Wiki-Leaks / Assange
So, is Julian Assange a modern day Ellsberg, or the biggest threat to the world since the Rosenbergs? Saint or sinner? Hero, or self-aggrandizing douche-nozzle?
gogogogo . . .
gogogogo . . .
Comments
I'm not one for conspiracy theories but I do find it a fairly odd coincidence that the person most hated by the majority Western politican's suddenly has some serious legal accusations leveled his way. Unless my info is incorrect, He gets accused of rape by two different women in Sweden during a short period of time after a never having an incident remotely this grave his entire life. Just sayin'.
I would not call him a hero or anything that noble but I have to admit that I'm loving watching many officials try and squirm their way out of reports that were lacking of any real substance and were nothing but bitchy and petty. Good times... good times.
Sinner - the Swedish charges, although it is somewhat mistranslated as "rape". I have seen it described elsewhere as unprotected sex (ie he did not tell them he was not using a condom).
Saint - information is power. The more the ordinary citizen knows, the better. Some of these leaks actually make our governments look good.
Sinner - in certain instances the leaks have placed real people in jeopardy, possibly of their lives
Sinner - you do not defend criminal charges against you by threatening to release damaging information (ie let me go or I will reveal some super-secret info. you do not want getting out).
I hope Assange goes through the legal process, with whatever result that brings. I also hope he is not extradited to the US, because that would be total BS. LEt the US gov't prosecute the guy they ahve in custody who sent all that info to Wiki-leaks in the first place. Or, let them put the NY Times on the stand right next to Assange.
There is no 'right to know'
something like that the police report is online i believe.....the initial one....
there is a different type of law out there and a different type of court system with a different type of jail.......he broke their laws.....and the states already labeled him a terrorist therefore he's punishable by hanging or torture in Guantanamo. He has no haven in any country, and the US will take him if they choose.
at this point they have frozen his known assets and are likely raiding his homes, and bunker searching for forensic evidence as to where his servers and such are....multiple searches in multiple countries as we speak, multiple arrests.....
i don't think he's our saviour but i think he's our only valid defense....i believe we are in trouble.
i also wonder if this really caught him by surprise he says he has files that will auto leak if anything happens to him.....no doubt he set a powerful bomb in place before he turned himself over, the most brilliant minds in the world don't just give in without a plan....
no doubt the biggest weapon he has is that the US doesn't know what he has......either way though he maybe have the info to start www3, he may have 9/11 proof....
also like to comment on the power of one small idea....an anonymous drop box...Milo im sure you agree the world needs an anonymous drop box the posts the messages to the world for all to read.....that sir is the beginning to real democracy
The criminals are the people passing the stuff to Wiki-Leaks. Assange is only liable to charge if he knowingly publishes material in contravention of a particular Nations laws. And then, only if he can be extradited to that country.
As for any "super-secret", devastating material he may have squirrelled away, I doubt it. That is what I find most execrable about him and his site. If you want to be a jounalist, fine. but a journalist publishes what he/she knows to be fact. A journalist does not hold back information and say, "I'll hold onto this if you let me slide on these charges, otherwise I'll publish it all." That is extortion.
As has been said, most of what has leaked is gossip, with a few items classified "secret" thrown in. To let you know how truly mundane even that stuff is, I had a "secret" clearance when I was in the Reserves. IT may sound cool, but it doesn't mean much.
If this is the best he's got, then I predict that five years from now, Assange will be a question on Jeopardy. The overreaction by the US gov't is exactly what he wants.
K I think what you're saying here is if he does something and its against the law in any country, he is to be shipped to that country and tried under their system.
i hope your doubt is justified, your lack of faith in government intelligence ability gives hope. And he is not the journalist, he has a journalists team that explains the leak and posts the explanation with the evidence....they spend time sourcing it and time the release so people don't get killed over it
i agree its what he wants i don't agree he will fade to a jeopardy question that fast. the American government could never foresee this kinda of threat, they now know they can't keep up with the internet and brilliant minds....
I believe the man is a genius and is inherently good, he my have been a pig with the ladies but i doubt that anyways, besides personal life is personal life.....but government is to be public...... side note Assange leaked Palins email account but she was using it to hide government stuff....
