged to.
They would have revealed who Georges spies in France were, if they'd have that information and a way to get it to the French. Getting that information from someone and getting it across would mean months of dangerous travel at the very least, with very little effect. The risk and effort were just not worth the trouble of an attempt.
Emerrassing details aplenty in those days. They just weren't written down in official documents or published in newspapers. Go check the internet about the sexual relations and mistresses and all that of the UK monarchy and the US founding fathers if such things interest you. I can assure you that the gossip circuit in those days was probably bigger and more influential than it was now, since people didn't have a lot of independent sources to verify the word of mouth information they got.
Taking up arms was the most effective way to do things back then. Maybe it still is, maybe today the pen or the voting ballot is mightier than the sword.
Taking a stab at Mannings personality is cheap. Sure, he did do things that were illegal and probably wrong. I'm sure you've done a few wrong things in your life. Even if I knew what those were and what your personality is, pointing out the latter wouldn't make me a better person, nor make you a worse one.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
It was a good rocket launch, if you're referring to the "collateral murder" nonsense. The perps were armed with RPKs, AKs, and RPGs on the street and shooting at US soldiers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgYfTRAZqek
If you truly are willing to spend the rest of your life in jail, and likely in solitary confinement, for your ideals then that puts you in a very small minority.
Nobody is willing to die for their country yet a powerful minority are ordered to do so with depressing regularity.
While the USA was poisoning, bombing, raping and in various other ways commiting general acts of genocide in Vietnam, a small minority were getting killed for Uncle Sam there too. Meanwhile a very, very small minority were walking on the moon also courtesey of Uncle Sam. And some were burning draught cards. And then there was the Manson family...
The United States is ruled by a carde of people wo are out of touch with reality. They are a small minority of the millions of people who live there (and how many of those small minorities have equal and opposite rights? I.e. None!)
For all the ideals of fair play so called democracy is supposed to have in it, it is all based on small minorities.
Some more powerful than others.
But only temporarily.
I am waiting for a small minority of one to shoot George Bush. I don't think I am in the minority either.
Slashdot doesn't delete comments unless absolutely forced to. We're smart enough to know this stupid conspiracy shit is just that.
--- start md5 hash of salt + below after this line ---
So have Ecuador work with a friendly (to Ecuador or to Assange) country (call it Ami-d-Eccange) and confer upon Assange status as a citizen of Ecuador and appoint him as an ambassador from Ecuador to Ami-d-Eccange. Presto-change-O! Assange is now a diplomat recognized by Ami-d-Eccange and Ecuador by mutual agreement.
I do not know if Ambassadors from country X to country Y would have safe haven during their travels through country Z. But if they do, then Assange could then arrange for safe passage.
--- end of text for md5sum hash
md5sum message
ad46d7f3dfc69f665962cdd27f566505 message
09h25 2012-08-26
A slight addition: Apparently Swedish law actually doesn't allow someone to be charged unless they are in custody. So the absence of charges doesn't have quite the same implications as in other legal systems.
I'm from the UK and we've tried with a couple of pretty successful petitions to have 'none of the above' put on the list of choices. Trouble is, they're scared to death of it because it would win nearly every time. Then we could spend a pleasant five years, moron-free, building small alternative structures: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-voting
On y va, qui mal y pense!
Do you really believe the complicated to use, easy to hack and manipulate machines are not according to plan? Even the larger countries in Europe handle voting with ballots with ease, no corruption or confusion but American politics system insist on it for a long, long time. The whole thing is rigged to make sure that certain parties are in power. Even after this the general incompetence level catches up and then they lose an election. Bush stole two elections and only the first one raised some eyebrows in the rest of the world.
Manning, have signed their lives away willingly to do what the Army asks them to do. And to follow orders. ... to carry out their orders to the t, and not to question them.
anyone who would unconditionally agree to something when they don't even know what they are agreeing to is a complete and utter imbecile. fortunately, every now and then someone with enough brain capacity to make informed decisions slips in. i.e. Manning .
when you violate the trust they put in you by acting like a traitor, well you deserve to be punished under the full extent of the law.
when you violate basic humanity, you deserve to be re-educated until you can fit in without further violations or failing the possibility of that - removed from society - not rewarded and promoted.
i spent five minutes thinking and all i got was this crappy sig
I really want to see the same eagerness towards arresting Roman Polanski. Otherwise it is clearly hypocrisy.
it would appear the OP is pointing out the unusual tenacity with which they're pursuing someone for a rape charge,
Perhaps you noticed that the "unusual tenacity" came to be when Assange became a fugitive from justice? Think about it. ... What did Assange do? Broke his bond and fled the police.
No bond was broken, no fleeing occurred.
As part of the extradition process Assange was released on bail, part of his conditions of bail were that he should remain overnight in the residence of one of his supporters who (from memory) guaranteed the majority of the bail. His residence in the Ecuadorian embassy means that a bunch of people are likely to be out of pocket.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/9343739/Julian-Assange-celebrities-could-lose-thousands-from-WikiLeaks-founders-bail-breach.html
Assange left Sweden weeks after the incident in question, with the express permission of the prosecutor's office. For that matter, he isn't even wanted on a rape charge, he's wanted for questioning in relation to a possible charge. He has offered numerous times to talk with the Swedish prosecutor or a representative while in the UK. None of this is terribly consistent with the actions of someone purportedly on the lam.
Worth noting, from a transcript of a Democracy Now discussion, emphasis mine:
"...Sweden and the United Kingdom both refused to provide assurances that once matters were dealt with in Sweden, that Julian would be permitted to leave the country and would not be extradited to the United States. They refused to provide those assurances."
This is probably the more salient point regarding Assange's reluctance to step again on Swedish soil.
Cheers,
The UK can't give any such assurances if he were to be transferred to Swedish custody, we don't have any control over Sweden. If the US wanted to extradite him from the UK they've had months to make a case.
Well, I, as a part of the the rest of the word, have a problem with your "rules of engagement" which leads to deaths of innocent people and children. Don't try to weasel out of it.
We are decent people and when we see a people in pain, in injury or distress, we stop and help them out. The last thing we want is some murderous pilot and his handlers deciding on killing us on a whim. The release of the "Collateral Murder" video was the right thing to do and shows to the rest of the world what a crooked military system America has. Bush even signed a law which would lead to the invasion of a friendly country (Holland) in case an American soldier was arrested and charged for war crimes. Go and google The Hague Invasion Act.
Which is exactly what's wrong with our and any military. Blind obedience and a culture of oversimplified dichotomies.
amiga3D is actually a boot licking Republican though.
What treason did Assange commit? Manning did, but, not Assange. Assange is an AUSTRALIAN, not American. Nor was he spying on us. Worse case would be that he would be convicted of being a fence. Now, I am one that believes that US should not bother Assange. However, Assange still needs to deal with 2 cases of rape in sweden. My guess is that Assange KNOWS that he broke laws there and is simply using the American stuff as an excuse.
Now, if you wish to talk about treason, that would be manning. And yes, I think that he should be tried, convicted and then hung or shot (though I also believe that the same must happen to those in the W admin that outed plame). Manning went into systems that he had no clearence for and did not know what he was grabbing. He was simply grabbing whatever he could. This was not a whistleblower. This was a man with a wish to hurt America. He did. Now, he deserves the same.
[Citation needed].
Also in Nuremberg, the humanity was reminded that blindly following orders is not OK and a person was supposed to stand up against the wrongs committed by the military. US executed war criminals based on this. You cannot have it both ways.
Yes, I am quite certain that a sniper round moves much faster than electricity, esp. when it has less distance to go.
You might wish to take up some biology and physics before making such wild statements.
Point is, nail somebody with a sex crime charge, nobody listens to him anymore. True or not, Assange's credibilty went down the shitter when the charges were announced. He'll never get past them.
And the kicker is that for each allegation, it is one person's word against another. No sensible court would even agree to have such a case heard.
So why did any further "investigation" take place?
And why put any citizen to the expense of travelling all the way to Sweden from Britain to talk about it?
If I was innocent I'd tell the bastards to **** off, too.
Who wouldn't?
Especially if I was broke.
The conspiracy theory is more than a mere theory. AND while we are at it:
There ARE weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Ever since George the Thick put them there. They litter the streets and the land fill. Depleted uranium and phosphorus shells. General Issue.
Thanks GIs. I must go there for my holidays. Sounds inviting.
The way the UK is treating the case has everything to do with the fact we're angry with him,
I'm not angy with him. He can stay here as long as he likes, it's none of my business.
What's upsetting me is that when the Queen dies all she has will be passed on to the dick head of the family. What a family of nobs that is going to be. I already feel depressed because some **** for brains voted for Tony Blair.
I haven't got over Thatcher yet!
As for that silly ******, Churchill....
Except for this:
"England held a hearing, let Assange defend himself"
Under the expedited arrangement, the charges are never laid, the evidence never shown, and he does not get to challenge any of it. The requesting country is ASSUMED to be playing fair, and he can only challenge the side issues.
It's not exactly unusual for rape charges to be used as a way fixing a problem either. Rape laws are lax, the conviction is largely based on how convincing the woman is, a few well practiced tear work wonders. Get a seconder and it works better, so better to get two claims than one.
Which remarkably is what we have here. Yet both girls were witnessed by third parties to be willing parties to the sex, even the extent of a foreplay session in a cinema with girl 'W' which was witnessed.
When did the us army order people thrown into gas chambers?
