WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

it would not be the least bit surprising to find out that injustice allowed to exist because it targets those who the majority want to target (those men who offend women sexually) to be used by the state to target those it wants to get for completely different reasons. That is the damnedest thing about injustice, once we allow it we can not control whom it is used upon.

Yes, in 1938 Hitler was named "Man of the Year" by Time magazine,
but apparently Julian Assange must be much worse to be removed by
Time Magazine after he's received the most votes.

And to think that Obama was not only "Man of the Year", he also
received the Nobel "PEACE" price. Little did we know that he's part of
the witch hunt, did we?

Not that I've been able to track down, JTT.
You're finding Mr John Pilger's Oz accent heavy going?
Ask me for a translation if required.

(btw, he's a fantastic journalist, very good value, in my opinion.
I've been following his writings for years now. And not just about Oz politics, by any means.
Of course, he's been known to get establishment nickers in a knot! )

Hinge, I got it from Wikileaks on facebook - here is a screen shot

Sorry, osso.
Read my response to JTT.
It's pretty easy to access from the link, though, if you're interested.

Here are the nominations for "Man of the Year" from Time magazine - Julian Assange is removed

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,1972075,00.html

Hinge - this news is only about 1 hour old, but he's removed, trust me!

I don't have the right plug in and I'm plugin in wary.
If there is text, I'll read.

No. His name has not been removed and he is 73K or so ahead of Erdogen. Lady Gaga trails.

You are right, johnboy!
If you look on google for the "Person of the Year" Poll, Assange is not in there,
but if you go to time magazine online and click below on the poll, Assange is
there. He's got the most votes, and I hope it will mean anything in the selection
of "person of the year".

No, I tried it twice.

Weird CJ

Here's the link that he appears on:
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,2028734,00.html

What the heck is going on - the url makes me think it's a cms driven web site. Are you directed to different links depending on your entry point, or geographic location?

When I go to Time's home page http://www.time.com/

And click on
I get a picture of Assange, if I then click view all I see all the nominees (including Assange) and if I click on Poll Results I see Assange at the top of the list.

What's going on.

Ok, I clicked on your link, it worked.

Why shouldn't any government respond to its citizens' legitimate concerns? In democracies our elected governments are supposed to represent us, not ignore our concerns or act like our bosses. Surely?

The point though, Finn, is that our (Oz) prime minister & our attorney-general have been actively supporting US concerns & interests at the expense of an Australian citizen's rights & (possible) safety.

Julia Gillard has said publicly that Julian Assange has acted "illegally", but can supply no evidence that he's broken any Australian laws when questioned about this allegation by the media.
The attorney-general has said that Julian Assange is "not welcome" to return to Australia & has suggested that he might have his passport cancelled & citizenshipship revoked. (He's back-tracked on this since, in response to the not so surprising backlash from the Australian public.)
In the meantime, Australian police have been directed to search for any instances where Julian Assange might have breached Australian laws.
You can well imagine, I think, why many of us have been outraged by this sort of attitude by our elected leaders?

This open letter is simply the first opportunity Australians have had to urge our own government to support & defend Julian Assange's rights as an Australian citizen. We shouldn't have to do that. Such support should be automatic.

But, putting the open letter aside for the minute, the real concern, many political commentators believe, is our government's anxiety about the imminent release (January?) of diplomatic cables from the US embassy in Canberra. And what they will reveal about the Australian/US relationship. What decisions have been made, how & why, that we don't know about? And how do they differ from what our government is telling us?
Information which, of course, we have every right to have access to.
I suspect there will be severe embarrassment, at the very least, (& not just for our present government) when those Wikileaks are published.

Hooray, osso!

I don't know, hinge, but people reporting everywhere that he's been removed and only going directly to the time mag online site you'll see him nominated.
It's weird, especially since so many people can't see the nomination and can't
vote for him.

Hinge, did you see the information I posted last night, about Geoffry Robertson's decision to represent Julian Assange?
This is certainly going to make things very interesting!

I just voted for him.

Meanwhile, Oz foreign minister & former PM, Kevin Rudd, says he doesn't give a damn about his D rating by the US ambassador in Canberra.
He doesn't give a fig that he was considered a "control freak" & somewhat incompetent.
Oh, sure.

www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/08/3087480.htm

Just showing off but much earlier in this thread I'd mentioned that if Robertson and Pilger were supporting Assange then I was too.
http://able2know.org/topic/164540-12#post-4433618