Slashdot Mirror
US Military Designates Julian Assange an "Enemy of State"
First time accepted submitter Cute and Cuddly writes in with some new Julian Assange news. "The U.S. military has designated Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as enemies of the United States — the same legal category as the al-Qaeda terrorist network and the Taliban insurgency. Declassified US Air Force counter-intelligence documents, released under US freedom-of-information laws, reveal that military personnel who contact WikiLeaks or WikiLeaks supporters may be at risk of being charged with 'communicating with the enemy.'"
Can drone-strike him, with impunity, then?
America. It just keeps getting more like a bad Harlan Ellison story.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
We seem to like waging war on vaporous enemies don't we?
"The authoritative joint study, by Stanford and New York Universities, concludes that men, women and children are being terrorised by the operations ’24 hours-a-day’.
And the authors lay much of the blame on the use of the ‘double-tap’ strike where a drone fires one missile – and then a second as rescuers try to drag victims from the rubble."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208307/Americas-deadly-double-tap-drone-attacks-killing-49-people-known-terrorist-Pakistan.html
The constitution places the power to declare war and issue letters of marque with the congress, not the executive. It's up to the congress to tell the military who's an enemy, not the other way around.
Whoever has taken it upon themselves to do this has libeled Assange.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
For a country that prides itself on freedom of speech - they like to tell people to shut up.
Stories like this are really starting to worry me. Our country is rapidly losing civil rights, not to mention disregarding international laws regarding things like drone strikes in other countries.
It's just been revoked.
after Obama yesterday's utopian freedom of speech speech at the UN.
That's not their job, is it? Wouldn't this be up to Congress, the courts, the State Department?
I guess its official. We are being run by a military junta.
Have gnu, will travel.
if you're stuck here, for the better or worse, there's only one thing to do: get rich or die trying.
This just proves Assange's conpiracy theory...
If we needed more proof that is.
Well, that's nice of them. In Soviet Russia, he would simply have bee#RC@HREU
NO CARRIER
In Soviet Russia, articles before post read *you*!
I designate US military an "Enemy of the world"
If they believe they can get away with illegal activities and blindly attempt to maim / capture / kill someone or someone(s) purely on the basis that they had the gall to stand up to them, and expose them for the mewling pieces of shit that they are, then they have become the enemies of this nation. They have become the terrorist organization they were supposed to defend this country from.
It's time for the leaders of the armed forces involved in this, along with the leaders of the FBI that were illegally and immorally entrapping citizens in fake terrorist plots designed and developed by the FBI to be arrested and sent to gitmo with no chance or hope of appeal or parole, or just line them up for summary execution, whichever is easiest and fastest. That is the only way we can re-secure out country.
Could/would this designation be used against any American citizen who provides any type of aid or comfort to him, as in the US Constitution's definition of treason?
It appears that this might be designed to prevent further leaks by military personnel.
Ftom TFA:
Declassified US Air Force counter-intelligence documents, released under US freedom-of-information laws, reveal that military personnel who contact WikiLeaks or WikiLeaks supporters may be at risk of being charged with "communicating with the enemy", a military crime that carries a maximum sentence of death.
They may never go after Assange. But the next Brad Manning may find him/herself swinging from the gallows.
Have gnu, will travel.
Until people are named "enemy of the state" for tossing candy wrappers on the ground.
.. in a way.
Now that the US has designated this status, it gives many more countries the freedom to protect him. It gives him official 'political' refugee status in way more places.
Of course - it also paints a big target on his head, but everything has a down side.
EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
When what you're talking about is things businesses and governments wish to keep secret, there is no such thing as free speech. You pay for it in blood.
Were I Assange, I'd be far more worried about a bullet in my head or a mickey in my drink than a legit arrest.
Am I insinuating that a government or business would kill over information they wish to keep secret for legitimate reasons, or otherwise?
Hell yes, I am.
I'm sure there are many secrets that should remain so -- but buried in that pile are atrocities and behind-the-scene dealings that impact people like you and I in the worst ways -- and those are the dirty bits of laundry that need to get out.
Frankly, I still think the Internet is nothing but television magnified by 1000, with all the lolcatz and pr0n and myface and spacebook and all that -- but the ability to shed light on nasty, shady dealings -- that's what I had hoped the Internet would be able to do.