But on the last Opposite Day you said you absolutely definitely wanted to be told about the next one, so I thought that meant...
Never mind.
Watch the entire video. They attacked people attempting to help the wounded, as well.
The police officer hasn't been reprimanded, so the 'leak' was obviously approved higher up the command chain. Why? Puts more pressure on Assange and the Ecudorans.
He made himself that when he skipped bail. So as part of the extradition proceedings the British police arrested him. Generally extradition treaties specify something like this. After all it does you little good to seek formal extradition if when the person finds out about it they can just take off. However he made bail and was released. The concept of bail has a long tradition in the UK and is formally law there, as many other countries.
However bail is NOT a pass to do as you please. Bail is an agreement where the court says you can go, but you have to promise to appear. Sometimes, it is as simple as that, people are released "on their own recognizance" meaning that they've agreed to return to court and that is good enough. Often though bond also has to be posted, an amount of money that will be forfeit should you fail to show (as was the case here). Sometimes there are other requirements like surrendering passports or the like.
So the appeals with the extradition process went on, and eventually the high court ruled that the extradition request was legal per the treaty and he was to be extradited. Remember the British courts didn't consider innocence or guilt here, that isn't their job, only if the request was valid under the extradition treaty with Sweden. They decided it was. That meant that per the bail Assanage had to now turn himself over to the court to be extradited.
He failed to do that, he skipped bail and ran to the Ecuadorian embassy. That is a crime under British law. Not a super serious one, one year imprisonment max (and forfeiture of the bond of course) but a crime all the same.
So like it or not he -is- a "common criminal". He skipped bail, which is a regular ole' crime.
The executive is pretty much unrestricted in how it chooses to deal with classified information, since that's where the ability to classify stuff comes from.
US laws apply to everyone on the planet - the US Emperor has declared it so. All the Grand Jury convened in the the US has to do is find a law, any law, that Assange has broken.
And I suppose Rommel was a traitor to Germany for attempting to kill Hitler?
Morality trumps the wishes of the elite any day.
Their actions would still have been noteworthy, perhaps not illegal, but certainly noteworthy. Bear in mind that they essentially just spotted a bunch of people standing on a street corner and decided to kill them all when they saw that a few were carrying weapons. That's noteworthy. People excuse this by saying "it's war," although calling the continued occupation of Iraq a war is about as honest as the "war on terror." More than that though, even in a real war it's not as though all military action, even properly executed military action, is okay.
Consider: Scenario 1 - Germany invades France, the US eventually invades France with the goal of liberating it and shoots German soldiers from a helicopter in the process. Scenario 2 - The US invades Iraq and shoots Iraqi soldiers from a helicopter in the process.
Both wars involve soldiers doing their thing, in basically the same way, but one is okay and one isn't.
If a woman can consent then withdraw consent *after*, then of course you'll get a lot more 'rapes'. Every spurned one night stand will use that law, it's no wonder they have twice as many 'rapes', half of them will be false charges.
In this case both Woman 'A' and Woman 'W' say they consented, then later withdrew consent, (at an unspecified time, the presumption is during sex). Except they made the rape claim days later, after they chatted.
Yet here we are, with a Swedish prosecutor claiming 'rape' for consensual sex. Sure they have may been one night stands and pissed off for it, but this is a flaw in the Swedish law not a problem with the Swedish men.
Please quote your links to the proof that the accusers asked for this case to be re-opened.
PS please explain why the condom apparently used to permit JA to have unprotected sex by breaking
a) was cut with a sharp blade
b) had no DNA evidence of being used in sexual intercourse between the woman and JA.
PPS there are scores saying "According to Swedish law, they can't charge him if he's not present". Got any proof of THAT? And any proof that if you can't be charged in absentia, that they can't prosecute with whatever evidence they have?
Go on, prove yourselves.
William of Orange was actually invited to rule the land because another Stuart had contracted a case of catholizism.
20 minutes into the future
Why isn't anyone asking the question: Why is the British authorities so fixated on extraditing Assange to Sweden when he's only wanted in connection with an accusation concerning two counts of the mildest form of rape (consensual sex under false pretenses - without condom) ? - If convicted he can't even get jail time for a first time offense!
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
Technically, they do that in boot camp, except it's tear gas training.
The fuckl? They're being hounded by the very same fascist scum.
Did you have a point or anything?
As far as we know, the US army has never ordered such an action. This specific example was intended to illustrate the point that you still have your faculties when signing away your rights to join the military, and that the soldiers' moral actions should always precede any order given in the course of duty.
Nerve conduction isn't a purely electrical process ; it's a rolling wave of membrane depolarisation, has a biochemical element, and is much slower than an electrical impulse through a copper wire.
Couple that with the fact that the brain itself has no ability to sense pain, and the .50 cal round to the head method of execution probably is painless. Soldiers used to commit suicide by holding a grenade to their head and that's probably painless too.
But it is definitely gross.
No bond was broken, no fleeing occurred.
Incorrect. A £200,000 surety was lodged to the UK courts, shortly before he fled to the Ecuadorian embassy.
Funny... That's what the Nazis said!
Deuteronomy 22 28-29 says rape is not a big crime. You can rape a little girl and keep her.
If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged.
Unfortunately indeed. You fucking bootlicker.
Nerve impulses are actually pretty slow. So yes, a bullet will reach the brain before the impulses from the skin where it hits.
But it should be. Government should make no laws abridging the freedom of speech.
How inappropriate to call this planet Earth, when clearly it is Ocean.
Her name was Valerie Plame and Scooter Libby took the fall for outing her. (I scrolled down, but didn't see anyone respond).
Everything I've ever learned the hard way was based on a statistically invalid sample.
Aggressors assumes aggression, I'm sorry but you've confused rape with coercion. In Sweden rape can simply be, you changed your mind after the act. Which is what the two women here are claiming.
Notice that woman 'A' and Woman 'W' both are allowed to remain anonymous as though there was aggression though, even though nobody has claimed that.
It shows you how bad Sweden feminism has got that consent to sex isn't enough for it not to be rape. I wonder how many innocent men are in jail because of these laws.
amiga3D is actually a boot licking Republican though.
Oh, I wasn't aware the Republicans orchestrated a secret coup d'etat. Last I knew, Obama/Democrats have been in charge of the DOJ and TLAs for the last 3 1/2years.
But please, don't let facts or reality spoil a good narrow-minded, cheap, partisan dig when both parties are and have been equally guilty of ignoring and pissing all over the Constitution and the Rule of Law for at least the last 50 years or more.
Carry on.
And people wonder why US politicians view the citizens as willfully stupid, blind, ignorant, and easily-manipulated sheep?
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
You've got to be kidding.
It's funny that the Wall Street Journal you link to would consider $1.9 million to be distinctly "middle class" when it comes to tax policy, but in the case of an organization serving the world it's suddenly "rich".
You think the Wall Street Journal would consider $1.9 million "rich" if it was the cutoff point for taxing "the rich"?
Anyway, considering the most powerful nations in the world are after Assange for pressing his penis against a sleeping girl with whom he was sleeping and are prepared to storm embassies and engage in other acts of war in order to get their hands on him, I'm guessing $1.9million is going to get burned through pretty quickly in legal funds alone (assuming he ever sees the inside of a courtroom).
Come on...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Few would vote "None of the above" because it would let Labour/the Tories in (delete as appropriate).
Indeed, our electoral system punishes third party candidates for merely standing. If people vote for you as a left-winger, you help the Tories win. If people vote for you as a right winger votes, you help Labour win. Somebody should make an ironic Flash game illustrating that perversity.
Sadly, the only chance in our lifetimes to stop permanent control of the country by the 2 big parties was lost in the AV referendum. We'll be lucky to see another shot at electoral reform before 2050.
Unless punishable by a international war crime trial due to following the order, its the duty of everyone who volunteers to join the military to carry out their orders to the t, and not to question them.
Everyone has known this for centuries about the military, and if you, like Manning cannot man up to your obligations you agreed to when you signed the dotted line to serve your country, when you violate the trust they put in you by acting like a traitor, well you deserve to be punished under the full extent of the law. It is not your place to decide when transparency is to be applied or not.
You are not compelled to follow an illegal or illegitimate order. One hopes that Manning's trial will weigh his deeds against dishonorable behavior he disclosed and come to a conclusion that supports the honor of the military services and the rule of law.
Every individual and every nation has both good and evil within... this whitehat/blackhat stuff is nonsense. I'm an atheist, but didn't Jesus speak on just this ie. "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone", the parable of the Good Samaritan etc? ie. parables on this issue at both at the individual and national level?
If you want to know about the theories NeoCons and the ruling elite subscribe to search "Leo Strauss" look at his philosophies. His students became the founders of the Neo Conservative movement and applied these theories. To summarise : the nation should get simplified "whitehat/blackhat" versions of issues that aren't necessarily even true - it's just a glue to hold society together. The elites know the truth, but hide it from the people when they deem it necessary. Sound democratic?
Proof's in the pudding
No, the saying goes "the proof of the pudding is in the eating".
And for this pudding, it needs to be extradited.to be had. That's the only way we will see any proof.
What was the name of that CIA chick the Old Regime outted? That's why whistleblowers are supposed to be protected by law, which is what Manning should have been.
Her name was Valerie Plame.
Yesterday's Weirdness is Tomorrow's Reason Why
Your lovely US media once again caught on spewing a bunch of utter lies and calling it "news". Oh my. Not a long shot from soviet Pravda, just a bit more "modern". Here is something worth looking for.. Lots of interesting stuff - especially for misled by corporate media propaganda US residents.
