57
   

WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

 
 
Builder
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 04:08 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
This is an open and shut case no matter how the defense try to turn this into a three ring circus.



Exactly, Bill.

Despite repeated assurances of openness and accountability from our elected leaders, they continue to lie, cheat and steal behind our backs, and cry like babies when exposed for doing it.

Hi time they got caught out.

BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 05:35 am
@Builder,
Quote:
Despite repeated assurances of openness and accountability from our elected leaders, they continue to lie, cheat and steal behind our backs, and cry like babies when exposed for doing it.



Sorry but the young man betrayed his oath and broke the law and that what the case is about not a hate our leaders for acting like every other government in the history of the human race had done and in fact must act.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 05:40 am
@BillRM,
Yeah but when they get a steam shovel to crack a nut it's impossible to avoid thinking that something else is going on.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 07:28 am
Quote:
Julian Assange says he's launching TV chat show
(Associated Press, January 24, 2012)

LONDON — You've read his leaks. Now watch his show.

International secret-buster Julian Assange says he's launching his very own television series. The guests haven't been disclosed, but the 40-year-old Australian has promised to give viewers more of what he's been supplying for years: Controversy.

WikiLeaks said in a statement late Monday that the show is intended to "draw together controversial voices from across the political spectrum — iconoclasts, visionaries and power insiders — each to offer a window on the world tomorrow."

How the show will be produced and who will carry it remain open questions.

WikiLeaks referred queries about the series to the hitherto obscure Quick Roll Productions, whose website appears to have been created only about two weeks ago.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 08:27 am
@spendius,
Quote:
Yeah but when they get a steam shovel to crack a nut it's impossible to avoid thinking that something else is going on.


The shovel is the normal working of the military justice system in dealing with a traitor/oath breaker and nothing else no matter how you and others try to paint it.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 05:16 pm
@BillRM,
Bill, it is very interesting to observe your rigid acceptance of military "rules" when it applies to the Bradley Manning case (I assume due to patriotism) , while at the same time constantly arguing the law is an ass (in regard to your pet "causes") on other A2K threads. So, from your perspective, military rules are set in cement, and never to be questioned, while civil laws can be?

There are quite a few real concerns about the conduct of the Bradley Manning hearing, not least that the prosecution lawyer (a state department employee whose employer is pursuing a separate investigation into Wikileaks ) allowed only two witnesses for the defence, while allowing all military witnesses.

Of most concern to me is the charge with holds the most serious consequences .....that of "aiding the enemy".
Nowhere in the state department's previous public statement's has any evidence of this been been provided, in fact the state department's earlier assessment declared that Bradley Manning's actions were not a threat to national security at all! How can it possibly be considered reasonable that he should stand trial for an offense that the prosecution cannot (or is not even required to?) provide evidence for?

Quote:
....The recommendations, which now go before the Special Court Martial Convening Authority, include the most serious charge of “aiding the enemy.” Legal observers who followed the Article 32 proceedings noted that military prosecutors never provided evidence of how these materials supposedly harmed national security.

“These charges contradict the administration’s own impact assessments which showed that these WikiLeaks revelations posed no threat to our national security” said Kevin Zeese, a legal adviser to the Bradley Manning Support Network. “But since the Obama administration appears dead set on railroading Bradley Manning through their show trial, we can’t expect them to allow such critical evidence or testimony to be considered. This evidence could have shown that these materials were improperly classified.”


http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/military-refers-all-charges-against-bradley-manning-to-court-martial

So far I have seen no information in the media (nor in this discussion) about how Bradley Manning's actions actually aided the enemy. In fact it is not even clear who this "enemy", exactly!
Who or what is this "enemy" and how exactly was it aided by the the Wikileaks? Surely the prosecution should be required make that clear?

(Nor, btw, has there been any evidence provided of the resultant harm/deaths of those who confided in US ambassadors abroad as a result of Wikileaks, despite constant claims to the contrary on this thread & elsewhere. Severe embarrassment of the US administration at its failure to protect their sources with appropriate security of the cables seems much closer to the mark to me.)

-
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 05:44 pm
@msolga,
Quote:
while at the same time constantly arguing the law is an ass (in regard to your pet "causes") on other A2K threads.


Sorry but he was not a minor and he told an oath repeat an oath and sign papers concerning his responsibility in dealing with classified materials so there is not one bit of unfairness in this case in prosecuting him for his misdeeds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No one can said with a straight face that there is not more then enough evidences to move this matter along in the military justice system even if his lawyers was end stop from turning this into some kind of a political circus instead of a simple and straight forward military justice matter.
msolga
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 09:05 pm
@BillRM,
No one said he was a minor.
Thanks for your considered response. Wink
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 06:26 am
@msolga,
msolga wrote:
Severe embarrassment of the US administration at its failure to protect their sources with appropriate security of the cables seems much closer to the mark to me.


The U.S. attempted to protect their sources by labeling the documents as "classified." It was Manning who violated security.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 06:33 am
@wandeljw,
But did the "classified." category make those documents any more secure on online, wandel? To anyone who was seriously interested in the information they obtained?

I seriously doubt it.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 07:08 am
@msolga,
Quote:
No one said he was a minor.


No you and others did not say he was a minor just not bearing any damn responsibility for his own actions as in it is every one else fault on the damn planet that he betrayed his country.

