EPTAnd the Manning case is even more weird. they angrily demand WHY ARNT YOU PROTECTING HIM!!! instead of asking why he needs protection in the first place.
WikiLeaks founder arrested in U.K. - Page 34
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Railxp
Hong Kong1313 Posts
And the Manning case is even more weird. they angrily demand WHY ARNT YOU PROTECTING HIM!!! instead of asking why he needs protection in the first place. | ||
|
dybydx
Canada1764 Posts
Julian Assange should be awarded Nobel peace prize, suggests Russia In what appears to be a calculated dig at the US, the Kremlin urged non-governmental organisations to think seriously about "nominating Assange as a Nobel Prize laureate". "Public and non-governmental organisations should think of how to help him," the source from inside president Dmitry Medvedev's office told Russian news agencies. Speaking in Brussels, where Medvedev was attending a Russia-EU summit yesterday , the source went on: "Maybe, nominate him as a Nobel Prize laureate." http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/09/julian-assange-nobel-peace-prize --------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, I suppose this is fitting. As we all recall, the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner, Liu Xiao Bo is a human rights activist in the eyes of the West but a trouble maker and criminal in the eyes of the PRC government. Now, in 2011, we have Mr. Assange, an anti-war whistle blower who released videos and documents that are highly critical of the wars in the Middle East. Unsurprisingly, he is hailed as a hero to some but as a terrorist by US politicians like Sarah Palin. I wonder what our 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner has to say about this. Edit: To provide a bit of related history, the CIA secretly nominated Russian author Boris Pasternak for the 1958 Nobel prize for literature as to publicly humiliate the then USSR. So perhaps this is payback. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Pasternak | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:15 dybydx wrote: This is a repost, because Zatic does not want a seperate thread for this news Julian Assange should be awarded Nobel peace prize, suggests Russia In what appears to be a calculated dig at the US, the Kremlin urged non-governmental organisations to think seriously about "nominating Assange as a Nobel Prize laureate". "Public and non-governmental organisations should think of how to help him," the source from inside president Dmitry Medvedev's office told Russian news agencies. Speaking in Brussels, where Medvedev was attending a Russia-EU summit yesterday , the source went on: "Maybe, nominate him as a Nobel Prize laureate." http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/09/julian-assange-nobel-peace-prize --------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, I suppose this is fitting. As we all recall, the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner, Liu Xiao Bo is a human rights activist in the eyes of the West but a trouble maker and criminal in the eyes of the PRC government. Now, in 2011, we have Mr. Assange, an anti-war whistle blower who released videos and documents that are highly critical of the wars in the Middle East. Unsurprisingly, he is hailed as a hero to some but as a terrorist by US politicians like Sarah Palin. I wonder what our 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner has to say about this. Edit: To provide a bit of related history, the CIA secretly nominated Russian author Boris Pasternak for the 1958 Nobel prize for literature as to publicly humiliate the then USSR. So perhaps this is payback. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Pasternak Repost then. This news is really interesting imo. Why? It parallels the U.S. efforts to condemn China for its treatment of Liu Xiabao. In the end, it goes to show that many in power regard morals and human rights as a political tool, to be suspended ad-hoc if it damages their interests. Ultimately Liu Xiabao has done as much harm as Julian. Both individuals activities have caused massive damage to their countries prestige and power, by being an destabilizing force in the world economy, while advocating for internal changes in government. But neither have caused any actual human loss of life. In fact, Liu Xiabao is technically more guilty, because technically, he has violated Chinese Sedition laws while living in China, in acceptance of these laws. (And China is more then happy to ship its dissidents abroad, contrary to western media reports, dissidents who have not made a stir are encouraged to go to Taiwan or the U.S. where they will not stir up trouble domestically) Julian Assange on the other hand has violated no laws, in fact, he is not even a U.S. citizen. | ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:15 dybydx wrote: This is a repost, because Zatic does not want a seperate thread for this news Julian Assange should be awarded Nobel peace prize, suggests Russia In what appears to be a calculated dig at the US, the Kremlin urged non-governmental organisations to think seriously about "nominating Assange as a Nobel Prize laureate". "Public and non-governmental organisations should think of how to help him," the source from inside president Dmitry Medvedev's office told Russian news agencies. Speaking in Brussels, where Medvedev was attending a Russia-EU summit yesterday , the source went on: "Maybe, nominate him as a Nobel Prize laureate." http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/09/julian-assange-nobel-peace-prize --------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, I suppose this is fitting. As we all recall, the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner, Liu Xiao Bo is a human rights activist in the eyes of the West but a trouble maker and criminal in the eyes of the PRC government. Now, in 2011, we have Mr. Assange, an anti-war whistle blower who released videos and documents that are highly critical of the wars in the Middle East. Unsurprisingly, he is hailed as a hero to some but as a terrorist by US politicians like Sarah Palin. I wonder what our 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner has to say about this. Edit: To provide a bit of related history, the CIA secretly nominated Russian author Boris Pasternak for the 1958 Nobel prize for literature as to publicly humiliate the then USSR. So perhaps this is payback. