Are you in favour of wikileaks?

For non-sports-related posts. Because we really can't stand talking about sports!
Post Reply

Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Yes
4
57%
No
3
43%
 
Total votes: 7

User avatar
Lewis
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:16 pm
Gender: Male
Location: UK

Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Lewis »

Looking at this article are you in favour of what Wikileaks is doing or do you believe that it is a terrorist organisation?
Top GOP congressman says WikiLeaks should be named terrorist organization

Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican who is scheduled to become chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said Monday that WikiLeaks should be designated a terrorist organization for releasing hundreds of thousands of secret and classified government documents.

â??The benefit of that is, we would be able to seize their assets and we would be able to stop anyone from helping them in any way,â? King said, appearing on MSNBC.

King also hinted at getting WikiLeaksâ?? founder, Julian Assange, extradited for prosecution in the U.S. Naming WikiLeaks a terrorist group would help the U.S. government, he said, â??as far as trying to get them extradited, trying to get them to take action against them.â?

â??Either weâ??re serious about this or weâ??re not. I know people may think this is a bit of a stretch, but I analogize it as the RICO statute, where they had a pretty narrow definition of criminal enterprise in the beginning, but now thatâ??s been expanded quite a bit to deal with contemporary problems,â? King said.

â??If weâ??re going to live in this world, this technological world, where information can be disseminated so quickly, we have to be serious, take firm strong action against those who are putting American lives at risk, because this will put peopleâ??s lives at risk.â?

Joe Scarborough, the co-host of â??Morning Joeâ? and a former Republican congressman from Florida, was dubious.

â??I think you may be overstepping a good deal,â? he said. â??Isnâ??t your first job to call government agencies â?¦ in front of your committee and say, â??How did this happen?â?? â?¦ You know you canâ??t designate them a terror outfit?â?

King persisted.

â??I donâ??t think we should write it off that quickly and say we canâ??t do it. They are assisting in terrorist activity. The information they are giving is being used by al Qaeda, itâ??s being used by our enemies,â? he said, adding that foreign intelligence agencies will be able to identify sources for intelligence from the more than 251,000 cables being released by WikiLeaks in batches.

King wrote a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Sunday urging him to charge Assange under the Espionage Act and a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking her to designated WikiLeaks as a terrorist organization.

Holder said Monday that there is an â??active, ongoing criminal investigationâ? into the WikiLeaks release.

â??We are not in a position as yet to announce the result of that investigation, but the investigation is ongoing,â? Holder said.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said that â??WikiLeaks and people that disseminate information to people like this are criminals, first and foremost, and I think that needs to be clear.â?

Kingâ??s rhetoric is the latest example of outrage â?? most of it from conservatives â?? against the international nonprofit that earlier this year released hundreds of thousands of classified government and military documents related to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The documents appear to have come from one source: U.S. Army Private First Class Bradley Manning, who was arrested in May and is currently being held at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia, and faces a long prison sentence.

Later in the day Monday, former Clinton era Secretary of Defense William Cohen said he supported Holderâ??s criminal investigation and said the U.S. government should seek to have WikiLeaksâ?? leaders extradited â??to bring them back to face a trial here.â?

On Sunday, as the first diplomatic cables began to dribble out, Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia who has since left the organization, sent a public message to WikiLeaks on Twitter.

â??Speaking as Wikipediaâ??s co-founder, I consider you enemies of the U.S. â?? not just the government, but the people,â? Sanger wrote.

He added: â??What youâ??ve been doing to us is breathtakingly irresponsible and canâ??t be excused with pieties of free speech and openness.â?

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin called the release by WikiLeaks â??treasonous.â?

Assange, who is Australian, is facing possible prosecution in his country of origin if he returns there. The government in Canberra is exploring the possibility of filing charges against Assange.

In October, conservative columnist asked in a column: â??Why isnâ??t Julian Assange dead?â?

WikiLeaks gave an explanation for its actions in publishing the diplomatic cables Sunday that showed what appeared to be a strong anti-U.S. motivation.

â??The cables show the extent of U.S. spying on its allies and the U.N.; turning a blind eye to corruption and human rights abuse in â??client statesâ??; backroom deals with supposedly neutral countries; lobbying for U.S. corporations; and the measures U.S. diplomats take to advance those who have access to them,â? WikiLeaks wrote.

This document release reveals the contradictions between the U.S.â??s public persona and what it says behind closed doors â?? and shows that if citizens in a democracy want their governments to reflect their wishes, they should ask to see whatâ??s going on behind the scenes.