One of things that caught my attention was that after losing in UK Supreme Court Assange lawyers planned to appeal to European Court of Justice but were denied: standard 14-day term for filing an appeal was "magicaly" shortened to 0 days (!). That's the last one of a whole series of strange events in this case. Did you hear about this in CNN, folks from US ? Oh, you didn't ? Welcome to the real world.
So many things indicate that this was a setup from the beginning, yet even in this forum I see so many folks in this forum still seem to live in a fictional world of lies and propaganda fabricated by CNN and other "murdoch-media" organizations (as I call them). Sorry to say that but everyone still buying CNN crap deserves for any cruelty your lovely government serves you.
You are responsible for letting this ill system running and only you can shut it down by withdrawing consent and ignoring corporate propaganda outlets. It's a waste of time, folks ! Getting back to history books will be a MUCH better way to spend time than watching Fox News. Plus, after reading enough of these you won't need to see much media coverage to easily predict what really happened and what will happen tommorow.
Except at the moment you're being nice to the Tories because they're the majority of the UK coalition government at the moment, and you want something. See also "Saddam Hussein" and "The Taliban" in the 1980s. There was even a film about the latter being brave heroes alongside John Rambo.
A significant proportion of the UK agree that this is all one big stitch up to put Assange in US hands, and frankly (as a Brit), I'm siding with Ecuador and their allies on this one.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
none of the people who were involved were ever charged with anything,
This is not true, they prosecuted and convicted Scooter Libby over the Valerie Plame outing, and he lost his job. I am pretty certain he was pardoned, though not exonerated. It looks like he took the fall for the Cheney office.
The worst part is Cheney wasn't even after Plame, he was after Plame's husband for reporting that Saddam Hussein was _not_ shopping for yellowcake uranium ore in Africa. For interfering with the Iraqi WMD lie, the White House outed the wife of the messenger (former diplomat). Cheney and Bush thought they were playing war with their toy soldiers-- war is so often a perversion old men engage in using young men as their living toy soldiers.
Everything I've ever learned the hard way was based on a statistically invalid sample.
Remember the people calling for him to be tried for treason in the US are the same ones who recently asked a NASA official what it's like to land a shuttle on the moon. Politician != intelligent.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
In my time in uniform I was instructed by senior NCM's, officers (commisioned and non-commissioned) that it was a primary duty to respect and defend my country to the detriment of self -- which most definately included that I was to do what was required of me including actions that could put me in front of a military court martial or civilian court in order to protect the rights of people. I was to question and if necessary by word and action refuse orders that contravened the rights of people both within and outside my nation. Furthermore it was instilled in me that it was my duty to defend the people of my nation against oppressors from outside and inside my nation and that if it meant speaking out or acting against those who gave the orders I was expected to do my duty. I knowingly and willingly gave up some of my rights for the express intent of protecting my country - that protection I offer should not stop when it's being attacked from someone inside the chain of command or government officials.
Fomer Uniformed Canuck
You missed the words "possibly outright corruption" in my final sentence.
...to CNN. Yet they refuse to guarantee it to the Ecuadorian foreign minister.
Why the fuck should we believe them?
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Slavery is against the law. But then, governments have a tendency to think themselves above the law in general.
And yes, it is my place to decide on transparency, you fucking neo-Nazi apologist.
You're right, they just gun them down in the streets like dogs from attack helicopters.
The moment the authorities arrested him he was already doomed.
Releasing the cables was vengeance.
I must have missed the evidentiary hearing. When did it happen and where? Also, you do realize that if most of the stuff didn't reveal wrongdoing, that also means that some of the stuff did, right?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Nothing is more un-american than stuff that would make our founding fathers turn in their graves.
Valerie Plame was the person hurt most.
Outed as a spook, her career was torched.
Because nobody here is letting that happen. You, for example, insist he HAS RAPED. But proving that is the prosecutor's job, except you've not let him do it.
And it's complete bollocks to say that the case cannot be tried without Assange's statement, otherwise there would be nothing like "in absentia" which many people who didn't turn up to a court case lost because they couldn't argue their side of the case.
COMPLETE.
BOLLOCKS.
"The intelligence level here on Slashdot, like everywhere else in American society, has fallen greatly in the last 10 years or so."
quite right
The obvious solution is to get rid of those newbies who lower the average IQ. We should just dump any member whose number is higher than, oh, say 195815...
...omphaloskepsis often...
Who said the US has a case against Assange? Even if they do, who said that treason was the charge? Please decide if you want to sound intelligent or continue to post your lines of "reasoning".
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I think the expectation that Sweden should tear up their extradition agreement with the USA is a bit much to ask, don't you ?
More on Wikipedia
This nonsense is evidence that various governments are out to get Julian and that a fair trial simply can not take place. To me that means that he can not be brought to trial at all. Not to mention that all of us need to be thanking Julian for a glimpse at truths that are withheld from us.
Sure. Completely correct. And I'm saying that maybe we should think about whether we want the same 'obey at all costs' mentality.
First you are only required to follow legal orders as well as refuse illegal orders. Secondly Manning was an Intel analyst, he worked on a computer in an air conditioned room, Grunts on the other hand work with hands-on weapons like rifles and grenades in the heat, mud, dust and blood of the battlefield; don't insult real Grunts by confusing Manning with them.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
America is pressuring the UK to send Assange to Sweden?
Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Treason
someone forgot to tell him "you didnt do that"
"Americans make Nazis look not-so-bad."
Say what you want about the national socialist party, but at least it had an ethos.
On the other side of the pond, Bradley Manning is going to be put to death. Where are the Wikileak white knights?
One major difference is that Bradley Manning has been accused of something that is punishable by the death penalty. Assange had no requirement to be loyal to the US. He can do pretty much whatever he wants, with regard to keeping the US's secrets. PFC Manning did/does not have that luxury.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Manning was a whiney sniveling little fagot who got tired with being beat up in the shower room; there was nothing noble about what he did, it was indescriminant revenge pure and simple. I hope they put him in general population and he getts his ass pounded untill he looks like goatse.cx.
His actions set back gays in the military decades.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
C'mon guys. Love him or hate him, what he did was illegal. And illegal in every country on the planet. Whoever gave him the info is guilty of treason. Since he's not a US citizen, he is guilty of espionage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage
Insert period here.
The US really has no choice but to go after him. It's their law. And the law in virtually every other country on the planet. He just happened to release docs from the USA.
As far as what he released... the majority being personal opinions like "this guy is stupid" that guys fat, this one smells funny... Gimme a break. That's human nature. Release tapes from any country on the planet and you'll likely get the same crap. People are people no matter where you go. Just human nature.
Wuddooeyeno? IITYWYBMAD? Like nuts? eclecticallyincorrect.com
That's what the Laws of War say, too. So I guess in this case the Nazis were in good company.
The International Committee of the Red Cross says (rule 47) says someone is hors de combat and protected if:
"(a) anyone who is in the power of an adverse party; ...
(b) anyone who is defenceless because of unconsciousness, shipwreck, wounds or sickness; or
(c) anyone who clearly expresses an intention to surrender;
provided he or she abstains from any hostile act and does not attempt to escape.
According to Additional Protocol I, immunity from attack is conditional on refraining from any hostile act or attempt to escape.[39] This is also set forth in several military manuals. The commission of these acts signifies that the person in question is in fact no longer hors de combat and does not qualify for protection under this rule."
The insurgents in the video--who were themselves in the midst of committing a war crime by engaging in combat while out of uniform--did not meet this requirement. It's perfectly acceptable to continue to engage them.
if we didn't have such happy voluntary grunts, we'd have no wars!
grunts are stupid morons. and these days, they willingly give their lives for some rich oil CEO.
how stupid can you be! there's no honor in that.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
I just bit the bottom out of an ice cream cone on a Sunday then stuffed the remains in my back pocket, next to the nude picture of Marilyn Monroe before chaining my pet 'gator to the fire hydrant outside and opening an umbrella to keep the sun off him.
Come get me, Alabamians!
By the way, all those things are completely legal in England, so fuck you - and the horse you rode in on.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Assange gets most of the Wikileaks salary budget paid to him. Wikileaks relies on volunteers. They have been reported to receive much free or reduced cost hosting over the years.
Julian Assange paid two thirds of WikiLeaks salary budget
. . . Mr Assange was paid $86,000 (£56,000) in salary in 2010 – two-thirds of the total WikiLeaks salary budget of $130,000 (£84,000).
WikiLeaks Spending Rises Dramatically to $500,000 - By Kim ZetterEmail Author12.13.10 4:47 PM
WikiLeaks’ expenditures have risen dramatically from a paltry $38,000 between October 2009 and July 2010 to more than $495,000 in the last five months, according to a foundation that manages most of the organization’s donations.
The jump in expenses appears to be due to salaries the organization recently began paying staff members. WikiLeaks said in the past — before it began paying salaries — that its operating costs run only about $200,000 annually.
“Personnel costs are a relatively recent development,” Hendrik Fulda, vice president of the Berlin-based Wau Holland Foundation, told the German newspaper Der Spiegel. “WikiLeaks now pays some of its employees salaries. The staff members give the organization an invoice, and WikiLeaks hands them over to us.”
It’s not known how much WikiLeaks staffers earn, or how many staffers receive salaries — the organization is said to have only two or three staff members, but hundreds of volunteers. This information should be detailed in a financial report the Wau Holland Foundation is expected to release before the end of the year.
