55
   

WikiLeaks about to hit the fan

 
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 07:13 am
@CalamityJane,
I don't care about WL using facebook. I don't think FB is a bad source most times. It's certainly a good tool for sharing information.

Was that blurb from the WL page on FB or was it a comment on something on the page? Many people here have said that WL does not editorialize; that they only present info and let others decide.

I'm not for funding dictators, but it also seems that the message was that the US failed to support a regime change. Isn't regime change the exact problem the US has struggled with? What about the criticism that the US imposes it's world model on the world? Now the US is guilty for not doing this?

The blurb has credible points and certainly I think they are worth discussing, but this certainly editorializing how people should internalize the info.

A
R
T
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 07:24 am
@hingehead,
Nevermind, I just found HH link to the original source. Disregard comments about the origin of the commentary. I'm still interested in the content of the commentary though.

(save us time with citations por favor)

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 07:53 am
@failures art,
failures art wrote:
Isn't regime change the exact problem the US has struggled with?


well they certainly failed with the last one (2008), and things don't look much better in 2012 Wink
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 07:55 am
@djjd62,
oh wait, were you talking about countries other than the USA Confused
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 08:50 am
@spendius,
If any of those cables were classified at all, he is guilty of leaking classified information.
By providing them to an internet site, he has broken the law.
And yes, there is precedent for charging him with that crime...

http://pubrecord.org/law/6318/former-employee-pleads-guilty-leaking/

Quote:
A former FBI contract linguist pleaded guilty today to unlawfully providing classified documents to the host of an Internet blog who then published information derived from those documents on the blog.



http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/04/cia-fires-employee-for-leaking.php

Quote:
JURIST] A US Central Intelligence Agency [official website] employee has been fired for leaking classified information and having unauthorized discussions with the media, CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said Friday. Though Gimigliano declined to elaborate, a law enforcement officer has said that the leak led to last November's report in the Washington Post detailing allegations that the CIA has operated secret prisons in Europe [JURIST report] for alleged al Qaeda detainees. The officer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that a criminal investigation is also underway, but that has not yet been confirmed by the US Justice Department.


So as you can see, there is precedent for charging him.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 08:56 am
@mysteryman,
Mr. Assange is not an employee of the U.S. government. An employee (or several) provided the information to him.

So, no, there is no precedent (in the cases you reference).
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:00 am
@wandeljw,
wandeljw wrote:
Diplomatic cables revealing the names of foreign citizens working on humanitarian projects shoul not be posted. Certain countries assassinate or imprison citizens that are working on humanitarian projects.


this continues to be worrisome. There is a handful of current/former posters here who could be endangered by the release of their names in connection to the particular projects they are working on/have worked on.


(the details were not posted here)
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  5  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:33 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:
By providing them to an internet site, he has broken the law.

You can't break US law when you're a non-US citizen living and working outside of the US. That's why it's called US law, not planetary law.
BillRM
 
  3  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:37 am
@mysteryman,
Quote:
If any of those cables were classified at all, he is guilty of leaking classified information.
By providing them to an internet site, he has broken the law.
And yes, there is precedent for charging him with that crime...


He is not a US citizen or living in any territory of the US so how in the hell does our laws apply to him?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:37 am
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

I don't care about WL using facebook. I don't think FB is a bad source most times. It's certainly a good tool for sharing information.

Was that blurb from the WL page on FB or was it a comment on something on the page? Many people here have said that WL does not editorialize; that they only present info and let others decide.

I'm not for funding dictators, but it also seems that the message was that the US failed to support a regime change. Isn't regime change the exact problem the US has struggled with? What about the criticism that the US imposes it's world model on the world? Now the US is guilty for not doing this?
The blurb has credible points and certainly I think they are worth discussing, but this certainly editorializing how people should internalize the info.

A
R
T


This may alarm you, but on several occassions on this thread you have made points I was prepared to make.

Keep up the good work.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:50 am
@Thomas,
So someone living in Bermuda can commit fraud against a US bank, and as long as they stay out of the country and arent a US citizen, then they havent committed a crime?