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Pasternak Interesting, but realise that the guardian is a pretty crappy news source and is pretty close to being a tabloid. This could be true, but I am guessing that most of it is fabricated. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:17 Kralic wrote: Interesting, but realise that the guardian is a pretty crappy news source and is pretty close to being a tabloid. This could be true, but I am guessing that most of it is fabricated. The Guardian is about as credible as any "Major" western news organization like the NYtimes or CNN. Granted, not very credible, but if you dismiss them, you dismiss pretty much every single source thats been used in this thread. | ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:19 Half wrote: The Guardian is about as credible as any "Major" western news organization like the NYtimes or CNN. Granted, not very credible, but if you dismiss them, you dismiss pretty much every single source thats been used in this thread. I already dismissed it earlier in this thread. It is funny how almost all of the sources from this thread can only be found on the guardian. | ||
|
dybydx
Canada1764 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:17 Kralic wrote: Interesting, but realise that the guardian is a pretty crappy news source and is pretty close to being a tabloid. This could be true, but I am guessing that most of it is fabricated. You can Google the term "Julian Assange Nobel Prize". I believe the original source of the story came from AFP. The Guardian is just re-distributing the material. | ||
|
wadadde
270 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:21 Kralic wrote: I already dismissed it earlier in this thread. It is funny how almost all of the sources from this thread can only be found on the guardian. How's that funny? Does it tell us anything? I'm obviously operating under the assumption that your statement is pretty accurate. | ||
|
Taguchi
Greece1575 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:17 Kralic wrote: Interesting, but realise that the guardian is a pretty crappy news source and is pretty close to being a tabloid. This could be true, but I am guessing that most of it is fabricated. read up on a topic before u reply next time please, dont let petty bias overrule common sense as others have said this has been widely circulated and putin himself has, today, made critical remarks about west's idea of democracy and the hipocrisy of criticising russia for lack of it | ||
|
Stacks
Norway68 Posts
They want to take away our ability to know what they do, and the net as it is today: WikiLeaks stands up. Gets beaten down. Anon kicks a little back. Palin says terrorism, Russia says "Yay, nobel prize for this one". Media writes about weather. And so the war for internets started ? It is truly strange days we live in. | ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:27 Taguchi wrote: read up on a topic before u reply next time please, dont let petty bias overrule common sense as others have said this has been widely circulated and putin himself has, today, made critical remarks about west's idea of democracy and the hipocrisy of criticising russia for lack of it I have been trying to find another news source to see if I am just being biased. So far I found one on the rawstory.com and that is about it. Maybe my google skills are lacking. edit: I guess I could wait and see if it circulates. Who knows. I still think it is a interesting story, I would just like a bit more concrete sources to carry it. | ||
|
Krigwin
1130 Posts
I would also like to echo the interesting similarities between Assange and Liu Xiabao and the inevitable doublespeak that will occur condemning Assange despite his lack of any actual wrongdoing. At this point, really, the corporate/political monster that is the US government has leaped past "transparent" and is getting into "circus" territory. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:21 Kralic wrote: I already dismissed it earlier in this thread. It is funny how almost all of the sources from this thread can only be found on the guardian. I'd suggest starting with Der Spiegel or Le Monde, if you understand French. Even CBC, your own Canadian news network, does better reporting than CNN. Just because North American news networks haven't been airing these cables doesn't mean the rest of the world hasn't. This just means that the only place around that... A: Speaks English as the primary language B: Is over three thousand miles away from the White House C: Has direct access to the cables Is The Guardian, the only British newspaper that (was offered)/(took up) the chance to peruse the documents ahead of time to create a coherent research/release process. Of course, Salon has some very good articles on more releases, but mostly by Greenwald, an opinion writer. If you want information outside of that that's available in English, the cable releases are fairly insular in scope and scale. Other British newspapers are certainly reporting, but don't have quite the same amount of access to the documents as The Guardian. For instance, from Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald has some cables on a certain Australian Labor Party member (Mark Arbib) accused of giving confidential information to the United States of America. And on Rudd. I'm certain that some German newspapers available in English have information on US coercion against German legal action against Gitmo. But I can't be sure, outside of Der Spiegel, I don't understand German. Der Spiegel is currently running an article from the diplomatic cables on how China and the United States conspired against Europe during the Copenhagen Summit. Indian newspapers are running articles on how The United States and Europe conspired against small nations in the same summit. No wonder nothing got done. Of course, if you have trouble with any bias, you could always peruse the primary sources yourself. It's not exactly difficult, and The Guardian sometimes links the documents in question directly in their article. | ||