We need more of this. We need to know more about what businesses and governments do in secret to line their pockets by picking ours. The mainstream media can't quite be trusted to do so, I feel they're in the payroll of government and business -- so the last resort is.. this.
But, who vets this kind of leaks? Who can assure the reader that it isn't misinformation? Wow, paranoids are right, I think!
Still, there's a little place in my heart that tells me.. we really don't want to know. I think it could be that revolting, that repulsive.
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
By exposing state corruption and other wrongdoing, he's a friend of the people, which makes him an enemy of the state simply by closure.
The US Army thus shows the same behaviour of China and Russia.
If you're no better than bullies, what does that make you?
For getting the truth government corruption out there, huh. They really want to shut him up.
That is a really bad sign. That makes giving them classified message traffic treason, which is punishable by death during time of war. This does not bode well for Bradley Manning.
But this is slashdot. A slashdoter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber!
Not that I agree with everything the military does, or even the majority of what we as a country do, and I also believe that much of what wikileaks does is good. When they release information that puts people at risk, or personal letters between our representatives with the explicit purpose of causing controversy and turmoil, I think that is fucked up. People who say that all information should be open are naive, and people that say everything should be controlled are paranoid. Finding a middle ground has always been the problem, and always will be.
The United States was embarrassed by WikiLeaks, and they are looking to "fix" that. The problem is, they can't take any of it back. This is all reactionary, and not real rational. If anything, they need to review how/why Bradley Manning had access to the State Department cables, since it doesn't make sense Manning would have had that access in the first place (just because people have a security clearance doesn't mean they have a need-to-know- and the information system should enforce that). They need to put blocks in place to prevent future problems.
The US can't change the past this early- they need to wait a long time to spin this (probably a couple generations). Punishing WikiLeaks won't accomplish much in this case, because the next time a leak happens another proxy will be used. They are trying to punish Assange, as they punished Manning, to deter future "leak" hosts. It won't work- while the US can control the military personnel and their actions, they can't change the rest of the world.
The US is acting like a child- "I told Timmy a secret, and he told Jeff, and Jeff told the rest of the school. I'm no longer going to be Timmy's friend, and I'll tell the teacher to suspend Jeff. That way, the school will know not to tell my secrets." It doesn't work- everyone knows, and you can't wipe the world's memory with legislation or prison.
They need to show an iron fist on this one, can't have people embarrassing the military and government.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Ran out of mod points real quick in this thread...
Article 104 is NOT restricted to the military, the army can arrest anyone under Article 104:
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm104.htm
"Scope of Article 104. This article denounces offenses by all persons whether or not otherwise subject to military law. Offenders may be tried by court-martial or by military commission. "
What they're doing is to say "deal with Wikileaks and you're an enemy of the state", which is aimed at journalists publishing the leaks surely? This is an official leak, i.e. the kind the US Military does when it wants to send a message out. Assange isn't the leaker here, he's just a journalist in the chain. The major distribution is the 100s of newspapers who publish the leaks.
Gee, why not just make fake rape charges or something like they usually do?
So the rules are:
1) Out an undercover spy (Valerie Plame) and directly or indirectly causing the death and/or compromising of countless intelligence sources -> Penalty = nothing
2) Out the US government's dirty laundry list -> Penalty = being set up for the death penalty...either officially or through a drone strike
I think Jon Stewart was right...anyone wishing to create a Constitution for their country should use ours...we aren't using it...
TWICE. Never though I'd be a terrorist supporter so soon. I'm so fucking proud of myself.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
In this case the Enemy is the World ... So Obama's America interprets the World as the Enemy.
Lovely. LOL
So will Lord Obama dial up SAC and have London evaporated? No! And Why! Obama's got no balls!
If Assange is an 'Enemy of the State' then Obama as 'President of the USA' has latitude to kill all ... who are aiding and abetting an 'enemy of the state' of the 'USA'.
of the citizen of London
On legal terms Mr. Assange is NOT an 'Enemy of the State' ... rather ... he IS an Enemy of Mr. Obama.
A grudge match and fight to attrition.
Will Mr. Obama take a 'Leap Of Faith' from the balcony of the White House on the morning of November 7
just when he realizes his 'Empire' has crumbles to ashes?