The report, which was supposed to be released in August, will be the first public disclosure of WikiLeaks’ finances. The organization, and founder Julian Assange, have been criticized by supporters and others for failing to provide a transparent accounting of donations and expenses. According to The Telegraph, the Wau Holland Foundation has recently been issued two official warnings by charity regulators in Germany for failing to file the required financial reports.
It has long been known that the most effective "propaganda" is the truth, or at least factual information. You seem to be short of that and seem to be relying on snark which isn't really a substitute, is 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
Americans make Nazis look not-so-bad.
Normally we could say you Godwined the thread, however for today I'd like to suspend that and actually debate this. The Nazis used to execute their own political prisoners with wire garrotes. They deliberately dropped fire bombs on civilian targets. They used to starve newborn babies to death in controlled experiments in concentration camps. The Nazis did not stop gay people getting married; they sent them to their deaths. In recent US massacres of civilians up to several hundreds of people have been killed and even in the largest battles it seems a maximum of a few thousand combatants were killed. Compare with Leningrad where 1.5 Million people were killed in the city alone including 0.5 Million civilians which should be added to another half million or so who died trying to leave the city. Or Stalingrad with about 1.5 million casualties, of them 600k Russian soldiers and 40k Russian civilians.
Comparing these two just looks silly. I could understand the claim that current changes might take us in that direction, however, we aren't nearly there yet and may never get close.
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
Shall we presume that you support actions like this from Wikileaks then?
The treachery of Julian Assange
Perhaps you have acquired a taste for some variety of leather yourself? (Let me guess: progressive, right?)
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
America is doing evil things. Those who do evil things deserve to die.
America as a whole deserves to die? I'm curious, when did you acquire a taste for genocide?
Those who do evil things deserve to die.
By the way, does that include Assange?
The treachery of Julian Assange
Julian Assange and Europe's Last Dictator
Sweden Issues Arrest Warrant for WikiLeaks' Assange in Rape Investigation
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
.... You already have the people that could do the job, but I suspect there's too much pork, and possibly outright corruption, bound up in all that money that goes into local voting systems, to do it without a lot of resistance even if it was done at a state instead of federal level.
It's not so much pork or corruption, but a desire for local control, based on a distrust of higher levels of government. Where I live, we vote for the Town and School District budgets every year. Our property taxes are based on those budgets, so they are very important to every property owner. We have election procedures which are efficient and transparent. We don't want the State (or, worse, the Federal Government) telling us how to run our elections.
When I first moved into my town, ballots were placed in boxes. When the polls closed, volunteers counted in pairs: one counting and the other verifying. We switched roles occasionally to stay alert. When the lally was finished the ballots went back into the box in case the totals were close and someone called for a recount. Today, we use a Scantron for the preliminary count, with the paper ballots retained inside the machine. The results are available on the Town web site the day after the election.
If we were to convert to an electronic system, perhaps the results could be available an hour after the polls close. That would please the national media, but we are afraid of losing the transparency that makes our system work. I have seen the loser shake the hand of the winner after the preliminary count was complete, and wish him well. Without confidence in the accuracy of the count, close races might lead to endless bickering.
Outside of CBN training in boot camp? They don't. But ever hear of a place called My Lai? It was only after Rusty Calley was convicted of war crimes that the UCMJ was fixed to allow a soldier to refuse an illegal order. Yeah, tradition at the time was, you could refuse an illegal order, but the reality was, refuse it and face a court martial with limited defense options.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Why do you get so upset over four characters at the end of my posts? Are you just incensed that I do what I want, instead of what you want?
Try to work it out in therapy.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
He broke the conditions of HIS UK HOUSE ARREST, you tool. They could have locked his ass up, instead they let him live at home and were, within the limits of their law, quite reasonable to him, and then he scarpered, which has pissed them off some.
In addition, the UK is really not keen on the idea that criminals can flee to the embassy of any tin pot dictator they may like to escape justice. Whether the president of Ecuador is acting with integrity I don't know(though I suspect his support for Assange is based more on how flipping the bird to the US plays out at home than any support for free speech), but there are plenty of countries with UK embassies who would overlook pretty much anything for a big enough cash payment. The UK cannot and will not let this stand.
A usurper's heir is still a usurper.
In any case, I would argue that the American revolution was not treason, because any duty of loyalty that Americans of English descent may have once had to England was removed by the English government's betrayal of its duty to preserve the liberty and safety of Englishmen in America.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why it is OK to shoot anyone. Sometimes (when it is a question of self-defence; i.e one person is definitely going to die, so it may as well be the person instigating the incident) it might be justifiable, but I'm not sure it should ever be OK...
On shooting wounded soldiers it depends on how wounded they are and if they still have the means to engage in combat. Under the typical laws of land warfare, medical personel are typically non-combatant medical personel and will display a red cross or red cresent which supposedly gives the medics both protections and obligations. Using wounded soldiers to bait their comrads into the fire zone is concidered dishonorable by professional soldiers, but is very commonly employed tactic. Many Islamic Militants are taught that the red cross is the mark of Satan and they use it as a target.
Rushing into or out of an area of active combat is always a hazardous activity, acting like a combatant in a combat area where combatants don't wear uniforms is always a stupid thing to do.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
They cannot provide those assurances - because no extradition request has been made.
They are legally bound to look at extradition requests and judge them on their merits, they cannot hypothetically say they would or would not extradite him were the US to issue one.
It is perfectly obvious and the continuing pedalling of that line, despite it having been explained over and over, is one of the most annoying parts of the Assange case.
Well there is ANZUS The Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty, and there is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast_Asia_Treaty_Organization"> South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), I imagine that there is a lot of sub-treaty agreements and letters of understanding. Austrailia like Canada has always been a heavy liffter defense wise always contributing far more than one would expect for their respective population sizes; so you might be very surprized what the lawyers can dig up from the existing pool of national laws, treaties and international agreements.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
And even that's not real treason.
Sources, please. You're an AC making a statement point blank.
Actually, I guess I should have articulated it better rather than write that out so hastily: Americans today make the German citizens living under the Nazis (and supporting their regime verbally) look not-so-bad. Now obviously, not all Americans are like this, there's still a small contingent that believes in things like gay rights, not engaging in useless wars, etc., but there's no shortage of American citizens who would be happy to round up all homosexuals and gas them. We've even had politicians say things to this effect. Or to invade Iran; lots of Americans are chomping at the bit to start yet another war. We're just lucky that our regime hasn't started taking these actions, yet (I fully expect to see an invasion of Iran within 2 years). Some of them they're prevented from doing so because of politics (the other "side" takes the other position to get votes from the more-moderate Americans who aren't quite as far-right-wing as the ones who want to murder gays, so it stalls this action, and there's significant parts of the country where people are more-moderate like this; if the people in the "heartland" states for instance had all the power, we'd already have concentration camps).
I'm not sure what you're getting at here, but I think it's definitely justifiable to stop a greater crime. If you had a gun in hand and were near the door when the Colorado movie shooter busted in and was about to start shooting people, would you seriously have not shot him to prevent a dozen dead and scores injured? How can that action not be OK?
However, what we saw in "Collateral Murder" was NOT self-defense in any way, and was even less so when they opened fire on people trying to rescue the injured.
So because some people shoot at red crosses, the US thinks it's OK to shoot at anyone trying to help injured people?
And no one in that video was acting like a combatant. Camera lenses are not guns, and don't even look like them.
It's really pretty sick just how evil Americans are now, and what kinds of crimes they will defend. Americans make Nazis look not-so-bad.
So if we dialed our behavior back to just merely "Nazi-like" and took over your shitty little country you'd be OK with that?
The whining about America I hear from subhuman vermin around the world leads me to believe that the United States chose very, very wrongly back in the lead up to World War 2. If we had sided with the Axis I truly believe the world would be a far better place than it is today.
I'd say since he was a serving member of the military in a war zone he has more balls and most likely more integrity than you are putting on show.
Don't mean to put the guy down, but Manning never went outside the wire. He signed up to sit in a room full of computers and compile reports. (Yes, I did go outside the wire, and was combat arms.)
Manning was an adult, had taken the oath and is responsible for his actions, and yes, they're going to throw the book at him. They should: that intel has disrupted our peaceful diplomatic efforts, it included names and addresses of people in dangerous situations, etc. I don't care what terrible secrets of the government were uncovered, none of that was worth the life of even one poor son of a bitch in some hellhole who was feeding us intel so he could feed his family.
But, at the same time, he was a young dude who was going through a difficult time, and he was callously manipulated by Assange's people. That organization is designed to find a sucker they can manipulate to fall on his sword while they keep far enough back to be legally untouchable. And they don't care if the leaks harm innocent people.
And why don't they care? Because you, the fans, don't care, you'll never hold them to account. You're so fucking self-righteous that you worship this creep Assange and make excuses for his sexually assaulting those women. You don't care about the brown guy in Shitcanistan who gets tortured to death because of the leaks. You don't care if our peaceful efforts at diplomacy are derailed. You just want to be part of a big circle jerk around your stupid conspiracy theories. You really are worthless excuses for human beings.
What about cowards?
I would love to be able to cast a ballot for "None" and if that selection gets the most votes, the position is abolished. If people want true choice in elections, let's have "None of the above" be one of the choices.
rather than the proportional election systems you Europeans use
Haha! Hahahahahaha! A-hahahahahaha!
