See why I mean?
I dunno what's going on.
@hawkeye10,
Quote:Where could he get access to the web? Iran? North Korea? IDK, they have been chased off of two servers in one week by government pressure. It is not clear to many they they will be welcome in any port.
Good luck in getting him off the web as there must be a few hundred thousands people on the web who will begin to mirror his site if need be.
You would need to shut down the internet to stop this.
@msolga,
Good to see Ellsberg hasn't developed any rationality over the years
@msolga,
A week or so from now he'll drop out of the news, and will then have to begin work on the next phase of building the heroic legend of Julian Assange.
Fear not, he'll surface again.
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:Fear not, he'll surface again.
Unless he is taken out like a wolf from a helicopter as Palin had suggested.
@Finn dAbuzz,
Good to see that you're still the same ole Finn, providing cover for war criminals.
How can a human sink so low, Finn, as to want to make excuses for war crimes and war criminals?
@msolga,
It's all over facebook now and the followers who will boycott Amazon is huge!
As I said in the beginning of this thread, Julian Assagne is a modern "Robin Hood" and he's got all the sympathies of the people around the world (sans many Americans of course).
@CalamityJane,
We better wait and see what else comes out before we decide on that Cal. The story is that he is in England, close to London, and the cops know where. There are some complications it seems.
@spendius,
So go and drive up there, spendius and hide him in your house, for crying out loud. Do something for society!!!
@CalamityJane,
What?? In this weather. Getting to the pub is sufficient a trial. We are an isle of white.
Here is a good analysis regarding the latest Wiki leaks.
The WikiLeaks Cables And U.S. Foreign Policy
Since last weekend, the international organization WikiLeaks has been releasing a trove of a quarter-million confidential American diplomatic cables, some dating back as early as 1979. This is the third such document release by the organization. The first, in July, contained 77,000 documents relating to over seven years of the U.S.-led coalition's war in Afghanistan. The second, in October, contained some 390,000 documents from the Iraq war. The latest documents cover a broad range of issues, from U.S. attempts to find host countries for Guantanamo detainees, to U.S. officials' concern over both Afghan and Pakistani allies' commitment and ability to fight extremism, as well as very candid appraisals of the leaders of U.S. allies such as France, Russia, Canada, and Turkey. Commenting on Monday, Secretary of State Clinton called the release of documents "not just an attack on America's foreign policy interests ," but "an attack on the international community -- the alliances and partnerships, the conversations and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity." However, British historian Timothy Garton Ash writes, "[M]y personal opinion of the State Department has gone up several notches," noting that the analysis found in the cables "is often first rate."
REVELATIONS AND MEDIA NARRATIVES : Among the revelations of documents is that the U.S. is more deeply involved in Pakistan and Yemen than has been previously publicly acknowledged, with the leadership of both countries interested in concealing that extent of U.S. intervention. The New York Times also reported on one cable that indicated that Iran had "obtained a cache of advanced missiles, based on a Russian design" from North Korea. A later Washington Post story, however, raised questions, noting the lack of evidence for the missile transfer. The University of Kentucky's Robert Farley commented that the Post's "degree of doubt...was utterly absent in the New York Times coverage of the same cable, which failed to even note Russian objections" to the claims. In a letter to readers, New York Times executive editor Bill Keller explained the decision to cover the documents, writing "The Times believes that the documents serve an important public interest, illuminating the goals, successes, compromises and frustrations of American diplomacy in a way that other accounts cannot match. ... As daunting as it is to publish such material over official objections, it would be presumptuous to conclude that Americans have no right to know what is being done in their name."