Every American schoolchild is taught that George Washington â?? the countryâ??s first president â?? could not tell a lie. If the administrations of his successors lived up to the same principle, todayâ??s document flood would be a mere embarrassment. Instead, the U.S. government has been warning governments â?? even the most corrupt â?? around the world about the coming leaks and is bracing itself for the exposures.

In its mission statement, however, WikiLeaks says its â??primary interest is in exposing oppressive regimes in Asia, the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East.â?

â??But we also expect to be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations,â? WikiLeaks says. â??We aim for maximum political impact.â?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailycaller/201 ... ganization

I think we should know what our governments get up to, so long as it does not compromise our defence and safety.
Image
User avatar
Lewis
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:16 pm
Gender: Male
Location: UK

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Lewis »

Harper advisor calls for assassination of Wikileaks director: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqtIafdoH_g
Image
User avatar
Fat Man
The Fat Man Judgeth
Posts: 3301
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:08 am
Gender: Male
Location: El Paso, Texas, USA, 3rd Planet, Sol System, Milky Way, Local Cluster, Somewhere in The Cosmos!
Contact:

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Fat Man »

Well, I for one, am in favor of Wikileaks.

There is so much corruption in the Republican party these days, as everyone should know from some of my topics in the forums, scandals that would make Watergate look like a pie fight!

Of course, the Democratic party is not exactly as pure as the driven snow either, but the Democratic party is still the lesser of the two evils.

I think corruption should be exposed. We need more whistle blowers who are brave enough to come forward.

Yeah, even if it means security might be compromised, because corruption in high places is a far greater threat to our security and our civil liberties than the occasional security leak.
ImageI'm fat and sassy! I love to sing & dance & stomp my feet & really rock your world!

All I want to hear from an ex-jock is "Will that be paper or plastic?" After that he can shut the fuck up!
Heah comes da judge! Heah comes da judge! Order in da court 'cuz heah comes da judge!
Image

Image
User avatar
recovering_fan
Member
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:08 am
Gender: M
Location: in my apartment :-)

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by recovering_fan »

Lewis wrote:Harper advisor calls for assassination of Wikileaks director: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqtIafdoH_g
THAT IS GOING TOO FAR, and think we might show them some clemency--as in not extraditing and not sending them to jail. However, I do think there should SOME limits on the public's right to know classified information.

Bill Cohen is a liberal Republican and brilliant thinker by the way. He's no fascist!

I don't trust "the government", but I do trust the opinion of free-thinkers like Cohen.
former Clinton era Secretary of Defense William Cohen said he supported Holderâ??s criminal investigation and said the U.S. government should seek to have WikiLeaksâ?? leaders extradited â??to bring them back to face a trial here.
So based on what I currently know, I am NOT in favour of Wikileaks. We never had it in the past, and WE SURVIVED AS A DEMOCRACY.

--RF
User avatar
recovering_fan
Member
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:08 am
Gender: M
Location: in my apartment :-)

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by recovering_fan »

Oh, and I don't think they are TERRORISTS, but the poll question did not ask that. It asked whether I favoured them. I do not.

--RF
User avatar
The Imperialist
Member
Posts: 283
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:49 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Guess...

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by The Imperialist »

I am not in favour of wikileaks, as when things are classified, they are classified for a reason. (I do have to confess, I did look at materials concerning Okinawa, Japan, and the island disputes, but all the things that they supposedly 'found ou', we already knew, so not a big news anyway)

Another thing I am concerned is that Australians think they are so righteous. Just like the bloody sea sheperds (who are essentially trying to prohibit Japan from one of its food sources when we are not yet fully self-sufficient) they think that because they are this great big land mass in the middle of the Pacific, and having a ultra-neutral stance (which they do not as they are scarily pro-China) and thinking they are supposedly 'liberal' (if they are, they should be condoning China on human rights, but no because they are big friends with the Communist Party) and because they have a huge uranium deposit, they think they are the chosen people. The Australian mentality regarding foreign affaris disgust me.

And certain invididuals (like the founder of wikileaks) think that by going against American interests, they are the great saviour of the world. It is very childish.
User avatar
Lewis
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:16 pm
Gender: Male
Location: UK

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Lewis »

Julian Assange denied bail over sexual assault allegations

Judge fears WikiLeaks founder â?? who denies all charges â?? has 'means and ability' to abscond

Image

The WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, who is wanted in Sweden over claims he sexually assaulted two women, was in Wandsworth prison tonight after a judge refused him bail at an extradition hearing in London.