Stay Tuned! :)
8D
He already is.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
And they have the weapons. They can kill us all. Their weapons are the rules. It's as simple as that.
I couldn't think of a better call for donations and support for wikileaks than to have my government demonstrating Assanges central points for him.
They're doing this to go after Bradley Manning. If they don't, no crime, or at least a lessor one, was committed by Manning.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
We are not required to give free speech to citizens of foreign nations who leak diplomatic confidential communiques and battle plans.
They are not calling assange an "enemy of the state". They are calling him an enemy of the United States. It doesnt mean
the US is going arrest him anymore than the US would arrest an Iranian military attache. It just means now that US government
employees and military personnel who leak information to him would be committing a crime.
Leaking information to legitimate journalists regarding specific wrongdoing is protected , whats not protected is wholesale information dumps
regardless of sensitivity of the information or any sort of legitimate public interest.
There has to be a reason we pick fights that we can't win. War on drugs, War on poverty, war on terrorism, ...
It has been almost 100 years since the start of the War on Drugs.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I'm not surprised. Assange released a bunch of classified military documents - at a time when two wars were going on. Now, a lot of people might disagree with those wars and would, therefore, agree with Assange releasing the information. Assange, himself, has said it was his mission to end the wars - presumably, he meant that the release of classified US documents would damage the war effort so badly that the US would withdraw.
Although, I have to wonder what our response would be if this was the early 1940s, the US was fighting Germany and Japan, and a character named 'Assange' released a bunch of documents relating to the US war effort. Would this be the same thing? Would we label Assange a hero or a traitor if he was degrading the US war effort against enemies which we all hate? I wouldn't be surprised at all if a 1940s-era Assange released this information (he talks about how he'll release anything), and I wouldn't be surprised at all if the US labelled him an enemy of the state, either. I would hope that people's outrage over this didn't seem to hinge on whether or not you agree or disagree with the US war.
It is also claimed that he is adept at voodoo and has his own personal zombie army. Sources indicate that his zombie forces are closely allied with organized werewolf and vampire cadres who are planning a global coup intended to bring the Apocalypse, institute the rule of Satan on earth, and overthrow heaven.
Plus, his mother dresses him funny.
Why is Snark Required?
It's almost like they're seeing how far they have to push before we have to re-enact the French Revolution for them.
Tho unpolite, he got a point.
His actions proved that long ago.
Drone strike? Right on!
US has no problem with WikiLeaks here, but with Jullian, who knowingly worked to release secret materials. However, It is interesting because if he was seriously considered a threat, he would be already in US, because of time in freedom he was in UK. However, there's still no extradition requests. They sure think he is annoying, and probably wonder what military secrets (including spec ops and agents) he still has. They're nervious, and it tells with this language about enemies and terrorists (in some sense, Jullian terorises US goverment, and think it's fun. I don't think it was very smart idea if you were about to release such serious leak).
This charge is actually more or less to prevent anyone with access to secret government/military networks in US to cooperate with WikiLeaks. For Good or for bad, but that's how any military would react. They don't have a 'annoying activist' paragraph. From their POV, all this information can be used against military in active operations, so you are a threat.
And freedom of speech - Jullian has it, tons - from outside, from inside, Jullian that, Jullian there, he even has live video stream with UN. Show me another journalists or unfortunates who had problems with arrests and "enemy of the state" tags, for example, in Russia. You can't, because most of them are just dead - mostly without court. No US government has closed any newspaper because they printed leaked material - in detail. Was Swedish situation just a coincidence or they really trying to extract him to US? Personally I don't think so. Any backslash it's not just worth it.
I'm getting tired of all this WikiLeaks BS. It supposed to be recover corruption, company dirty secrets, etc. Instead I get "US is teh max evil". Sorry, world isn't black and white, and sure change within it doesn't work like you have imagined it do. I just hoped that geeks are better. I guess we humans after all.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Nothing has changed.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
Go quack the nearest denmark... freaking bully scotland?
1st the hearing in Sweden, on sexual harassment. Then one can see what happens. What is interesting now is what happens at the Ecuador Embassy, London.
Who owns the movie rights to this story?
Tinker, Soldier, Spy for real.