-- a UK citizen
Many people are imbeciles.
the issue is that they misidentified the targets.
The soldier at the scene who picks up the child from the minivan (Ethan McCord) believes that the attack on the van was a war crime. They seemed all too quick to decide that people were carrying weapons and all too eager to shoot. I've heard many accounts where all civilians were considered as the enemy whether or not they were armed. e.g.
McCord told Van Auken: "He [Kauzlarich] goes, 'If someone in your line gets hit with an IED, 360 rotational fire. You kill every motherf*cker on the street.'" McCord said that he had also witnessed the order carried out, saying: "I've seen it many times, where people are just walking down the street and an IED goes off and the troops open fire and kill them."
To be fair, I fear that all war is like that. At least insofar as I have never heard of a war without atrocity, however just it was hoped to be.
But what I hate all the more is the cover-up, made only to blind us to the real horrors of war, leaving us all the more willing to engage in them.
Not a peep about this on the BBC website, as far as I can see. I'm trying hard to think of a good reason for that.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I'm not sure that would help. I see breathtakingly stupid posts by low-UID users all the time. It's not just younger/newer people who are stupid, it's the older people too; I think it's like a disease that's infecting Americans and turning them stupid (stupider than they already were), regardless of their age.
He asked for and got permission from Sweden to leave the country after the first complaint was made. He has offered to meet Swedish prosecutors in the UK to answer their questions. He has offered to return to Sweden if they promise not to extradite him to the U.S.
Now, you were smearing?
Thank you for proving my point. You sound like a typical American.
I love how none of the soldiers who took part in these atrocities were given any kind of punishment.
It's more complicated than that actually. Yes, in some states, the winner of the popular election gets all the electoral votes for that state. In other states, the electoral votes are divided proportionately based on the results of the popular vote. Every state is different (which is the case for many other political issues too). I'd say the failure of the Founders to devise a proportional election system is probably their biggest failure.
I'm not a UK citizen nor a European, but I've heard people on both sides say that the UK isn't really part of Europe, that UK citizens aren't really Europeans, etc.
Valerie Plame. The really fucked up part was all the Rep-tiles saying "she was NON OPERATIVE!!!1!1" as if that made it better. She was a Non-Operative Covert, which is to say, she was a step or two above ground-level operations. Instead of James Bond, think James Bond's contact/director. Suddenly every spy and informant she was working with is endangered, as various countries espionage centers review their records of who went to lunch with this particular American "businesswoman" on her visits.
Worse, she was assigned to Eastern Europe tracking the locations of actual, REAL weapons of mass destruction from the former Soviet Union, which makes it ironic as she was outed as revenge for her husband's refusal to play along with the party line of "Saddam is a menace who's after nukular weapons!" Outing her made America less safe from WMDs.
(Not the AC)
I don't see how the 50cal to the brain is barbaric. From the point of view of the person executed (i.e. the person whose opinion matters), it's painless and instantaneous. If done at close range, a bullet that large wouldn't require a second shot. Pigs used to be slaughtered that way - one of my earliest memories was seeing a pig head with a bullet hole in it at the meat market where my dad worked.
It is rather messy for the people watching, but really, isn't execution partly to dissuade people from committing similar crimes?
Your proposal, on the other hand, is barbaric, unless by "sedated" you mean "unconcious". Your body would start to hyperventilate and trigger a panic reaction that would last until you passed out. A better option would be carbon monoxide or some other gas which causes you to fall unconcious before you asphixiate.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
The Brits' determination to capture Assange at any cost, for a Swedish Chippie's thinking she remembers he might not have used a condom, after she learnt he had also booked into one of her competitors/friends, has turned into Living History! If he makes it it will be a 21st century edition of Mary Tudor, and numerous others from times to times, sneaking over the channel to France. If he fails it will be just like a number of other cases where the poor devil was apprehended and hauled back. It shows that history is not just some dry and boring old stories stuff. It is proof of the consistency of human stupidity, and the sanctuary that stupidity finds in halls of power.
Yes, my friends, Whitehall is the Equadoran Embassy for the powerfully idiotic. Always has been, always will be, Just like Washington, D.C.
The vehicle was unmarked. The combatants being shot at were violating the laws of war by engaging in combat operations while out of uniform. You're on crack if you think they weren't acting like combatants. AKs and RPGs are clearly visibile in the video, and you're lying if you deny it.
There's no obligation to refrain from killing the wounded so long as they are not hors de combat. Attempting to escape is evidence that they are not. They must indicate intention to surrender.
You can't shoot Red Cross or Red Crescent personnel. You can't shoot wounded prisoners that are in your control (flying over them in a helicopter doesn't count - you have to have them as a prisoner or have control of the battlefield). You can't shoot anyone outside the field of battle, or anyone who surrenders to you.
Basically, you can't shoot anyone who isn't an enemy combatant.
That's what the Geneva Convention says, and U.S. soldiers are taught these rules during training. I was taught them, even though I was just a network jockey in the Air Force.
The key point here is determining who is an enemy combatant. If you pull a weapon in a battlefield, you're automatically one. If you assist the enemy in any way (excepting Red Cross stuff, as above), you're one. If you put on an enemy uniform, you're one.
Now, I haven't read the news story all this is about, so I'm not going to comment on the particulars, but if it was indeed misidentification that was the issue, then it basically falls into the "shit happens" category. If the host country for those soldiers has beef about it, they can raise the issue with the UN to see if it qualifies as a war crime. I wouldn't hold my breath, though - evil shit happens in any war, not just those the Americans fight. The difference here is that the government has to at least pay lip service to public opinion, so if enough people get up in arms about it the government will take steps to prevent it from happening again.
Those steps won't totally prevent this sort of occurance, of course - shit happens. But maybe they'll make it less likely. It's the best you can hope for in war.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
Pigs used to be slaughtered that way - one of my earliest memories was seeing a pig head with a bullet hole in it at the meat market where my dad worked.
Sure you're not thinking of a captive bolt pistol?
And no, nitrogen shouldn't cause hyperventilation as it allows CO2 exchange. Am I mistaken here?
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
ah coward, I lick no boots. Believing that when someone puts on the uniform, raises his right hand and swears an oath of loyalty that he should be held to it is not boot licking. It's the way civilization works. What you propose, that every man is a law unto himself, is anarchy.
It's an evil world full of evil people. Think Polly Purebread is gonna survive? All governments have secret organizations that wage secret wars against others....or they're just victims and get tromped on by the big boys. Name one major country that doesn't engage in this kind of activity.
man that crap burns
Sure you're not thinking of a captive bolt pistol?
Pretty sure. That meat market got most of its animals locally, IIRC, and this isn't exactly pig country here. I doubt the farmer would have had one of those, but I'm sure he would have had access to a 12 gauge.
And no, nitrogen shouldn't cause hyperventilation as it allows CO2 exchange. Am I mistaken here?
You may be right - I hadn't thought about that. If it doesn't induce the panic reaction, then I retract what I said about it being barbaric.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
It goes on to suggest possible ways in which he could exit the building, such as in a diplomatic bag or vehicle.
Or vagina.
so did the massive wave of trolls start with the six-digit slashdot id's? not finding any trolls with 5 digits or less in their ID.
(too lazy to login/post from my 4-digit ID)
Valerie Plame
I can't be bothered verifying this.
It is hard for me to say what I feel for Mr. Assange, his pursuers, the women he allegedly abused, the Ecuadorians at the embassy, the British police force, the Swedish prosecutors, the US government, and so forth, but all of this is incredibly entertaining in some way.
How will Mr Assange escape now? At least he is not making it easy on anybody.
I must congratulate you on a most splendid misdirection. Well done.
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
False. There are only 2 states that divide up the vote (Nebraska and Maine), and neither of them matter much due to low population. Source: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html#wtapv
Every other state is winner-takes-all, which is why voting in any state that is not a swing state basically doesn't matter. Politicians know this. Check out spending per state: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States)#Focus_on_large_swing_states
California and Texas have almost no money spent on them despite their huge number of electoral votes. If you live in those states, your vote REALLY doesn't matter.
Well, I hope that whoever pulls the trigger or flips the switch on ole Assange is humming the star spangled banner when he does it.
I'm so over Assange ....
They simply need a helicopter to hover/land at the embassy and pick him up, they could try to force the helicopter to land but getting him out of the embassy without stepping on British soil isn't that much of a problem.
Unix, an obscure operating system developed by bored researchers in an attempt to get a better game playing experience.
US troops on the scene were taking fire. If a bunch of men in the area the fire is coming from are milling around with weapons they're gonna get lit up.
Taking personal responsibility for yourself and upholding yourself to the commitments you make is a important thing in life.
If you feel the contract is not valid do not sign the dotted line. Otherwise all your doing is proving you have no personal responsibility in your own actions and you clearly should not be treated as a responsible adult.
Wait, what! They fired an AMBULANCE from a HELICOPTER?
they go about pounding the words "honor" "loyalty" and "integrity"
To the service and to the country by following the orders you are given, and respecting the chain of command, not by exposing secret documents for the entire world to see. That is treason.
Invalid argument, one there is no international law requiring one to "out" their country, quite the opposite really.
Secondly, 23 people were executed by the Nuremberg trails, all of them in a position of authority to issue the orders, and in a position to refuse. People who were under them (such as doctors and soldiers) who carried out the orders but did not have the authority to order anyone to do anything, did not get executed.