The 39-year-old Australian, who denies the allegations, was driven away in a white prison van after an extraordinary one-hour hearing at City of Westminster magistrates court. The district judge, Howard Riddle, ruled there was a risk Assange would fail to surrender if granted bail.

Despite Jemima Khan, former wife of Pakistan cricketer Imran Khan, the campaigning journalist John Pilger, the British film director Ken Loach and others offering to stand surety totalling £180,000, the judge said Assange's "weak community ties" in the UK, and his "means and ability" to abscond, were "substantial grounds" for refusing bail.

He was remanded until 14 December, when the case can be reviewed at the same court. His legal team said he would again apply for bail at that hearing.

The move against Assange came on a day when increasing pressure was brought to bear in the US on companies and organisations with ties to WikiLeaks.

As Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate homeland security committee, urged businesses to sever their ties with the website, Visa suspended all donations through its credit card.

Asked about the New York Times's role in publishing the leaked cables, Lieberman told Fox news the newspaper "has committed at least an act of bad citizenship. Whether they have committed a crime I think bears very intensive inquiry".

Assange, wearing a black suit and open-necked white shirt, stood in the glass-panelled dock as more than 50 journalists from around the world packed into the well and more than 20 supporters and friends crammed into the public gallery. Outside, the pavement was swallowed up as more photographers and camera crew jostled with angry protesters gathered at the building's main entrance.

After the ruling â?? with supporters waving A4 printouts reading "Character Assassination" and "Protect Free Speech" â?? his solicitor, Mark Stephens, emerged on to the court's steps to claim the prosecution was "politically motivated" and pledged that WikiLeaks would not be cowed. Assange was entitled to a high court appeal, he said, adding the judge was "impressed" with the number of people prepared to "stand up" on his client's behalf. "[Those supporters] were but the tip of the iceberg," he said. "This is going to go viral. Many people believe Mr Assange to be innocent, myself included. Many people believe that this prosecution is politically motivated."

Pilger, who told the judge he did know Assange and had "very high regard for him", said outside court: "Sweden should be ashamed. This is not justice â?? this is outrageous."

Assange was arrested by appointment at a London police station at 9.20am after a European arrest warrant was received by the Metropolitan police extradition unit yesterday. He appeared in court at 2pm, where he spoke to confirm his name and date of birth and to tell the court: "I do not consent to my extradition."

There was confusion when he initially refused to give an address except a Post Office box number. When told this was unacceptable, his lawyer, John Jones, read out an address at 177 Grantham Street, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. Assange is wanted in connection with four allegations including of rape and molestation.

Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish prosecutors, said the first involved complainant A, who said she was the victim of "unlawful coercion" on the night of 14 August in Stockholm. The court heard Assange is accused of using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.

The second charge alleged Assange "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.

The third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on 18 August "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity". The fourth charge accused Assange of having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on 17 August without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.

Lindfield argued there was a "high risk of flight" because of Assange's "lifestyle, connections and potential assets".

He had access to funds, through PayPal donations to the WikiLeaks website, had a "network of international contacts", lived a "nomadic" lifestyle, and spent his time in "hiding", she said. The court later heard that for the past three weeks he had been staying at a UK address, and before then had spent two months living at the Frontline media club in Paddington.

There was no record of him entering the UK in the first place. He had displayed an unwillingness to co-operate, refusing to be photographed, fingerprinted or give a DNA sample on arrest, she added.

No details were given about the strength of evidence, with Lindfield saying it "is not a factor in relation to bail". She also opposed bail for reasons of his personal safety, saying if granted "any number of unstable persons could take it upon themselves to cause him serious harm".

"This is someone, simply put, to whom no conditions, even the most stringent conditions, could be imposed that would ensure he surrendered to the jurisdiction of this court," she said.

John Jones said the case must be "shorn of all political and media hysteria" associated with WikiLeaks.

Assange was of previous good character, and had voluntarily handed himself in to Kentish Town police station in London. His refusal to be photographed, fingerprinted or give a DNA sample was on legal advice.

He had stayed in Sweden for 40 days after the allegations were made to answer the charges and only left the country after being given "express permission" by the Swedish prosecutor.