Not to be a buzzkill, but it's my understanding that members of the military can also be charged with "communicating with the enemy" if they enter a blacklisted business(businesses can be blacklisted if it is "known" that they are involved in illegal activities, but the police don't have enough evidence to prosecute)
As much as I believe that Manning is a traitor (and should be executed), Assange and wikileaks are NOT in the same arena. Basically, Manning is not just an American citizen, but also took an oath. Just to get back at the USA over our military policy towards gays, he released all sorts of document that threaten ALL Americans.
But, Assange/Wikileaks are not us citizens/located in America. Assange has not taken a loyality oath to America. The list goes on and on. There is no reason to list either of them as the enemies. At worse, Assange/wikileaks are serving as a fence of stolen info.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The Brits are negotiating with the Ecuadoreans tomorrow.
If you look up stuff on the Internet or watch mainstream media and choose to remember the stories then you get a pretty clear picture of "Blood for Oil" and "Too big to fail" stories. You balance that out with candidates saying money for influence and the massive disproportion in wealth in the US and it paints a grim picture.
A few people with a disgusting amount of money make decisions that impact the rest of the world and none of them are elected.
The bad part is that we know all this already and no doubt when troops hit the ground in Iran, Somalia, etc, we will continue to rage on the Internet while ours sons go and kill someone else's sons......Wikileaks rocks but unless we are using the information at our disposal for change then what's the point?
How does the fact that an prosecutor was considering charging Manning with "communicating with the enemy" in some pre-trial notes turn into "US designates Assange an enemy of the state"?
I'm in the army but I also host an alias on my domain that points to wikileaks' site and a 301 redirect as well.
I've also got wikileaks' facebook page liked.
Julian Assange is a hero, and eventually will be seen at large as one. Exactly like Daniel Ellsberg was at first hated, condemned for the "pentagon papers" leak during Vietnam, but is now seen as a hero.
come and track my ip and figure out who I am Uncle Sam
Shoot that messenger! Don't fix the problem. Don't change your ways. Kill innocents. Declare 'Really Free Speech' and portions of the US constitution that is supposed to guarantee that speech as enemies of the state. Oh wait! Old Julien isn't American. The constitution doesn't apply! On one hand that solves the problem, and on the other, it means the constitution isn't fit for export. So much for telling other countries how to behave. There *must* be some doublespeak to get around this... In the meantime, *shoot the messenger*!!!
This decision puts me square on the same side as the "terrorists" I guess. I would consider any country that would consider Assange a military target an enemy. I guess I better get my "Daeth to America" t-shirt on.
prove me wrong
"The ability to delude yourself may be an important survival tool" - Jane Wagner -
Whether or not some people like it, no entity can work and interact with others without knowing some information will be kept secret. This is as true of the USA as it is of Iran, Walmart, and you and I. Bradley Manning stole classified information to which he had been entrusted, then gave it to that Julian @$$ange (I sure hope "ange" means something like "hole" or "wipe" in some language) and Wikileaks. They accepted stolen information (from him & others of course). They had no right to access any of that data, and certainly to not distribute it.
It's not about "freedom of speech" people, and it's not about "truth" or "whistleblowing". It's about acknowledging any entities' need for some secrecy - whether it's a person, a corporation, or a government.
so you'd have a declaration of war and no army paid to fight it right?
ROFL charlie sheen style winning on that constitution of the USA....
There is something rotten in the state of Danish (replace with "American")
--Hamlet
Welcome to Nazi America. (Wonder if Slashdot is next, eh?)
YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
I love the USA, I love your culture, your "yes we can" attitude, I love your technology, freedom laws, etc, etc.
But CHRIST on a hobbling donkey, your country is becoming scarier every year.
Grow the hell up.
China can out number us 10 to 1, but without the ability to project power with a blue water navy and air superiority, who cares? Give them all the guns in the world and if they are still limited to Eastern Asia it is basically meaningless. China will not invade Japan, because the US will get involved. They also will not invade Taiwan for the same reason. This is also why the US will not get involved in the Chinese occupation of Tibet.The tech edge isn't the only edge, they have a LOT of tech. China might be pouring money into its military, but they are probably decades behind the US in military tech and infrastructure and the US isn't standing still. As demonstrated in Kuwait and Iraq, superior numbers and dated tech do not win wars. Besides, China isn't interested in engaging in forign adventures, they have a HUGE population they need to keep happy. China has a tradition of violent insurrections overthrowing governments, and they are quite happy pretending to be 'communists' with a growing, rich middle class.