Well, not really "false", since 2 states is enough to qualify as "some", but thanks for pointing that out, I didn't realize is was only 2, I thought it was somewhat more than that. Thanks for the links.
And basically, if you're in a non-swing state, your vote doesn't matter either, not just CA and TX. And then people keep trying to tell us that "your vote matters!" BS. This also explains why the popular vote is so close to the electoral vote, and why it rarely differs enough to matter: lots of people don't bother to vote because their vote really doesn't matter, leaving only those whose preferences align with the majorities in their state to bother going to the polls, so that reinforces the result that the popular vote closely matches the electoral vote.
Manning wilfully decided to copy data he knew were considered secret and privileged information that should not be passed on, and passed it on to foreign individuals.
No matter what country the first and last part of that sentence is still treason. If he had found something that was wrong, there are appropriate channels to funnel information to the proper people to handle it, within your own country. Instead of broadcasting it out to every foreign nation in the world wouldn't you agree?
Metropolitan Police: You are a public service fully supported by the tax payer. Assange is an Australian wanted for charges of rape in Sweden (but really wanted by Uncle Sam helping distribute classified information) who is currently technically on Ecuadorian soil and is posing no threat of violence to any British citizens. Kindly stop wasting our money with this dick waving charade and get back to serving the British general public.
Yours,
A concerned UK citizen
Attacking a sovereign nation who had not attacked the USA and in fact did not even have the capacity to do so is a crime against humanity. It doesn't matter if they identified their targets correctly or not, they had no business in Iraq and are all war criminals.
Ecuador needs to purchase a skyhook equipped C-130, fly it as a foreign military flight for diplomatic personnel into a london area airport, then when leaving, do the extraction. See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_surface-to-air_recovery_system
Helicopter is too obvious, the skyhook gives a better chance due to the unexpected nature, assuming police snipers don't try to shoot down the balloon.
It worked for Batman...
Anyway, considering the most powerful nations in the world are after Assange for pressing his penis against a sleeping girl with whom he was sleeping and are prepared to storm embassies and engage in other acts of war in order to get their hands on him, I'm guessing $1.9million is going to get burned through pretty quickly in legal funds alone (assuming he ever sees the inside of a courtroom).
The prosecutors in one small European nation, Sweden, are after Assange for inserting his penis into a sleeping woman in a manner which she had previously expressly forbid, and to which she could not consent as she was asleep. (But you already knew that, didn't you?) Intercourse without consent is rape, even if they had previously had sex. (Perhaps you remember the debates about the legal question -can a husband rape his wife?) The UK is honoring its treaty obligations to Sweden by honoring the INTERPOL arrest warrant. After losing his legal fight to avoid extradition from the UK to Sweden, Assange fled the UK police, became a fugitive from justice, and took refuge in a foreign embassy of a nation currently oppressing its journalists. Breaking bond and escaping custody of the police is one easy way to turn even a minor crime into part of a much more serious offense. The UK had made it know that they could withdraw recognition of the current embassy grounds, not storm the embassy. Assange's legal bills would be much more modest if he wouldn't continue to create problems for himself. If he is lucky he will only end up serving time in a Swedish prison for sex crimes, and not be returned to the UK for bail jumping and fleeing the police. What about Russia and China? Not involved. The USA? It isn't involved in the matter of resolving the allegations of sexual assault against Assange other than to be the object of a red herring about extradition from Sweden to the US before Assange faces justice in Sweden.
Is $2,000,000 a big deal? Many small businesses hope to make that kind of money. Ask these guys.
That's funny, I thought $250,000 was the new rich.
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 truth must be suppressed.
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
Yep. I live in Montana. I'll be voting for Obama; and it isn't going to count towards his election. The word "disenfranchised" is appropriate here.
I'm going to do it anyway.
Soldiers take an oath to defend the constitution. Turning in the scumbags in Washington that piss on that document daily is defending it.
I'm prior service (US Army, 92-94) and I'm not sure I'd have the stones to do what Manning did. I for one salute him.
Good idea, report it through the appropriate channels. So he can be quickly and quietly silenced in a military "accident" a few days later.
California and Texas have almost no money spent on them despite their huge number of electoral votes. If you live in those states, your vote REALLY doesn't matter.
Yeah, in non-swing states the politicians only really spend time there to raise capital to better campaign in the swings.
I don't read AC A human right
.50BMG to the head(and most other .50 caliber rounds) - humane to the target, not so humane to those who have to witness it. Works well in combat conditions.
Nitrogen asphixiation - humane to the target - CO2 exchange is allowed, human body detects CO2 levels, not O2 levels, so asphixiation reflexes are never triggered. You just pass out/go to sleep. Often faster than you would underwater/holding your breath, because with no O2 in the air, with each breath you actually breath OUT O2. Doesn't work well in combat conditions. Cheap if you can build a reasonably air-tight room. No need to bargain with medical supply companies, the local welding shops have what you need. Many gasses would work, but nitrogen has the advantage of being the cheapest, on average.
Considered humane by some:
CO2 asphyxiation: Quick, but I wouldn't consider it humane because it does trigger asphyxiation reflexes.
Lethal injection: At the least I'd change up the drugs. Go to a straight opiate overdose. Worse, I don't like the idea of having to tie down the condemned and have somebody stick a needle in his vein. With Nitrogen, you just put them in the appropriate room and turn a valve.
Electric chair: Problems are obvious at this point
Short drop Hanging: You have the problem that you have to restrain the condemned, but if done right it's excellent. Problem is that it takes some practice to 'do it right'.
Really, the problems with execution is that we want an intact head afterwards.
I don't read AC A human right
Well, I seem to remember reading that he tried to go through channels, his reports got buried, and that's when he went full disclosure.
This article seems to pretty clearly refute arguments that Obama's administration was the source of those leaks.
Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
The prosecutors in one small European nation, Sweden, are after Assange for inserting his penis into a sleeping woman in a manner which she had previously expressly forbid, and to which she could not consent as she was asleep. (But you already knew that, didn't you?) Intercourse without consent is rape, even if they had previously had sex.
You're conflating two different occasions...
On the first occasion, Assange had consensual sex with a woman. The woman wanted to have sex with a condom, but the condom broke, and Assange proceeded having sex without it. This is the allaged rape.
Two days later, Assange had consensual sex with another woman, and afterwards, when she slept, the woman claims Assange tried to have sex with her again. This is the alleged molestation. I haven't heard any claims about actual penetration on this occasion.
The women themselves weren't sure they had been raped or molested; they only went to the police for "advice". And they only decided to do this after they had met each other and talked.
The UK is honoring its treaty obligations to Sweden by honoring the INTERPOL arrest warrant.
There was no arrest warrant. Sweden requested the extradition to question Assange, not to arrest him.
This is an important distinction, since it means there wasn't sufficient evidence to have Assange arrested.
Of course, what the Swedish government decides to do once he's in Sweden, is another matter.
After losing his legal fight to avoid extradition from the UK to Sweden, Assange fled the UK police, became a fugitive from justice, and took refuge in a foreign embassy of a nation currently oppressing its journalists.
At most, Assange is suspected of breaking his bail with the UK authorities. He's not been formally charged with any crimes.
And talking about "oppressing its journalists" is rather ironic. Assange is a journalist. Publishing information on web sites instead of in newspapers is just journalism in the Internet age. And he's oppressed by the US government, since he's been harassed and threatened for revealing embarrasing classified information, which is legal both in the USA and in Assange's own country of residence (Australia).
Is $2,000,000 a big deal? Many small businesses hope to make that kind of money.
In any case, it's not much money for a medium-sized international organisation that goes up against powerful governments.
Releasing the cables may also have been life insurance for Manning, since it ensured he had the world's attention and the US government couldn't just let him slip between their hands.
Most of the stuff Manning revealed didn't provide any evidence of wrongdoing, so he's not protected as a whistleblower. The "collateral murder" video, for instance.
That's just your opinion. The US government apparently disagreed, since they were embarrassed enough about the video to deny its existence when the event was formally investigated.
Regardless of whether the video actually shows any wrongdoing, leaking the video proves that the US government lied. In that situation, I think it's appropriate to leak the video so people can decide for themselves.
Legally, it is. But if those documents were classified to hide how badly the war was going, it may be morally right to break the law.
The war is paid for by the public, and the public can only make an informed decision on whether to support the war if they have access to relevant information. If the government is hiding information just to avoid embarrassing themselves, it's a betrayal against the public.
You sign away your rights and freedoms when you join the military. You, as a grunt, such as Manning, have signed their lives away willingly to do what the Army asks them to do. And to follow orders./quote
There are also national laws which trump military orders. If your officer asks you to send a rocket into a nearby residential area during training, it's hardly a war crime, but I doubt you'd be court-martialed for refusing that order.
IF he without came across data that proved something illegal was going on, there are legal, appropriate channels to file individual complaints to, without broadcasting everything indiscriminately to the rest of the world.
The problem is that those legal channels classified the documents in the first place, because they didn't want the public to know how badly the war was going. Letting an organisation oversee itself never works.
No matter what country the first and last part of that sentence is still treason. If he had found something that was wrong, there are appropriate channels to funnel information to the proper people to handle it, within your own country. Instead of broadcasting it out to every foreign nation in the world wouldn't you agree?
Do you also believe that if you report a policeman's inappropriate behaviour to the police, the problem will be dealt with in a swift and fair manner?
Advocating anarchy is a good way to get yourself killed.
