57
   

WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

 
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 09:54 pm
@hingehead,
hingehead wrote:

Because, if it were true, it would be indicative of just how bound up in the power elites mainstream media is, and how dismissive they are of our intelligence.

Censorship is directly linked the preservation of power elites. Censorship increases the more they feel threatened. Clearly Assange doesn't pose enough of a threat yet. (I doubt he ever will - it's the pandora's box he's opened that is their problem)


Time magazine was strong-armed into removing Assange from an on-line Man Of The Year Poll that doesn't even decide who gets the "award," but the NY Times was stopped from printing the leaks?

Is Time that craven, or is NYT that courageous?

First of all the Time story is bogus and simply a product of the paranoid rumor mill that has sprung up around the fate of Julian The Martyr.

Secondly, if the Power Elite was so horridly powerful, "Why isn't Julian Assange dead?"

Good Lord, but I hope Assange doesn't eat bad sushi or pop one too many Ambiens. The conspiracy theories will run rampant.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 09:56 pm
@CalamityJane,
CalamityJane wrote:

realjohnboy wrote:

I am skeptical. Wikilinks claims that Time is shunning them. Wikilinks claims. They have a good PR firm.
Did you know that Time named Hitler as Man of the Year?


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?


Shaking the Obama fairy dust from some true believers' eyes - something for which even I can thank Mr Assange.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 09:57 pm
@CalamityJane,
I was just there three minutes ago and he's still leading the race.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 09:58 pm
@hingehead,
hingehead wrote:

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 http://img.timeinc.net/time/rd/trunk/www/web/feds/i/emergency-tout-300x100.jpg
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.


The Power Elite is messing with your minds.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 09:59 pm
Almost had a small seizure Wink when I saw this lead article in the Sydney Morning Herald, titled: "Assange wanted by US for 'espionage offences"

A report of "talks underway" between US & Swedish officials to transfer Julian Assange from Sweden to face treason charges in the US?

After checking the SMH's source for the story (The Independent (UK) ) there was still no further detail to be found than this (see quote from article, below) :
So that was a bit of a beat-up, SMH! Rolling Eyes

But anything is possible, I guess? Who knows? Neutral

What I did find interesting was the video contained in the SMH article. Mark Zaid, "US national security law expert" explaining why Julian Assange is unlikely to be extradicted to the US.


Quote:
As critics protest against the "shonky" way WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been denied his freedom, diplomatic sources have reportedly revealed informal talks are underway for him to be transferred into US custody.

US and Swedish officials have already discussed the possibility of Assange being delivered into the hands of US law enforcement to face potential charges over "espionage offences", Britain's The Independent reported, citing "diplomatic sources".


http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/assange-wanted-by-us-for-espionage-offences-20101208-18ouj.html
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:07 pm
@hingehead,
I remember that..
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:13 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Sneer all you like Finn, CJ posted a link that clearly went to the Time poll and excluded Assange - technically I don't understand how or why. Do you think just possibly they changed their minds when they saw the online backlash?

Again, on with the show!
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:13 pm
@msolga,
Quote:
US and Swedish officials have already discussed the possibility of Assange being delivered into the hands of US law enforcement to face potential charges over "espionage offences", Britain's The Independent reported, citing "diplomatic sources".


Yet another damn leak. Is the Independent going to be extradited to the US? Are the diplomatic sources going to get the top bunk in the cell or the bottom bunk or considering that there are sources will they get a cell to themselves?

This is so kafkaesquianly kafkaesque!
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:18 pm
@JTT,
Isn't it, though?

But I was not the only one sucked in by that SMH headline.
527 other people were reading it at the same time! Wink
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:18 pm
@JTT,
USA has been running "Denial of Service" hacks against any and all servers WikiLeaks attempts to utilize. I haven't heard anything new on this front for the last few days.
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:19 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
Shaking the Obama fairy dust from some true believers' eyes - something for which even I can thank Mr Assange.


If you weren't such a chickenshit poster, you'd have seen this weeks ago. I mentioned that if Jesus Christ were elected president of the US, he couldn't help but be sucked into that swamp and become a war criminal himself.