Also, nobody is scared of the US nuclear arsenal, because the US has made it abundantly clear that it is a deterrent tool. If you want to fight the US, you can do so without fear of nuclear retaliation, provided you don't engage in NBC warfare against them. Simply put, the political fallout over using nukes as anything other than a retaliation weapon would be catastrophic. As powerful as the US is, it cannot act against the will of the rest of the world.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Freedom will not be given to those, who are unwilling to fight for it. The government will take away as much of your freedoms from you, as it can get away with.
MY OTHER COMMENTS
Since Julian Assange has been officially designated "enemy of the United States", it is only fair that the country of Sweden be designated as "lapd***" ... urrr... "the best friend of the United States".
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Most already did before.
But you just keep piling it on!
And the actual US citizens suffer under the hate!
(Now whether they deserve it, depends on whether you think they had any choice to influence it. As somebody who knows political social engineering and neuropsychology, I don’t think they did. Not even remotely. It’s really an unfair game that every non-professional falls for in minutes. Yes, you and me too.)
For the first time, I'm sympathizing with an official enemy of the United Stated of America.
It always seems to me that military (US and others) use to act as "enemy of People"...
...were childish enough to even think Julian actually did rape anyone.
Maybe now you have woken up to see just how corrupt the government is and how they will do anything to get to those they hate. ANYTHING.
The article uncannily reminds me of this Schlock Mercenary comic, about the somewhat fuzzy line between journalists and spies. If the state considers Julian Assange an enemy, and Julian works to the benefit of the general public, does this make the state an enemy of the public ?
Maybe we deserve this world ?
Perhaps you left out Taiwan, Thailand, Singapore, Vietnam, and Philippines with no special love for China in Indonesia either.
It's a long swim, en masse.
China had boats when the west still hit people over the head with rocks...
Tap tap.
Done.
It shows what a fucking joke the Nobel peace prize has become
Please disregard that post. If you didn't; of course the committee can't be expected to be clairvoyant. And there's not much new in the story anyway. Sorry
...friend of democracy. And the implications of that bother the hell out of me.
Apparently nobody on /. has ever served in the US military (not surprisingly). The UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) applies to serving military members. It limits free speech, making it a crime to make derogatory statements about the Commander in Chief. It limits freedom of association, making sodomy and adultery felony offenses subject to punishment at hard labor (cases have been tried as late as a few years ago). So it hardly seems unusual that someone, somewhere in the military heirarchy has invoked article 104D regarding an individual and an organization who has leaked classified military information.
Now tighten your tinfoil hats, this bits hard to comprehend: None of this applies to a civilian. UCMJ 104D is applicable to military members only.
So roll back 408 comments and GTFO.
Oh, and why cannot the original "ememy of the state" document be published? Is it perhaps that it is a memo from some JAG junior officer to another questioning if 104D can be applied? Yeah, but that would make for such less...juicy...news to post on /.
Sheesh.
Again...sheesh.
Too freekin funny Captcha: flagpole
What army? The Stoner Brigade?
If you really are US military, have fun, because the boys and girls in CID are just hankering to mess with you...
CITATION REQUIRED
arsenal the World has ever seen". The us had a lot more nukes locked and loaded during the cold war.
US miltary FORCE EP number 1 :julian assange... (1 guy) :wikileaks...(1 website)
US miltary FORCE EP number 1
lolilol or pathetic
And we wouldn't want a world without military operations, because that would just be terrible. Nothing to kill or die for.
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
What about the tool bag who leaked the info to begin with?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
particularly the military, is clearly the highest crime.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
1) WikiLeaks is an enemy of the United States.
2) WikiLeaks works to foster and encourage openness and transparency.
3) Does the United States consider openness and transparency its enemies?
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
I would post something snarky, but They're listening
Run! It's the drones!
Fixing the problem would be minimizing the amount of people who have access to classified material. But since they tend to over-classify, nobody can work without that classified-access, so there's a huge amount of people who need that access.
The only rational course would be the declassify 90% of what gets classified right now, since it's not really important. And for the rest, you would not have to give 2 Million people access, but maybe only 50'000, so the chance of leaks would be very much lower.