Since he had arrived in the UK he had "consistently agreed to talk to the Swedish authorities". His defence fund had been frozen, and he would also be "instantly recognised" if he tried to leave the country, said Jones.

"He resists extradition as it is disproportionate to extradite someone under these circumstances. There has been every indication that the point of this warrant is to get him back for questioning."

The judge said the warrant did state it was for prosecution.

Others offering surety were Professor Patricia David, and the lawyer Geoffrey Sheen, president of Union Solidarity International, who both said although they did not know Assange they were concerned about human rights. An unnamed relative of Assange offered £80,000.

But judge Riddle said: "The nature and strength of the evidence is not there, this is normal at this stage in proceedings. What we have here is the serious possible allegations against someone with comparatively weak community ties in this country. He has the means and ability to abscond if he wants to and I am satisfied that there are substantial grounds to believe if I granted him bail he would fail to surrender."

Downing Street said Assange's arrest was "a matter for the police" and there had been no ministerial involvement.

A WikiLeaks spokesman, Kristinn Hrafnsson, said it would not stop the release of more secret files. "WikiLeaks is operational. We are continuing on the same track as laid out before. Any development with regards to Julian Assange will not change the plans we have with regards to the releases today and in the coming days."

Unlike the UK, Swedish rape law is not based on consent but on the aforementioned concept of sexual integrity. There are a number of possible offences against this integrity. Those that involve both penetration and either physical force or a threat of some illegal act, such as violence, are classified as rape. So are assaults on people who are helpless at the time, either as a result of intoxication or severe mental disturbance. The degree of physical force involved need only be very small. It can be enough merely to move the victim's legs apart, according to Gunilla Berglund, at the Swedish ministry of justice. Rape carries a sentence of between two and six years; aggravated rape a sentence of four to 10 years.

An issue concerning Assange's lawyers is the lack of bail in Swedish criminal procedure. Suspects are remanded in custody when legal grounds can be made out for their detention â?? particularly when they are foreigners who are deemed at risk of absconding.

However, there are strict limits on the timescale for bringing a suspect to trial, with a formal charge required within two weeks of being remanded into custody, and trial one week after that.

The Swedish director of public prosecutions, Marianne Ny, dismissed suggestions of a political motive for the rape allegations.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/de ... enied-bail
Image
User avatar
The Imperialist
Member
Posts: 283
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:49 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Guess...

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by The Imperialist »

When I heard this, I was thinking "Wow, such convienient timing"

And now, so called Anonymous are being a bunch of bastards just ruining people's lives by hacking into Mastercard and Visa etc. Why can't they hack more relevant things like the... actually I shouldn't say this. You never know who is watching.

Point being, I have this feeling that this so called 'leak' was orchestrated by America, as certain cables do make the 'Axis of Evil' look like as if it is criticised by everybody, even countries that lookoed friendly to these 'Axis of Evil', but I am just speculating.

One thing people have to know, bump up security. I think this is what people have learnt by now (unlike some stupid Republican politicians calling Assange a traitor when he is not an American Citizen -technical term should be Espionage- and calling for his execution as that is just childish. Why can't they say to put him in court when America is supposed to be the 'Land of Law' -and ridiculous amount of lawyers-, such hypocrites.)
User avatar
Agent 47
Member
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Agent 47 »

The Imperialist wrote: Australians...are scarily pro-China
Ah, Imperialist - your opinion of Australia's position on China appears to be in error.

Let me help you with that.

In fact, there is a recent WikiLeaks leak that can help here.

The following WikiLeaks cable release covers the content of a meeting between US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, and our then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, discussing China.

Here are the words of our then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd...

The Sydney Morning Herald wrote: Rudd the butt of WikiLeaks exposé
December 6, 2010


Kevin Rudd warned Hillary Clinton to be prepared to use force against China ''if everything goes wrong'', an explosive WikiLeaks cable has revealed.

...

In a wide-ranging conversation, Mr Rudd:

Described himself as ''a brutal realist on China'' and said Australian intelligence agencies closely watched its military expansion.

Said the goal must be to integrate China into the international community, ''while also preparing to deploy force if everything goes wrong''.

Characterised Chinese leaders as ''sub-rational and deeply emotional'' about Taiwan.

Said the planned build-up of Australia's navy was ''a response to China's growing ability to project force''.

...

The disclosures in the cable, posted online by the British newspaper The Guardian, will complicate Mr Rudd's already testy personal links with China after his reported reference to Chinese negotiators as ''rat f---ers'' during the Copenhagen climate change conference.