But, again, you are hardly the person to be pointing fingers unless your only intent is to keep up your stunning levels of hypocrisy.
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:21 pm
@BillW,
Wikileaks has been posting a list of over 100 mirror sites on twitter regularly. They (US Gov) are going to have to go Chinese on the internet's ass to make any sort of a dent.

While most of what I've read of the leaks seems inconsequential I'm surprised at the little amount of traffic the US espionage efforts in the UN headquarters are getting - now there is a violation of international law - who we gonna extradite?
BillW
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:28 pm
@hingehead,
Twits are only what - 165 characters? But, how could they be stopped?

As I posted on another thread,

Quote:
I think Assange, et al, better take it a little more seriously - there is a death penalty out there for these type crimes - both on the "with us" and "against us" sides. If information leaked can be directly attributed to a death - bye-bye. Prosecutors and juries do not take kindly to this - America has declared Terrorism as "at war"!


I'm sure his attorney is telling him this. Will he drop the nuclear stuff and push Holder into a corner?
hingehead
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:33 pm
@BillW,
The tweets link to pages that list the mirror sites.

As I've posted elsewhere, whatever Assange has done it is not terrorism. Use a dictionary or a law book, you won't find it in either.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:34 pm
@msolga,
OK, here's the real deal, for a change.

Julian Assange wrote this piece for the Australian newspaper, just before handing himself over to the UK authorities. I'll print it here in full.

BTW, the Australian is Rupert Murdoch territory.

Which begs the question, is Rupert a secret fan of Julian's? Wink

Or, perhaps like all good Australians (like John Pilger, Geoffry Robertson) he responded to the call to come to the aid of a beleaguered national?

(Or - probably the most likely reason - here was an opportunity to sink the boots into Julia Gillard & the Labor government. Rupert's like that.)

Anyway, here's what Julian Assange had to say:


Quote:
`The truth will always win’ - Julian Assange writes

IN 1958 a young Rupert Murdoch, then owner and editor of Adelaide’s The News, wrote: “In the race between secrecy and truth, it seems inevitable that truth will always win.”

His observation perhaps reflected his father Keith Murdoch’s expose that Australian troops were being needlessly sacrificed by incompetent British commanders on the shores of Gallipoli. The British tried to shut him up but Keith Murdoch would not be silenced and his efforts led to the termination of the disastrous Gallipoli campaign.

Nearly a century later, WikiLeaks is also fearlessly publishing facts that need to be made public.

I grew up in a Queensland country town where people spoke their minds bluntly. They distrusted big government as something that could be corrupted if not watched carefully. The dark days of corruption in the Queensland government before the Fitzgerald inquiry are testimony to what happens when the politicians gag the media from reporting the truth.

These things have stayed with me. WikiLeaks was created around these core values. The idea, conceived in Australia , was to use internet technologies in new ways to report the truth.

WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?

Democratic societies need a strong media and WikiLeaks is part of that media. The media helps keep government honest. WikiLeaks has revealed some hard truths about the Iraq and Afghan wars, and broken stories about corporate corruption.

People have said I am anti-war: for the record, I am not. Sometimes nations need to go to war, and there are just wars. But there is nothing more wrong than a government lying to its people about those wars, then asking these same citizens to put their lives and their taxes on the line for those lies. If a war is justified, then tell the truth and the people will decide whether to support it.

If you have read any of the Afghan or Iraq war logs, any of the US embassy cables or any of the stories about the things WikiLeaks has reported, consider how important it is for all media to be able to report these things freely.

WikiLeaks is not the only publisher of the US embassy cables. Other media outlets, including Britain ‘s The Guardian, The New York Times, El Pais in Spain and Der Spiegel in Germany have published the same redacted cables.

Yet it is WikiLeaks, as the co-ordinator of these other groups, that has copped the most vicious attacks and accusations from the US government and its acolytes. I have been accused of treason, even though I am an Australian, not a US, citizen. There have been dozens of serious calls in the US for me to be “taken out” by US special forces. Sarah Palin says I should be “hunted down like Osama bin Laden”, a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a “transnational threat” and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister’s office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and harmed for no other reason than to get at me.

And Australians should observe with no pride the disgraceful pandering to these sentiments by Prime Minister Gillard and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not had a word of criticism for the other media organisations. That is because The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel are old and large, while WikiLeaks is as yet young and small.