But bureaucracies don't really work like that, since bureaucrats get power over other bureaucrats when classifying things. So everyone classifies and thus ever more people need access to that material... You see where this is going?
"The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
we will crush it.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
So you have to lie about using a condom during sex in Sweden and publish some not particularly interesting documents as you do your NGO driven democracy and public responsibility thing to be labeled as an enemy of the state. What do you have do to get nominated as a fuckbuddy of the Nation?
There is no official PR from the Pentagon, no mention of a credible source and no reason to believe that the "possible" charge of "communicating with the enemy in some future case would be upheld, even by a U.S. military court.
This is just an threat used by people who want to believe that such vaporous talk is actually an effective deterrent against 'bad' behavior. It's in line with the apparent belief that designating certain crimes to be 'hate crimes' and assigning them stiffer penalties with stifle the urges or mediate the behaviors of people who are already inclined toward some direction. It doesn't work.
Texans still murder people, even though the state enforces the death penalty. And U.S. military personnel understand explicitly that they can be thrown in the brig without argument or remedy now that non-state actors have shown just how easy it is to martyr the Constitution.
Come to Texas....
Independent power grid, affordable housing, free Spanish lessons ...
and when things get really bad in the US, the ability to say "peace out bitches"
How is it that since Assange and WikiLeaks, uncovering secret state information is not considered crime anymore by the general public, or so it appears? I understand the call for transparency of governments intends to promote true democracy, as citizens have access to information about how their money and trust are spent by the ruling party, but how is it that the world needed an Assange to show us that?
Also, as a non-US citizen, I can't understand why such compassion for Manning? It's not like he did anything good for the country he was serving on a basis of his own free will, he actually comited one of the worst atrocities possible in the military: treason. Here in Europe during WW2, many nations had problems with those fighting for their own country, and those fighting for the invaders (ie Hitler, etc). The latter were killed and buried even after the war ended, no trials, just military executions, something to me seems way too barbarian. Yet, in Europe, as we keep finding the graves, not everybody condemns the killings. It's like "hey, you know, it's wrong what happened, but they were traitors, who went against us, so.." excuses all over. No trials even as some of the executioners are still alive.
Now here comes Manning, a professional soldier, releases top secret state information, and he is a hero, not a criminal and a traitor? How is that?
Person is k now for trying to acquire US secrets. Person is know for releasing the documents..
SO the military doesn't want it's person dealing with that person.
Wow, that's not scary, so lets toss in al-Qaeda , and maxmum sentences of death.
NOW it's scary.
What this is, is reasonable.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
p.s. see you soon.
I do agree with your point that this is mostly to get future Bradley Manning copy cats who may cooperate in the future with Wikileaks or something similar. However, I do disagree that the US has a problem with Assange. I think that if we could secretly talk with the upper levels of the US government, while they are not at all thrilled with Assange, I suspect that they are resigned to the fact that he is just a journalist of sorts who got the story of a lifetime dumped in his lap and he printed it. The real problem is with Manning.
For many years now, the US has had spies like Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen who got people killed. The US government ended up looking powerless to give them the death penalty when they basically made a deal that in exchange for the government leaving their families alone and not asking any more questions that they would go into explicit detail about what they had done. I think the real issue that the US government doesn't really have a clear cut legal case against Manning. Oh I am sure that he will be convicted of something, but he will probably top out at 20 years behind bars and possibly get 10 or even as few as 5. That is the real issue here. I think that the US government wants to be sure that the next Manning will face the death penalty. Of course some people will not be stopped from spying or turning over secrets because of various reasons, but I have felt for years that until the US actually executes someone for this that they really look impotent and powerless to stop this in the future.
What does it matter if he was democratically elected? Allende threatened to dispossess Chileans, to imprison then in the borders of the country, to draft them as slaves in the army, to create mass starvation by adopting a socialistic economy.
And in the US, we have:
Flamebait much? Sheesh.
Well, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile_under_Allende, take your pick: Nationalizations, land seizure, raising the minimum wage, hyperinflation...
Like all socialist leaders eventually do, Allende would have denied its citizen the right to leave the country. Again, I don't see how the adjective "democratically" changes anything.
Cripes, I can't tell if you're trolling, or just a moron.