You are either not from the USA or you don't love your country enough to know about what her heroes died for.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life,_liberty_and_the_pursuit_of_happiness
See, the Constitution says there are rights you can not sign away. EXACTLY the ones you mention! Isn't that a strange coincidence.
If you back up to the GGP, you'll see it's about Bradley Manning, not Assange...
A real spy would try to hide the fact that he had obtained the information, to prevent the enemy from changing their codes and procedures.
My opinion is that the rape allegations are used as an excuse to cause trouble for Assange. Not even in Sweden has a man been charged with rape because he had sex with a woman without a condom when she only agreed to have sex with one -- much less internationally wanted for it.
The women themselves weren't sure they had been raped and molested -- they only decided to go to the police after they met and talked, and then they only went there for advice, not to file charges.
Sometimes we fight our own country and commit illegal acts, specifically because breaking the law is the ethical thing to do. For instance: The revolutionary war which led to the creation of the United States of America was totally illegal and involved attacking our government's (British) troops. Manning's actions were those of an idealistic revolutionary. Nothing more or less.
Since when is shutting off your mind, your moral compass and proceeding to "carry out their orders to the t" make you a man?
A man (or woman) questions authority.
A man (or woman) thinks for themself and doesn't just blindly follow orders.
A man (or woman) will risk their own life for their ideals.
A man (or woman) is willing to DIE for a cause, not KILL for a cause.
Here's the big mistake the authorities made when fitting Assange up for extradition to Sweden: they didn't use underage girls. Had they set him up with a couple of very hot, mature looking but legally underage girls, he'd have been pilloried in the media as a "pedophile" and he'd be in jail in Sweden by now facing extradition to the US.
No-one cares about human rights or any other principles once "child sex" is mentioned, all reasoning goes out the window.
With respect, having a well devised system does not necessarily rule out it being implemented by local people. Due to that nature of elections being prohibitively expensive to run without the support of large numbers of volunteers that live near the polling stations I doubt that there is any sensible solution that does take a lot of the control out of the hands of local volunteers.
Of course I don't consider Diebold machines that communicate with a central server sensible for a very large number of reasons. One major reason is losing that transparency you mentioned - instead of having a large number of people aware of exactly what is occurring you have a black box that could be a vector for fraud without even observers in the same room noticing.
Where I live we have paper ballots and ballot boxes produced and supplied by a central body but the results are tallied and scrutinised at a local level by the same sort of people you describe as "local control" above. It's effectively something that covers all of your points above but is still consistent on a national level which avoids things like the insane mess you had in Florida 2000. How many different voting methods were used in that state alone? Who was the idiot that came up with that stupid thing with the hanging chads, and were the people that spent their taxpayers money on that thing offered kickbacks or just stupid?
You're mixing up two different accusations.
Go read up on the Assange case and get back to me before you spend to much time barking up the wrong tree.
You are welcome on my lawn.
What's really sad is that this isn't some random general-population site on the internet, this is supposed to be the home of geeks and nerds, people who are supposedly smarter than the average. Even so, your words are true; this level of stupidity is normal here in 2012. The intelligence level here on Slashdot, like everywhere else in American society, has fallen greatly in the last 10 years or so.
Smarter than average, less socially adept than average, poorer hygiene than average, being a gamer. There's a lot of reasons people self associate or are associated with being geeks/nerds. As technology and gaming have become a bigger chunk of the economy and society, it seems the "geeks and nerds are smarter than average" correlation has become weaker over time.
And, this site isn't about geeks and nerds who are smarter than average. There are lots of good sites on the Internet that probably meet those criteria. While that may have been true in the past, Slashdot is really little more than a hangout for a growing polarized set of self-identified geeks and nerds who believe in a few common things above reason. I've said before this is the Fox News of tech sites now, and all evidence suggests that is, in fact, the case.
No amount of stupidity surprises me here anymore. There are some key subjects that really pull the dims out of the woodwork, though.
It appears that you stopped reading to reply without reading my whole comment. You missed this part, as metacell expands upon in his reply.
Then they get pissed off when you apply those words where they were meant to be applied.
You really should read someone's whole post before you reply. I know - you might read something and get fired up - but you need to finish reading first.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
All wearing bowler hats and black suites. You could blast Nina Semone's "Sinner Man" on the embassy speakers, tape the whole thing, put it on youtube, and make the UK look like an even bigger ass.
What the fuck?
Yeah, vote for Sam Johnson or John Samson. That'll help.
When will you understand that your ENTIRE SYSTEM IS FUCKED. It doesn't matter whom you vote for. We've seen that in two subsequent Bush elections. But wait!~!! Obama was elected! So now America is on a completely different course than it was in the Bush Jr era! Right? Right?
You need to drop your romantic notion that your country has any kind of democratic process left in it. Your vote doesn't matter when you're voting for a different side of the same coin.
Excellent post with several insightful points. Thank you.
I saw the video, both the full version, and the version edited to paint the US soldiers involved in the worst possible light, and in both everybody's behavior was combative, They were armed with assault rifles, weapons were pointed outward, they were moving in a military combat formation and the cameraman was located central and rearward in the formation which is SOP location for crew served weapons like Rocket Propelled Grenade launcher
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
This is non news. Everyone is aware that Assange is wanted for skipping bail, irrespective of any other agendas, hidden or otherwise. The fact that plod was seen with a piece of paper on a clipboard which stated the "bleedin' obvious" adds little if nothing to the story, and merely demonstrates that plod needs clear and simple instructions on how to proceed.
1) I would not have done what Assange did for, on account of the deleterious effects on national security. Releasing shit on bankers and politicians is fair game- endangering sources and methods we need for serious reasons is really, really not O.K. He is not Ellsberg in my view; he's not getting a hold of proof the government lied about matters of national security. He's just data dumping everything and anything. Too bad if no one wants to help you sort it out before you dump. That's no excuse. In that case, you have some work ahead of you and if you can't do that work, then you've bit off more than you can chew and whose fault is that? It's not enough to have good intentions- you have to be competent in the follow through, especially if someone's life is at stake.
2) The rape case against him is a joke. Look into it from any reputable source and you'll see that it's a manufactured device to lose him public sympathy (he's a sex offender!!!) and specifically and obviously an attempt to split his would-be united sympathizers- leftists, including of course feminists
3) The whole thing is obviously and transparently the US trying to make sure that he doesn't go unpunished no matter what and to set an example of him to others. There is no other actual motivating factor for this guy's prosecution/ persecution.
4 The fact that the US media have been obedient sheep in the face of this, reporting what the US wants them to report in just the way they want it reported is also disgusting in the extreme.. they COULD tell it like it is - the whole thing is fascinating and telling and important. They COULD something other than lie about it. but there's a reason they won't and here it is:
The whole issue of whether a reporter has the right , that is can do so without going to jail , to reveal classified information to the public and in the public interest has never been fully adjudicated in the US. No one actually knows what the legal limits on reportage, reporters and newspapers are in this highly sensitive arena and they'd rather not find out.. If the obvious case - Assange releasing classified documents and claiming it's in the public good and the US government was lying to its people- if that case were tried, what might come down from the courts in the way of a ruling might be something very ugly as seen from the perspective of the free press. They don't want to go there until they absolutely have to and they sure as shit don't want to go there with THIS case with THIS guy at THIS time. It's a loser all the way around.
So they mouth the words of whatever script the US government is typing up and just don't GO there.
That's why the US press is being so negligent in this case. Better he should be arrested and tried for rape or tried in a military setting out of the sight of the press once he falls into the hands of the US.
5) The US has a totally legitimate point that this guy recklessly endangered national security. Without secrets, without operational secrets and without an ability to protect assets, the US's ability to protect its interests and people takes a major major blow. This can't be allowed to come to pass.
6) Assange is an idiot for doing what he did the way he did it. Don't emulate him- he's not a hero, he's a guy who wanted to be a hero and wasn't up to the task, didn't have the discipline, the operational capacity, the judgement for it. Maybe there's something nefarious regarding the US we all need to know about. Lots of hardworking, perfectly sincere people in the US government ALSO would want to know about anything of this nature. Dumping terabytes of classified data and having some nuggets of worthwhile ,but predictable, wrong-doing by some players fall out as a consequence is NOT uncovering coordinated, self-conscious, systemic and ongoing law-breaking at the highest levels of government ala the Pentagon Papers.
Nevertheless, now that we're here, what happens in this case and to this idiot matters a lot
Eat shit and bark at the moon.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I've never heard of it being OK to shoot wounded soldiers or people who are trying to take them away to get medical attention, and certainly not when there's children in their car (since they don't have the resources for proper ambulances and such).
It's really pretty sick just how evil Americans are now, and what kinds of crimes they will defend. Americans make Nazis look not-so-bad.
War is sick - that has not changed since the dawn of time. Instead of blaming the soldiers who are fighting the war, perhaps you should blame the people who got us into the war? Especially since it was unnecessary and nothing good has come of it.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
"We had to destroy the Republic in order to save it"
We had to destroy the Republican in order to save him.
Assange likely coerced and encouraged a member of the US military to release classified information.
Assange had charges filed against him by Sweden.
Assange had an EAW (European Arrest Warrant) issued for his apprehension.
Assange appealed his extradition through the legal hierarchy in England, losing every appeal.
Assange was scheduled for a flight to Sweden to face the charges, instead he fled to a foreign embassy, making a mockery of the political asylum process.
Clearly the USA and Obama are to blame for all of this.
As Dogun points out, the executive office isn't bound by classification of documents. The President is Commander-in-Chief, and has supreme authority over the US military. That includes the ability to countermand any order, reclassify any document the military has classified, etc.