ARAB LEADERS AND IRAN : One of the most written about stories regarded comments by Arab leaders urging aggressive U.S. action against Iran, such as the King of Saudi Arabia urging the U.S. to "cut the head off the snake." But while Arab leaders are clearly concerned about Iran, as Marc Lynch writes, "there's also plenty of evidence of their reluctance to get involved in military action." In February, the office director of Kuwait's Foreign Ministry is quoted as saying that "Kuwaitis are equally concerned about military pre-emption, which they believe would not prove decisive and would lead Iran to lash out at US interests in the Gulf." An Omani military official advocated "a non-military solution as the best option for the U.S." The Saudi Foreign Ministry also "strongly advised against taking military action to neutralize Iran's program." The Washington Post's Glen Kessler also wrote that, now that "Arab angst about Iran's nuclear ambitions has been exposed," it might give "the United States greater leverage in international talks scheduled for next week." The Center for American Progress' Matt Duss wrote that the cables provide an important view of the region's security -- and Iran's increased influence -- in the wake of the Bush Doctrine.
A CLOSE LOOK AT U.S. DIPLOMACY : Asked by TIME magazine what his "moral calculus" was to justify publishing the leaks, WikiLeaks' Julian Assange insisted that his website was "an organization that tries to make the world more civil and act against abusive organizations that are pushing it in the opposite direction." Commenting on the implications of WikiLeaks for the business of journalism, Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Eric Alterman writes, WikiLeaks' "target is not any U.S. policy or even the U.S. government. It is secrecy itself." As to how the cables reflect upon the work of U.S. diplomacy, Fareed Zakaria pointed out that, unlike with the Vietnam-era Pentagon Papers, the WikiLeaks cables "show Washington pursuing privately pretty much the policies it has articulated publicly. Whether on Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan or North Korea, the cables confirm what we know to be U.S. foreign policy. And often this foreign policy is concerned with broader regional security, not narrow American interests."
-- americanprogressaction.org
Wikileaks, the only true form of journalism left...
@Ceili,
Yes--but is "true journalism" a good thing?
Could you define the term?
In other news, the sexual assault charge is for having unprotected sex and refusing to get tested for STDs....
Arrest Warrant for "Sex Crimes" Against Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange Is for "Sex Without a Condom", NOT Non-Consensual Rape Using Force
Quote:...
Borgstrom said that specific details about the the allegations had not yet appeared in Swedish media. But he acknowledged that the principal concern the women had about Assange’s behavior—which they reported to police in person—related to his lack of interest in using condoms and his refusal to undergo testing, at the women’s request, for sexually transmitted disease. A detailed, chronological account of the women’s alleged encounters with Assange—which in both cases began with consensual sexual contact but later included what the women claimed was nonconsensual sex, in which Assange didn’t use a condom—was published on Tuesday by The Guardian; a Declassified item included a more explicit reference than The Guardian to Assange’s declining to submit to medical tests.
...
The consent of both women to sex with Assange has been confirmed by prosecutors.
...
Stephens, told AOL News today that Swedish prosecutors told him that Assange is wanted not for allegations of rape, as previously reported, but for something called "sex by surprise," which he said involves a fine of 5,000 kronor or about $715.
***
"We don't even know what 'sex by surprise' even means, and they haven't told us," Stephens said, just hours after Sweden's Supreme Court rejected Assange's bid to prevent an arrest order from being issued against him on allegations of sex crimes.
"Whatever 'sex by surprise' is, it's only a offense in Sweden -- not in the U.K. or the U.S. or even Ibiza," Stephens said. "I feel as if I'm in a surreal Swedish movie being threatened by bizarre trolls. The prosecutor has not asked to see Julian, never asked to interview him, and he hasn't been charged with anything. He's been told he's wanted for questioning, but he doesn't know the nature of the allegations against him."
...
If John Pilger and Geoffrey Robinson are supporting Assange then I am too.
@spendius,
Without bias or political overtures...
@DrewDad,
This is all eerily reminiscent of the efforts to destroy Scott Ritter in 2002 when he turned out to be right about WMD and wouldn't shut up about it.
Cycloptichorn
@Ceili,
Where on earth can you find that?
)