Does the name "Gerhard Schröder" mean anything to you? Only he was one of these dreaded "socialists" your talking about, and he basically ran Germany for *seven years* without ever trying to keep everyday German citizens from leaving the country.
Asshat.
so when is wikileaks going to post the key to unlock the massive file dump of all the documents. I am eager to get look through the massive rar file i have
Julian Assange HAS ALWAYS BEEN Emmanuel Goldstein.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
It's one thing to be pretty sure you know Obama is blocking accountability for torture, giving his "look forward not backward" BS and the lack of investigations.
It's another to see diplomatic cables strongarming Spain into dropping their criminal prosecution against Cheney et all.
...and the FBI has no interest in making domestic terrorism a high-profile issue by exaggerating both the intent and abilities of 'terrorists'.
If every domestic terrorist plot foiled by the 'war on terror' had instead been wildly successful, where would we be?
Well, we'd be pretty vulnerable to threats like these from the Heritage Foundation paper listed above:
"He was arrested for conspiring to use blowtorches to collapse the Brooklyn Bridge"
"His plans, according to authorities, were to kill President Bush and then establish an al-Qaeda cell in
the United States, with himself as the head."
"The JIS allegedly planned to finance its operations by robbing gas stations."
"Derrick Shareef was arrested on charges of planning to set off hand grenades in a shopping mall outside Chicago."
"Four men plotted to blow up “aviation fuel tanks and pipelines at the John F. Kennedy International Airport” in New York City. They believed that such an attack would cause “greater destruction than in the Sept. 11 attacks.” Authorities stated that the attack “could have caused significant financial and psychological damage, but not major loss of life.""
"Hassan Abujihaad, a former U.S. Navy sailor from Phoenix, Arizona, was convicted of supporting terrorism and disclosing classified information"
Setting aside the dubious competence and unbalanced mental state of the overwhelming majority of plotters, total success above and beyond what a reasonable person would expect given the actual capabilities of these groups would have resulted in negligible damage to society as a whole-- a couple planes bombed and a smattering of minor bombings if everything went perfectly for these disgruntled losers who are already unbalanced enough to be terrorists.
Surprisingly enough, most of these plots were 'revealed' by paid informants with a major financial stake in exhorting their idiot co-conspirators to plan something outrageous enough to warrant FBI attention and major payouts to the informants.
Modern democracies with strong civil society and no significant domestic conflict are inherently resistant to fringe nutbars-- all the 'war on terror' is getting for us is foreign oppression, dramatic restrictions on our own civil liberties, balooning 'security' spending and media scare tactics.
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
Distinction without a difference.
Do did Daniel Ellsberg - of a much higher level of classification. So do the NYTimes and WaPo on a regular basis. But more to the point....so does the Obama Administration, when it's done to puff up Obama's image as much as a Mission Accomplished banner. You know, like simultaneously bragging about the effectiveness of the drone program and denying it exists because "it's classified".
It's easier for the U.S. to get people extradited from Sweden than from the U.K. For one, the U.K. has a problem with the death penalty (something Assange could be charged with), whereas Sweden has let people be kidnapped so they could be tortured.
Furthermore, people think that Sweden is some liberal utopia because they have free health care and education. But their justice system doesn't operate by "guilty until proven innocent". They have Star Chambers and can keep suspects incommunicado for extended lengths of time.
Sure it is. But for one, just because something is commonplace doesn't mean it's okay (see: slavery), and for another, it's not what Obama promised when he was running for office in 2008, when he vowed to protect whistleblowers.
Whoosh. Yes, it's all about Julian, rather than the massive amounts of corruption revealed by Julian, WikiLeaks, and allegedly, by Bradley Manning. This is not an accident.
Obvious red herring is obvious. This is the same misdirection perfected by the Bushies, who tried to derail any conversation about their incompetence or criminality by talking about what a very very bad person Saddam was and how the world is a better place now that he's gone.
Except: the American taxpayer wasn't funding Saddam (after the Iran-Iraq war at least) anymore than they are supporting Putin in Russia. The American taxpayer has been supporting torture and illegal wars whether they like it or not.
Not closed - but you find yourself closed off from the must-have "access" if you don't play ball. Or you might find yourself on a terror watch list or dealing petty harassment at the border, or some errant missile strikes if you are Al Jazeera.