...

Mr Rudd said he had urged China to strike a deal with the Dalai Lama for autonomy in Tibet

...

On his plan for an ''Asia-Pacific community'', Mr Rudd said the goal was to curb China's dominance.



http://www.smh.com.au/technology/securi ... 18lf2.html
Hardly the words of someone "scarily pro-China".

"rat f---ers".

Lol!
"We can’t find a healthy brain in an ex-football player."

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2873539.htm
User avatar
Lewis
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:16 pm
Gender: Male
Location: UK

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Lewis »

Wikileaks' Julian Assange 'fears extradition to US'

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says he is worried about an attempt to extradite him to the United States.

Mr Assange, 39, is free on bail in the UK while facing extradition proceedings to Sweden over sex allegations.

Mr Assange denies the Swedish allegations, made by two women, and says the case is politically motivated.

He said:"The big risk, the risk we have always been concerned about, is onwards extradition to the United States. And that seems to be increasingly likely."

He said the US was conducting an "aggressive" and "illegal" investigation into him and the website.

"A lot of face has been lost by some people and some... have careers to make by pursuing a famous case," said Mr Assange, who is living at the home of supporter Vaughan Smith, near Bungay in Suffolk.

Speaking to reporters in the grounds of the house he said some people appeared to be "engaged in what appears to be, certainly a secret investigation, but appears also to be an illegal investigation".

Mr Assange said he suspected an espionage indictment was being prepared in the US and he condemned the secrecy which surrounded his case.

The Australian said Wikileaks was a "robust" organisation which will continue to publish information. He said it had so far published only 2,000 out of the 250,000 cables.

He said: "During my time in solitary confinement in the basement of a Victorian prison, my colleagues were publishing material." He highlighted allegations published on Friday about India torturing people in Kashmir.
'Continuing vendetta'

At a hearing at the High Court in London on Thursday, Mr Justice Ouseley ordered Mr Assange be bailed on payment of £240,000 in cash and sureties.

The judge imposed strict bail conditions including wearing an electronic tag, reporting to police every day and observing a curfew.

Mr Assange must also reside at the manor home on the Norfolk-Suffolk border owned by Mr Smith, a Wikileaks-supporting journalist and owner of the Frontline Club in London.

On Friday Mr Assange said: "I'm going to go out into the country and do some fishing. It makes a very significant change compared to being in a basement in solitary confinement."

Mr Assange's solicitor Mark Stephens said after the court appearance the bail appeal was part of a "continuing vendetta by the Swedes".

Speaking to the BBC after his release Mr Assange said there was a rumour from his lawyers in the US there had been an indictment made against him by a grand jury.

A spokeswoman from the US Department of Justice would only confirm there was "an ongoing investigation into the Wikileaks matter".

In an interview for US television, Mr Assange denied any knowledge of former US Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning, who is accused of providing Wikileaks with classified reports that could lead to Mr Assange's indictment on spy charges in the US.

He told ABC's Good Morning America the website's computer system was designed to maintain the anonymity of sources who give sensitive government documents.

Bradley Manning, 23, was charged earlier this year with obtaining the classified video of a 2007 helicopter attack that killed a dozen people in Iraq and downloading more than 150,000 US State Department documents.
Sex allegations

Mr Assange has received the backing of a number of high-profile supporters, including human rights campaigners Jemima Khan and Bianca Jagger, and film director Ken Loach.

Wikileaks has published hundreds of sensitive American diplomatic cables, details of which have appeared in the Guardian in the UK and several other newspapers around the world.

He has been criticised in the US, where former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has said he should be hunted down like the al-Qaeda leadership.

Mr Assange argues the allegations against him are designed to take attention away from the material appearing on Wikileaks - but the Swedish authorities say the case has not been brought because of outside "pressure".

He is accused of having unprotected sex with a woman, identified only as Miss A, when she insisted he use a condom.

Mr Assange is also accused of having unprotected sex with another woman, Miss W, while she was asleep.

Mr Smith said Mr Assange was a good friend and had previously stayed at his house.

He said: "I knew Julian well and obviously it's a very contentious matter and I love journalism.

"I felt it was important to make a stand and I was very concerned that Julian received justice and I wanted to express my support."

Mr Smith said he had not employed any security guards to protect Mr Assange and he added: "If the police fear there is a real threat of that I'm sure they will do what is necessary to protect me."

It is possible a full extradition hearing will not take place for several months.