If you want a real example of treason, though, try the Iran-Contra affair. Negotiating with foreign powers and selling weapons to them without approval (remember that the President can negotiate treaties, but they must be approved by the Senate to take effect), then taking the proceeds from it and using it to back a war that Congress had voted for the US not to get involved in... especially when you toss in the fact that the weapons were being sold to a declared enemy of the United States. Of course, Reagan and Bush managed to successfully deny knowledge, which then allowed Bush to pardon the rest of the crew.
Obama didn't leak 'shit' my friend. It was all after the fact so how can that be considered a "leak"? bin Laden was already dead for crying out loud...
I disagree: we should blame both, the politicians who started the war, and the degenerates they sent to fight it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maywand_District_murders
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandahar_massacre
Go Blue Team, Booooo Red team!
Or is it the other way around?
We don't even get to vote on whether we use electronic voting machines.
Now many US voters just touch a computer screen to cast their "vote".
Want a recount? Ok, here, press "enter". See? 45 bajillion votes for Romney.
Want a recount? Press "enter." See? 45 bajillion votes for Romney.
If you agree with the rapist's politics.
Cool! Does this count as a Godwin incident?
Watch: http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/witness/2012/08/2012823616123717.html
There is a conspiracy element to treason charges, which is likely what Assange would be charged with..
Also, Bin Laden never killed a single American, yet, he was still charged with conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals, conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction against U.S. nationals and conspiracy to damage and destroy U.S. property. The fact is, we're treating leakers and whistleblowers with the same rationale as we did with murderers like Bin Laden. Yet, we all know what happened, we didn't capture him, we went into a country illegally and killed him. Assange is in no less danger of a similar lawless outcome.
Except for the fact that they think this is secret information ("Restricted" on the document), what's the big deal about this getting out?
I mean, they think he broke laws, so of course they'd want to arrest him "under all circumstances". That seems like it would be the case from the police for all suspected criminals.
Two things.
First the above poster called Manning a coward. He may be called many things, but do you really think it's appropriate for a civilian to call a member of the military a coward just becuase they don't like something that person did which has nothing at all to do with cowardice? Would you put up with a civilian like daemonenwind or myself calling you a coward? I don't think you should have to.
Second, while your convenient strawman may be a worthless excuse for a human being I only wrote the single line about a civilian calling a soldier a coward above and not the huge pile of extra baggage you've brought to build your strawman.
If he's putting on a show, you'll be able to see his balls when he kicks his legs up high enough to show 'em.
and the horse you rode in on.
Which is *not* legal in England.
... until voters become so lazy that when the opposite side turns out to vote it completely upsets the balance for a term.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
You haven't heard of drones I suppose.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
If the American people didn't bother to rise up for Iran Contra or the various incidents in South America, then the American people won't care about anything Assange digs up either.
Turns out the average American is a navel-gazing jerk and just doesn't care about what his or her country does elsewhere in the world to other people.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
And as worker action proved in the strikes that lead to unions, when everyone grows a pair and stands up for what's right, there's nobody left to order around.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
You're mixing up two different accusations.
Go read up on the Assange case and get back to me before you spend to much time barking up the wrong tree.
Could you shine the light up there? I think I see something.
New details emerge about Assange accusers
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
So states are non-swing states because of the way people vote. And because of being in a non-swing state, the way people vote doesn't matter? Wow.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
I salute you for going out of your way to prove my point.
The women didn't even realize there had been a crime.
And for this, this "crime" where the victim had a nice breakfast and was "sarcastic" about it to the monster Assange, the British are prepared to storm a foreign embassy.
I'll bet they'll also try to extradite him to Sweden via the US for overdue library books.
I'm not trying to minimize rape, but for christ's sake, we're talking about an act of war over something that is not a crime almst anywhere but Sweden.
You are welcome on my lawn.
He may be called many things, but do you really think it's appropriate for a civilian to call a member of the military a coward just becuase they don't like something that person did which has nothing at all to do with cowardice?
I'm a civilian who happens to be a veteran. And like others, I have to vote for civilian government that has a duty to maintain the UCMJ which defines, among other things, cowardice. I forget which article, but it's in there.
We are the government, and we have a duty to govern. Ergo we have a responsibility to form and develop opinions, usually through debate and other civic processes, about all matters including military. We can't simply ignore large portions of that responsibility when we don't have direct experience in those fields.
In particular, if I am prior service and you have wrong views on military affairs, I can only set you straight if you speak your mind and I am presented with an incorrect opinion and the opportunity to correct it.
Finally, there are plenty of forms of cowardice besides running away, moral and intellectual being two very prevalent ones.
Second, while your convenient strawman may be a worthless excuse for a human being...
Hard as it may be to believe, that entire post wasn't directed at you.
Since the strawman attack started with the word "you" that is how it appears.
Anyway, my entire point is the poster above is a civilian who stayed at home shouting "coward" at a guy that signed up to serve in a war zone, and whatever crimes he may have committed are not anything that fits a definition of cowardice I'm aware of.
I'm a civilian myself but would not like my relatives in the military to be treated like that.
I hope you're not being incredulous, because this is all very well-established. Non-swing states have voting records that are very well historically established, for one party or the other. The chances that they'll have a close election are very, very slim (i.e., the chances that Texas will be anything but overwhelmingly in the Republicans' favor is pretty remote, the same with Illinois and the Democrats). So if you're going to vote for the opposite party (or 3rd party), it's not going to make a difference in all likelihood.
Ok so this gives Texas a disadvantage. The cause is Texans' own voting behaviour, fix is also in Texans' voting behaviour. But you are saying that Texans are too busy appearing helpless to themselves and others , and have no interest in SOLVING the problem that is being a non-swing state.
If the "solution" is still not clear to you, it is for Texans to stop voting for Republicans. Solution is clearly not to declare voting is useless.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
WTF are you talking about? You're babbling and not making much sense.
Texans don't think there's a problem with them being a non-swing state. They like it that way. That's why they keep voting Republican, because the vast majority of Texans agree with GOP principles and the GOP platform. Texans aren't going to stop voting Republican; why would you even say such a thing? No matter what you do, Texans are going to continue voting Republican, happily. So if you live in Texas and don't like the Republican candidate, you might as well vote for whomever you like the best. It's not going to make a difference to their electoral votes, because the vast majority of Texan voters are going to vote for Romney regardless. There's nothing you can do to change that. Voting for Obama is a wasted vote (unless you really love Obama that much), because there is absolutely no way Obama will win Texas. However, a vote for a 3rd party candidate, while it also will not change the outcome for the 2012 election, could help that 3rd Party get over 15% nationwide, and then be eligible to take part in the debates in 2016.
Understand yet? Or is this still over your head? You remind me of religious fundamentalists who vigorously deny reality when it conflicts with their fantasy or their view of how things should be.
1. Texans don't think there's a problem with them being a non-swing state
2. So if you live in Texas and don't like the Republican candidate
The 2 contradict each other. Either ALL Texans are guaranteed to like the Republican candidate or not.
because the vast majority of Texan voters are going to vote for Romney regardless
Since all Texans are going to vote for Romney, all Texans must vote for Romney else not vote at all. Circular logic at its best.
In ANY voting methodology over many voters, a single vote is unlikely to do anything. If everyone has this defeatist assumption that since all other will vote the other way, why vote my way; the way will BECOME true. Otherwise , maybe not. This is not specific for the US system, or the Texan system, or the winner-take-all system.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
I don't know what your problem is. If you think the state of Texas is going to elect Obama, you're an idiot. I'm done with you.
Godwin's law. You lose.
Manning was a sergeant. He was trusted with access to that sensitive information because he accepted the responsibilities of his rank. He betrayed that trust and earned what is going to hapen to him
You are either lying through your teeth, or delusional. Conservatives and orthodox Christians simply want marriage to not be redefined. Many of them even accept a "civil union" that grants hospital visitation and some other benefits.
From that to "round up all homosexuals and gas them"... Wow. This is the single most bizarre straw man that I remember ever seeing.
Obviously, you have never been to war and hopefully, you never will.
It is in-humanity and terror on a scale that someone like you can scracely imagin.
Or to put it another way, try being up all day and all night for three days in a row in the pouring down rain, mud up to your knees, booby traps that can kill (if your lucky) or maim you for the rest of your life all around you and then some kid, maybe 14 years old, is shooting at your platoon from a snipers position and kills your best friend.
A few hours later you walk into his village, how do you know, because you killed the bastard and figured it our from some paper work he carried, yeah, their stupid sometimes too.
You walk in there scared to death and you hear something go pop...
What would you do?
None of that excuses firing on people who are no longer fighting back, and are trying to leave the scene to get medical help (because you've just shot them).
Furthermore (and I think this is pretty important), none of what you say is remotely relevant. The soldiers in question were not infantry, they were helicopter pilots. They don't have to worry about being up all day and night for three days, and certainly don't have to worry about being in mud, dealing with booby traps, or being shot at by 14-year-olds (Apache gunships are heavily armored, with depleted uranium armor protecting the pilots). Basically, for these assholes, it's not much different from safely playing a video game. They just fly around and shoot at stuff with very little danger to themselves.
Finally, none of this excuses the fact that the US forces have no legitimate enemy there. The Iraqi people did nothing to threaten the US, except try to start selling their oil in Euros instead of Dollars. If you can't fight a war professionally, don't go over there.