|
MicroMortuis
United States5 Posts
Like i believe i read somewhere that the women said it was tooootally consensual. idk weird shit happens in the penal system? | ||
|
Taguchi
Greece1575 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:30 Kralic wrote: I have been trying to find another news source to see if I am just being biased. So far I found one on the rawstory.com and that is about it. Maybe my google skills are lacking. edit: I guess I could wait and see if it circulates. Who knows. I still think it is a interesting story, I would just like a bit more concrete sources to carry it. Here u go, these guys published the story first, national news agency of russia ... | ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:43 acker wrote: I'd suggest starting with Der Spiegel or Le Monde, if you understand French. Even CBC, your own Canadian news network, does better reporting than CNN. Just because North American news networks haven't been airing these cables doesn't mean the rest of the world hasn't. This just means that the only place around that... A: Speaks English as the primary language B: Is over three thousand miles away from the White House C: Has direct access to the cables Is The Guardian, the only British newspaper that (was offered)/(took up) the chance to peruse the documents ahead of time to create a coherent research/release process. Of course, Salon has some very good articles on more releases, but mostly by Greenwald, an opinion writer. If you want information outside of that that's available in English, the cable releases are fairly insular in scope and scale. Other British newspapers are certainly reporting, but don't have quite the same amount of access to the documents as The Guardian. For instance, from Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald has some cables on a certain Australian Labor Party member (Mark Arbib) accused of giving confidential information to the United States of America. And on Rudd. I'm certain that some German newspapers available in English have information on US coercion against German legal action against Gitmo. But I can't be sure, outside of Der Spiegel, I don't understand German. Der Spiegel is currently running an article from the diplomatic cables on how China and the United States conspired against Europe during the Copenhagen Summit. Indian newspapers are running articles on how The United States and Europe conspired against small nations in the same summit. No wonder nothing got done. Of course, if you have trouble with any bias, you could always peruse the primary sources yourself. It's not exactly difficult, and The Guardian sometimes links the documents in question directly in their article. I guess I dismissed a Guardian news item in the Mastercard / wikileaks thread. Anyway, yes there is other news sources out there. Some are better than others, some also have different languages, The Guardian posts the news, it is the story for the most part. They add in a lot of filler content to sensationalise the story further. If you want to list off every news source in the world be my guest. I know which sources I like to rely on and I am sorry if I hurt you when I said the Guardian is not one of them and is trash in my opinion. On December 10 2010 05:57 Taguchi wrote: Here u go, these guys published the story first, national news agency of russia ... Thank you, looks to be a bit more straight to the point like most news agencies report.  | ||
|
Glaven
Canada554 Posts
If anyone hasn't seen this, definitely check it out. Assange isn't out to "get anyone" in my opinion, I feel like he's truly committed to his cause of revealing the criminal aspects of world governments. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On December 10 2010 05:59 Kralic wrote: I guess I dismissed a Guardian news item in the Mastercard / wikileaks thread. Anyway, yes there is other news sources out there. Some are better than others, some also have different languages, The Guardian posts the news, it is the story for the most part. They add in a lot of filler content to sensationalise the story further. If you want to list off every news source in the world be my guest. I know which sources I like to rely on and I am sorry if I hurt you when I said the Guardian is not one of them and is trash in my opinion. No problem. As long as you check up on what you read, I have no complaints whatsoever. | ||
|
anycolourfloyd
Australia524 Posts
but then again, i'd think that russia itself would have a lot of sketchy shit they wouldn't want exposed by wikileaks.. the whole thing feels kinda like the build-up to world war 1 though, except this could just develop into an internet / political war. | ||
|
.Aar
2177 Posts
At first I was like.. that's not good. Putin leading something means the rest of the world has to be against it because he's Russian, and Russians are evil and stuff. And then you find that the leaked cables include a sprinkling of shit on him, and everything is okay again. Damn, these are exciting times we live in, folks. | ||
| ||