0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 10:11 am
Quote:
Wikileaks' Jullian Assange to host Russian TV show
(United Press International, January 25, 2012)

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will host a 10-part political discussion program on Russian television in March, the channel Russia Today said Wednesday.

Each half-hour installment of "The World tomorrow" will feature guests being interviewed by Assange, the Russian news agency RIA Novosti reported.

The channel said guests will include politicians and revolutionaries, people that in the host's opinion will form tomorrow's agenda.

More than 600 million viewers are expected to watch the new show.

"We are proud and delighted that our channel will premier Julian Assange's project because the RT channel has gained a worldwide audience that's disappointed by the mainstream," said RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan.

"The World Tomorrow" will be filmed in England where Assange is under house arrest. He is fighting an extradition request from Sweden to face charges of sexually abusing two women.

Assange is scheduled to appeal the extradition order in Britain's Supreme Court Feb. 1.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 04:11 pm
Quote:
The Breathtaking Hypocrisy of Julian Assange, Kremlin Pawn
(Jeff Bercovici, Forbes.com, January 25, 2012)

How foolish of me it was to question whether Wikileaks founder Julian Assange really had a deal to distribute his new talk show to hundreds of millions of viewers. It turns out he does: with Russia Today, the English-language news network launched by the Russian government to massage its international image.

That’s right: Assange, self-styled foe of government secrets and conspiracies of the powerful, is going to be a star on a TV network backed by the Kremlin. The same Kremlin that has done suspiciously little to investigate or prevent the killings and beatings of journalists that have plagued Russia for more than a decade. The same Kremlin accused of blatant fraud in December’s parliamentary elections. The same Kremlin whose control of the country’s broadcast media allowed it to suppress coverage of the massive protests mounted in response to that fraud. The same Kremlin whose embrace of corruption led to Russia being named “the world’s most corrupt major economy” by Transparency International in 2011.

And so on. That Kremlin is Julian Assange’s new patron. The same Julian Assange who accused President Obama of putting “a chill across investigative journalism” by prosecuting Army leaker Bradley Manning.

Actually, though, maybe it makes sense. After all, Assange has said “it’s an international disgrace that so few western journalists have been killed in the course of duty, or have been arrested in the course of duty.” Russian journalists certainly aren’t disgraceful in that regard: They’ve been dying by the dozens, and their murders are seldom solved: Only three of the 33 murders of journalists committed in Russia since 1993 have been solved, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

In November 2010, in response to reports that Wikileaks was on the verge of releasing documents that would incriminate powerful Russian politicians and companies, Assange told my colleague Andy Greenberg that “we have material on many business and governments, including in Russia.” As is frequently the case with Assange, no such documents have ever emerged. Anyone want to bet on the chances that’ll ever happen now?
Thomas
 
  3  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 05:54 pm
@wandeljw,
wandeljw, quoting Forbes, wrote:
The Breathtaking Hypocrisy of Julian Assange, Kremlin Pawn

So what? I never appreciated Julian Assange for being a nice guy. I appreciated him, and still do appreciate him, for exposing crimes and propaganda from both my old country and my new. So even if everything in this Forbes article is true, it doesn't matter to me because it misses the issue. The issue is not whether Assange is a saint---he is not---but whether the governments of the world are proven murderers and liars---which they are. I will be eternally grateful to Assange for exposing that.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 06:30 pm
@Thomas,
One of the points of the Forbes writer was that revelations about the Kremlin, previously promised by Assange, will now not be forthcoming.
Thomas
 
  3  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 06:36 pm
@wandeljw,
If that is turns out to be true, the I will be slightly less grateful to Assange. But he will still have done infinitely better work on this topic than Forbes has, which has done nada.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 07:11 pm
@wandeljw,
This guy, like all Americans, really should not be throwing stones. Y'all pretty much have the market cornered on 'hypocrisy'.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  2  
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2012 07:22 am
@wandeljw,
Quote:
One of the points of the Forbes writer was that revelations about the Kremlin, previously promised by Assange, will now not be forthcoming.

I'd be interested in how the writer from Forbes can know that for sure.
Probably on Daniel Domscheit-Berg's say so.

Forbes, btw, has run a pretty relentless anti-Wikileaks/pro OpenLeaks campaign for some time. OpenLeaks is the supposedly squeaky clean alternative to Wikileaks. To be run by Daniel Domscheit-Berg, who defected from Wikileaks with a stash of unreleased cables (causing quite a few problems for Wikileaks as you'll recall) has been heavily promoted by Forbes, for some reason. He has given a number of exclusive interviews to the magazine. The general tone being Daniel Domscheit-Berg = good, Julian Assange = bad.
Interestingly, since the announcement of the OpenLeaks site (via Forbes) nothing much has occurred in the 12 months since. Personally I wouldn't trust this guy as far as I could kick him! Wink


http://search.forbes.com/search/find?tab=searchtabgeneraldark&MT=Daniel+Domscheit-Berg

wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2012 09:14 am
@msolga,
I guess that some reporters react badly to Assange's personality.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jan, 2012 10:37 am
@wandeljw,
In December 2010 when Assange was in a British prison, an American comedy show pretended that their broadcast had been hacked into by Assange himself. The actor portraying Assange spoke: "Hello, again. It's me, Julian Assange. I've taken over your airwaves, inside a British prison. How did I get a camera into a British prison? Maybe you weren't listening: I'm Julian Assange."
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 01:58:10