Wikileaks - Page 52

A truly free press — one unfettered by concerns of nationalism — is apparently a terrifying problem for elected governments and tyrannies alike.

It shouldn’t be.[...]

WikiLeaks stands to improve our democracy, not weaken it.[...]

A government’s best and only defense against damaging spills is to act justly and fairly. By seeking to quell WikiLeaks, its U.S. political opponents are only priming the pump for more embarrassing revelations down the road.

On December 07 2010 19:54 Uriel_SVK wrote:
Well I doubt that arrest can stop wikileaks now

On December 07 2010 16:28 BasilPesto wrote:


The thing is, nothing illegal has been implicated on Assange.

http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/pm-cant-say-what-law-wikileaks-has-broken-20101207-18nfn.html
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s3086781.htm

But when it comes to Assange, Jeffrey H. Smith, a former CIA general counsel, said: "I'm confident that the Justice Department is figuring out how to prosecute him."

Smith noted that State Department general counsel Harold H. Koh had sent a letter to Assange on Saturday urging him not to release the cables, to return all classified material and to destroy all classified records from WikiLeaks databases.

"That language is not only the right thing to do policy-wise but puts the government in a position to prosecute him," Smith said. Under the Espionage Act, anyone who has "unauthorized possession to information relating to the national defense" and has reason to believe it could harm the United States may be prosecuted if he publishes it or "willfully" retains it when the government has demanded its return, Smith said..

On December 07 2010 22:34 Hikko wrote:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112905973.html



Assange could only be charged and prosecuted if he was to step foot in the U.S. or was somehow brought there by some other means, but suspicion of criminal behavior or threats from a prosecutor with a reasonable case should be enough for these private entities to close Assange's accounts or block transactions to him.

I added the "Regardless of WikiLeaks being the moral victor or enemy in your opinion or anyone's opinion," line because I don't think it is morally right for these companies to stop his money flow, freeze his assets, and withhold donations to him, but their policies legally stand and are hard to argue against in a legal or logical sense without ignoring facts.

The problem with a lot of peoples' viewpoints in this thread is their disregard for the regular law because Assange is their hero. Does his fame and status as the founder of WikiLeaks cause legal action to be taken against him much faster or perhaps be on higher priority? Absolutely, but the Swedish rape charges and the US Espionage Act cases still stand, as they would with any person, famous or not.

I'm not taking a position of supporting Assange and his organization or being against him. What I am taking a position on is the idea and principle that in a logical argument, you can't praise your champion and condemn your champion's enemies unless you can completely invalidate said enemies' arguments. I do not believe that the charges of rape can be totally dismissed without some kind of showing in court, which should be kept private and apart from the WikiLeaks business, and I do not believe that the CIA's charges are invalid because we may not like the U.S. government or we may not like the CIA.

On December 07 2010 23:19 VIB wrote:


The US is not exactly known for it's exemplary super fair trials. But quite the opposite.

On December 08 2010 00:31 Hikko wrote:


Explain to me what case(s) prove this notion of yours, because it seems to be pretty false to me.

On December 08 2010 00:50 VIB wrote:
Seriously? Can I just pick any of the dozens of examples out of the top of my head? Or can I just raise Guantanamo and the Patriot Act and be done with it? Or would that be too cheese and unfair?

On December 07 2010 22:34 Hikko wrote:
I'm not taking a position of supporting Assange and his organization or being against him. What I am taking a position on is the idea and principle that in a logical argument, you can't praise your champion and condemn your champion's enemies unless you can completely invalidate said enemies' arguments. I do not believe that the charges of rape can be totally dismissed without some kind of showing in court, which should be kept private and apart from the WikiLeaks business, and I do not believe that the CIA's charges are invalid because we may not like the U.S. government or we may not like the CIA.

On December 08 2010 00:54 Hikko wrote:


The issue with Guantanamo is that they did not go to the court at all. Additionally, many parts of the Patriot Act have been ruled unconstitutional by none other than...the U.S.'s own courts.

On December 08 2010 00:31 Hikko wrote:


Explain to me what case(s) prove this notion of yours, because it seems to be pretty false to me.

On December 07 2010 20:13 FindingPride wrote:
also, i fucking love the wording these pricks give. "he was arrested at the police station"
in other words he turned him self in. and also said he was elusive... rofl?
such a fucking joke these piece of shit news sites are. God this country sickens me.

On December 07 2010 16:20 ddrddrddrddr wrote:
Go 4chan!!!

It seems they're doing a great job in screwing with Julian Assange. I wonder how Bin Laden would fair if they put this much effort into it.

On December 08 2010 04:47 acker wrote:
On another note, Visa just suspended operations with Wikileaks.

Ironically, it's entirely possible to use Visa and Mastercard to donate to the KKK and its branch parties.

On December 08 2010 07:50 Biggo wrote:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/wikileaks/dont-shoot-messenger-for-revealing-uncomfortable-truths/story-fn775xjq-1225967241332

An article written by Julian Assange released in The Australian newspaper today for those that are interested

Now, courtesy of Wikileaks, DynCorp can look forward to a new round of ridicule and denunciations.

As first reported by the British Guardian newspaper, on June 24, 2009 the U.S. embassy in Afghanistan sent a cable to Washington, under the signature of Karl Eikenberry, U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, regarding a meeting between Assistant Chief of Mission Joseph Mussomeli and Afghan Minister of Interior Hanif Atmar. Among the issues discussed was what diplomats delicately called the "Kunduz DynCorp Problem." Kunduz is a northern province of Afghanistan.

The problem was this:

1. In a May 2009 meeting interior minister Hanif Atmar expresses deep concerns that if lives could be in danger if news leaked that foreign police trainers working for US commercial contractor DynCorp hired "dancing boys" to perform for them.

Bacha boys are eight- to 15-years-old. They put on make-up, tie bells to their feet and slip into scanty women's clothing, and then, to the whine of a harmonium and wailing vocals, they dance seductively to smoky roomfuls of leering older men.

After the show is over, their services are auctioned off to the highest bidder, who will sometimes purchase a boy outright. And by services, we mean anal sex: The State Department has called bacha bazi a "widespread, culturally accepted form of male rape." (While it may be culturally accepted, it violates both Sharia law and Afghan civil code.)

Ben Johnston recoiled in horror when he heard one of his fellow helicopter mechanics at a U.S. Army base near Tuzla, Bosnia, brag one day in early 2000: "My girl's not a day over 12."

The man who uttered the statement -- a man in his 60s, by Johnston's estimate -- was not talking fondly about his granddaughter or daughter or another relative. He was bragging about the preteen he had purchased from a local brothel. Johnston, who'd gone to work as a civilian contractor mechanic for DynCorp Inc. after a six-year stint in the Army, had worked on helicopters for years, and he'd heard a lot of hangar talk. But never anything like this.

More and more often in those months, the talk among his co-workers had turned to boasts about owning prostitutes -- how young they were, how good they were in bed, how much they cost. And it wasn't just boasting: Johnston often saw co-workers out on the streets of Dubrave, the closest town to the base, with the young female consorts that inspired their braggadocio. They'd bring them to company functions, and on one occasion, Johnston says, over to his house for dinner. Occasionally he'd see the young girls riding bikes and playing with other children, with their "owners" standing by, watching.