We are the underdogs. The Gillard government is trying to shoot the messenger because it doesn’t want the truth revealed, including information about its own diplomatic and political dealings.

Has there been any response from the Australian government to the numerous public threats of violence against me and other WikiLeaks personnel? One might have thought an Australian prime minister would be defending her citizens against such things, but there have only been wholly unsubstantiated claims of illegality. The Prime Minister and especially the Attorney-General are meant to carry out their duties with dignity and above the fray. Rest assured, these two mean to save their own skins. They will not.

Every time WikiLeaks publishes the truth about abuses committed by US agencies, Australian politicians chant a provably false chorus with the State Department: “You’ll risk lives! National security! You’ll endanger troops!” Then they say there is nothing of importance in what WikiLeaks publishes. It can’t be both. Which is it?

It is neither. WikiLeaks has a four-year publishing history. During that time we have changed whole governments, but not a single person, as far as anyone is aware, has been harmed. But the US , with Australian government connivance, has killed thousands in the past few months alone.

US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates admitted in a letter to the US congress that no sensitive intelligence sources or methods had been compromised by the Afghan war logs disclosure. The Pentagon stated there was no evidence the WikiLeaks reports had led to anyone being harmed in Afghanistan . NATO in Kabul told CNN it couldn’t find a single person who needed protecting. The Australian Department of Defence said the same. No Australian troops or sources have been hurt by anything we have published.

But our publications have been far from unimportant. The US diplomatic cables reveal some startling facts:

The US asked its diplomats to steal personal human material and information from UN officials and human rights groups, including DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, credit card numbers, internet passwords and ID photos, in violation of international treaties. Presumably Australian UN diplomats may be targeted, too.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia asked the US Officials in Jordan and Bahrain want Iran ‘s nuclear program stopped by any means available.

Britain’s Iraq inquiry was fixed to protect “US interests”.

Sweden is a covert member of NATO and US intelligence sharing is kept from parliament.

The US is playing hardball to get other countries to take freed detainees from Guantanamo Bay . Barack Obama agreed to meet the Slovenian President only if Slovenia took a prisoner. Our Pacific neighbour Kiribati was offered millions of dollars to accept detainees.

In its landmark ruling in the Pentagon Papers case, the US Supreme Court said “only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government”. The swirling storm around WikiLeaks today reinforces the need to defend the right of all media to reveal the truth.

Julian Assange is the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.


http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/mediadiary/index.php
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:37 pm
@hingehead,
It doesn't matter what anyone wants to call it or list it as, it will be as he is charged. Troorrism is very loosly defined as is - I have always said tahat one can not go to war against terror, but guess what?

Oh, Britian denied bail in part for Assange's saftey. I wonder how worried they really are?
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:39 pm
@BillW,
Quote:
I think Assange, et al, better take it a little more seriously - there is a death penalty out there for these type crimes - both on the "with us" and "against us" sides. If information leaked can be directly attributed to a death - bye-bye. Prosecutors and juries do not take kindly to this - America has declared Terrorism as "at war"!


Assange can't be held responsible for any deaths. He's in custody, with no chance of bail. Are the yanks gonna say he used the computer in the prison library?

It gets more and more bizzare with each passing moment. I can't wait to see what Jon Stewart, Colbert and Tom Tomorrow do with this US/their toadies clusterfuck.
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:42 pm
@msolga,
Quote:
Julian Assange wrote this piece for the Australian newspaper, just before handing himself over to the UK authorities. I'll print it here in full.


Been there, printed that, here, while you were sawing logs, Olga.

But once is nowhere near enough with the number of dunderheads in existence.
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:45 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
Assange can't be held responsible for any deaths. He's in custody, with no chance of bail. Are the yanks gonna say he used the computer in the prison library?

It gets more and more bizzare with each passing moment.


They can and will hold him responsible. Oh, Britian denied bail in part for Assange's saftey. I wonder how worried they really are?
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 7 Dec, 2010 10:50 pm
@BillW,
Quote:
They can and will hold him responsible.


I was referring to a world that had a semblance of normality, Bill. You don't have to tell me that the US will do anything they want.

One good thing in all this is that the US stands to be mightily embarrassed. Small consolation but that's the way it goes.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2025 at 02:50:45