They're throwing out centuries of diplomatic policy by threatening to raid the Ecuadorian embassy or stop any diplomatic vehicle leaving it.
What part of the Constitution authorizes the military to label anyone anything?
....copyrighted. Sick 'em, Buena Vista Pictures!
Although, I have to wonder what our response would be if this was the early 1940s, the US was fighting Germany and Japan, and a character named 'Assange' released a bunch of documents revealing the corruption, criminality and false flag operations from Axis powers, only for Assange to face persecution from those same Axis powers.
for the short version...
Assange IS an enemy of the United States. His words and deeds show that.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
It's military detention without accusation or trial, and it was signed into law by Obama at the end of last year.
Nice idea. No more wars. Unfortunately that wont happen until there are no more humans.
I often notice they seem to be going out of their way to go after this guy. Thats not in itself wrong, (though the "essentially a terrorist" part is wrong.) because thats kinda a big crime. But what gets to me, is that they do so much to get this guy...while completely ignoring the problems that were revealed in the leaks.
1) If you care so much for the alleged victims of Assange - what do you have to say about Obama continuing the policy of giving Mubarak billions in aid, when Egypt was well known for using rape as a torture device?
Going so far as to use fucking dogs specially trained to sodomize prisoners?
2) If the Ecuadorian government is scum for harboring Assange, what do you have to say about the U.S. government protecting the former president of Bolivia, who is wanted in his own country for ordering hundreds of civilian deaths?
Don't bother complaining that this is an attempt at deflection, to say that the U.S. is more guilty so Assange must be left aloooone. If you are outraged by alleged rape in Sweden, you must be proportionally outraged by a country routinely using rape as a torture device - and those who financed the government of said country. If you are demanding that Ecuador hand over Assange so he can face charges in Sweden, you must be proportionally upset that the U.S. is harboring a mass murderer. But since that's not the case.....
3) Who's paying you, Rei? Is it the State Department? CIA? Who's signing your checks to pay you to obsess over Assange and attack anyone who points out the holes in the case or the obvious vendetta from western powers?
Does this mean we can get in trouble for showing support? What the hell is going on?
Ha. Assange is a terrorist now. You see people, this is what happens when you don't stand up to the government. They're trying to shut him up so that people don't get suspicious. See you in the labor camps!
America. Love it or get killed as a terrorist.
They almost got that right. It should read the US Military is the enemy of the state.
I'm old, not dead. Well that's my 2 cents worth, your mileage may vary. I say what I think, not what you want to hear.
"The State" are
the enemy of We The People...
Wait... does this make Ecuador a state sponsor of terrorism now? Is the Ecuadoran embassy in London now fair game for a cruise missile strike???
In Reason We Trust
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regime Obama; Romney, Cameron; Bankers, Fed, Regime regime regime. Yes that is right and Hillary Clinton, Condi Rice, Bush, Colin Powell, House of representatives operate a regime. Donald Rummy, Col Oliver North.... are you getting the picture now?
All cows eat grass!
As a just posted in The Register (I think).
Enemy is their definition for European, or those they have not been able to f..k up the arse YET (you know their thinking, if you don't succeed at first...). It is in opposition to sheep. But if he has fought them with their own weapons I'd say he is not an European nor sheep, he is a United States citizen, where they don't care about history, culture, languages nor future (except for the one that will destroy us all, of course).
Let me get this right. The US military declared JA as an
enemy of the state. Not the executive branch, not the congress,
not the courts (big pause.....) the military.
What and how did they garner the authority to make this declaration?
What bounds are there to this authority?
What if ...... the mind boggles..
We just had a coup d'etat and CCN, FoX, ABC, BBC etc.
did not notice.
I long ago designated the US as "an enemy of common sense".
I'm shocked, shocked, to see it's nothing but a schtick to you. Well, not that shocked.
Yes, reality. Where Obama covered up contractor rape, client state rape, and bacha bazi rape. The reality that you don't care about, for some reason.
As if Polanski has ever been out of the news. But yes that's the first question on the minds of actual advocates for rape victims: "is it newsworthy"? So, naturally, if the media forgot about Assange with the presidential election, you'd stop caring about Assange, right?
Right?
Thought so.