I dont think so.
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:51 am
@failures art,
Yes, it is my understanding that facebook.com/wikileaks is using the facebook platform to publish cables (due to default of servers) and not editorials.
I have read enough cables where U.S. embassy staffers wrote about their findings and it was posted word for word in the "first person" form. To be honest, it's unclear if it is Ted Rall who writes this as an editorial or if he just posted a cable of an U.S. staffer. Usually only wikileaks staffers can post on facebook.com/wikileaks.
Nonetheless, I will look more carefully in the future. Aside from that, my
legitimate sources from the USAID gov site and a look at amnesty international
prove that the U.S. indeed has predominately and extensively given $$$ aid to pro-dictator nations in Central Asia.
CalamityJane
 
  2  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:52 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

So someone living in Bermuda can commit fraud against a US bank, and as long as they stay out of the country and arent a US citizen, then they havent committed a crime?

I dont think so.


You don't get it, do you? Assange has not committed any crimes against US laws as he is not an U.S. citizen. Committing bank fraud on U.S. soil is a crime.
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:53 am
@mysteryman,
Quote:
So as you can see, there is precedent for charging him.


I don't see it as a precedent. Mr Assange is not an American. Nor an employee of the US government. If he is extradited and charged that would set a precedent it seems to me.

I can't understand it. If I had been in Mr Manning's position it would never have entered my head to leak that stuff out. Really!! Or anything else. Why wasn't I not in his job? Studying the racing form all day long. Not replaying the dusty old past.

I think the trouble is that all the downsides men have, smoking, drinking, gambling, chasing tail, forcing farts when getting down to pot black and suchlike, are considered signifiers of irresponsibility and they are exactly the qualities which are needed when discretion is required. Eschewing such things is bound to cause build-ups of tension.

The Catholic Church has, historically, known just when to organise periodic releases of tension. Christmas is coming, the geese are getting fat/ Please put a penny in the old mans's hat./ If you haven't got a penny a halfpenny will do./And if you haven't got a halfpenny well God Bless You.

The festival. Scientifically calibrated. Multi-functional.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:54 am
@CalamityJane,
But Bermuda is not US soil.
You missed that part of my question.
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 09:56 am
Here is a good article about yet another Central Asian country - Azerbaijan - in DER SPIEGEL

Quote:
Azerbaijan is rife with corruption and comparisons to European feudalism in the Middle Ages are hardly a stretch. But with vast reserves of oil and natural gas at stake, the US is willing to risk the embarrassment that comes with courting the country.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,734307,00.html

0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 10:00 am
@mysteryman,
you're pointlessly mixing things up

Assange has not committed a crime in the U.S. (at least not one that's on the books already).

Bank fraud is not at issue in the WikiLeaks situation.
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 10:00 am
@CalamityJane,
As I understand international treaties - and I'm happy for Wandel or any other lawyers present to correct this - a charge of terrorism would make it an extraditable offense no matter on which country's territory the alleged crime has been committed - BUT no country is bound to extradite its own citizens.

That's why if Assange is moved to Sweden to face these "rape" charges there, ie be moved out of a Commonwealth country automatically providing him with citizenship and consular protection, he would be in danger of extradition to the US - see previous pages for what might await him here.

As to the rape charges - one of them is from a woman stating she was lying on her sofa dressed only in underwear, had drunk half a bottle of akvavit (however the damn hootch is spelled in Swedish) and that's a woman over 30 who's lived in Sweden her whole life - like, yo, sister, get a grip!
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 10:08 am
@mysteryman,
MM - the US is the only major country taxing its own citizens for earnings abroad. On this I'm quite certain as I know SEC, IRS, and assorted other financial legislation. Extraterritoriality in non-financial crimes (and Assange isn't accused of any such) is an iffy matter under international law.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2010 10:08 am
@mysteryman,
Quote:
But Bermuda is not US soil.
You missed that part of my question.


So if I happen to had aided a Chinese citizen over the internet to bypass Chinese censorship and thereby breaking Chinese laws by so doing, that China could then demand my extradition to China to face charges?
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/02/2021 at 10:00:20