Not quite. If he breaks a law in country "A", and is in custody in country "B", country "A" can request extradition. It is then up to country "B" to decide, usually based on treaty agreements, etc. England has extradition treaties with the USA, but may decide that Assange's "crimes" do not meet the standard for extradition. IMO, Canada was wrong to extradite Emery.
Doubt his people spend much time sourcing stuff. As for endangering people, the Yemeni National who was helping US forces locate and destroy terrorist camps may disagree, if he still has his head.
Assange is not a "threat" per se. He is more like the drunk Uncle at the family dinner who starts spouting off about "the Joos and the N*****s" . . . he's annoying, and makes things uncomfortable for a while, but that is about it.
And government is to be held to account. It is not meant to be wide open in all it's aspects. It could not functuion properly if that were the case.
there's got to be a better way
Aussie Pm, says he obviously broke American law, and they are searching to find Auzzie laws he broke....
When you discover it, let the rest of us know, okay?
Seriously, it's like the Saudis and their unspoken agreements with the Israelis re: mutual enemies. The Saudis cannot be seen to be cooperating with Israel. But, if someone "happens" to turn off Saudi air defence radar as Israeli warplanes are heading into Saudi airspace on their way to knock out Iraq's nuclear reactor, well accidents happen don't they? And, if someone today were to suggest the same thing today viz. Iran, well qu'elle surprise. But they cannot acknowledge same, regardless of whether it is good for the region or not.
this is easy, i just was pretending....
de-militarize canada....
also we have to fully admit that government the way it is can only be corrupt....and as citizens we have to admit there is no democracy....we are given a choice but not taught how to use it, its a false sense
lastly we need to teach true intelligence not content such as history or math, but how to learn it, how to question it, .
True intelligence becomes debatable but the debate is far better than what we have now.
oh and we need to legalize marijuana it is crucial which is why I believe the states wanted emery so bad and why the Canadian government is making the laws harsher.
So true intelligence, true democracy and legalizing maijuana are all kinda lumped together? lol...
marc emery
Naivety...... Oh to be so....
which part
So, you are an idiot. Thanks for clearing that up . . .
both...
dont' mind the post but more interested in the debate. The only reason we have militaries is because we (the world) have militaries, the only reason we fight war is to stop war.
minimum mandatory sentences have been shown to increase drug crime. Did we vote these in, that would be stupid on our part, either ours our theirs its stupidity. I'd like to think the people are smarter than to vote in laws the create crime....therefore I'm suggesting its likely that we don't actually have any control over our own laws.
i don't quite know what your saying but are you suggesting MJ should be illegal?
The military exists, primarily, to kill people and break things. They do so at the direct command of our government (us), in order to protect our National interests. They also go abroad to promote the keeping of international treaties (peacekeeping), and to monitor same. Thirdly, our military acts in a rapid deployment capacity to relieve suffering caused by natural disaster in some of the poorest nations on this planet.
This is what you would do away with? I'll say it again, you're an idiot. And a horribly naive one, too.
Circular arguments are not debate, they are mental masturbation. Stop it or you'll go blind.
See bolded. Short answer is "yes". We, after all, elected the politicians who brought forth said legislation. We can vote in governments that would repeal them if we chose to do so.
I didn't understand this but are you suggesting war can stop war....
I would like to do away with number 1.
I don't believe 'we' are the government at all but that a difference of opinion no need to debate we are clear on that difference
Shouldn't we (this makes truthers uncofortable) switch to only having global interests see ourselves as a whole, not that all parts are 'good' but we are all of the same origin. The national lines are false and create us vs. them....really we are all 'us'. the distinction is the cause of war.
Peacekeeping seems to be mild war like activity or aggressive peace....i don't know much about it, glad to hear about it from a military perspective though.
I would like to keep the last one, but don't think it needs to be a military to keep it going.
well the people I know do not have the knowledge to back up your side and views so its nice to hear valid points that i wouldn't think of
this assumes we have intelligence to make a free choice. the choice is there but if we are in fact un-intelligent its not a real choice...
a seperate thread on what real intellectual is would be interesting to me after
I'm curious, Milo on how breaking a law internationally or on the web pertains to certain national laws around the world, you mentioned it a little but do you know more...i don't know about it....