At that hearing Mr Assange will be able to challenge the warrant and raise any defences to the extradition request.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12020063

I hope he is not extradited. They must be afraid of the truth coming out.
Image
User avatar
Agent 47
Member
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Agent 47 »

I haven't voted in this poll yet, because I'm still undecided.

On one hand, I like the idea of corruption getting exposed, but on the other hand, I'm worried that releasing certain information might cause innocent, well intentioned people to get hurt.

With only the first 2,000 documents released so far out of the 250,000, it's still only early days yet. So time will tell.

But I'm sure I heard that some UFO files are going to be released. Can't wait for those.

Anyway, here is another recent WikiLeaks release...
The Huffington Post wrote: Santa Claus' "Naughty/Nice" List Released by WikiLeaks
December 6, 2010

The "Naughty vs Nice" files maintained by Santa Claus ahead of his annual Christmas gift-giving flight around the globe are the latest documents released by self-proclaimed "whistleblower," Wikileaks.

The file is divided into a "naughty list," for children who misbehaved or treated people badly, who are therefore less deserving of presents; and a "nice list," which includes an inventory of gifts for children whose actions fall under the rubric of "good."

The confidentiality of the file is considered vital to a Christmas season filled with joy, surprises and holiday cheer.

Santa Claus - also known in some countries as Father Christmas, Kris Kringle, or St. Nicholas - reacted with fury at the leak.

"That's it. Assange is on the permanent 'naughty' list," he fumed from his North Pole workshop. "No more Swedish women for him!"

In one key entry, Santa is revealed to have written "very deserving," next to a letter to "S. Clause," written by a 7 year-old boy from Denver, who requested a sled for Christmas. In a special notation section, Claus is revealed to have written, "Worked very hard on spelling."

In another, however, a 12 year-old girl's request for an I -Touch will go unanswered. "Mean to girls in the hallway at school," says the special notation.

None of the children's names were redacted by Wikileaks, leading to concerns the children will be singled out for mockery in schools already fearful of bullying, both in person and online.

The Huffington Post has chosen not to publish these names to protect the children's privacy.

"It's wrong to say that we 'targeted' Claus," said Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, contacted while in hiding. "His organization, which is really more of a Christmas-cabal, has a virtual monopoly on flying reindeer and skilled-elves, and deploys what appears to be an entirely arbitrary system for categorizing the world's children."

"It's that type of secrecy we think is important to unveil to the public eye," Assange said.

Claus - the jolly, old fat man, typically seen wearing a red suit - works all year in preparation for the evening of December 24th, in which he brings gifts to children the world over. His North Pole residence is also home to more than a dozen flying reindeer, and scores of elves - whose work ranges from crafting toys to helping maintain the "Naughty vs. Nice" list.

"We think the file was exploited when we updated from dusty, old ledger books to a Windows-based server system," said Alabaster Snowball, the elf in charge of administering the system.

"But if we can't do our work with absolute confidentiality, then why would children even wake up early on Christmas to find out what they received?"

Disappointment by children around the world has many elves fearful of a "milk and cookies backlash." With lowered anticipation, elves are concerned that fewer kids will leave holiday treats for Claus.

"Those cookies represent the carb-and-sugar load he needs to get through the night," Snowball said.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mp-nunan/ ... 92506.html
"We can’t find a healthy brain in an ex-football player."

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2873539.htm
User avatar
Lewis
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:16 pm
Gender: Male
Location: UK

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Lewis »

Wikileaks' Julian Assange to be extradited to Sweden

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange should be extradited to Sweden to face sexual assault allegations, a judge has ruled.

At Belmarsh Magistrates' Court in south London, District Judge Howard Riddle said the extradition would not breach Mr Assange's human rights.

Mr Assange will appeal against the court ruling. He denies three allegations of sexual assault and one of rape last August in Stockholm.

He believes the claims are politically motivated because of Wikileaks' work.

Mr Assange has been released on bail on the same terms he was granted in December. His supporters had put up money as security.

The whistle-blowing website has made headlines worldwide with the publication of sensitive material - including leaked US diplomatic cables - from governments and high-profile organisations.
'Public enemy number one'

Judge Riddle dismissed the argument that Mr Assange would not receive a fair trial in Sweden that had been made by his lawyers during the two-and-a-half-day hearing earlier this month.

They had argued that criticism by Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt had made Mr Assange "public enemy number one" in Sweden.

But delivering his ruling on Thursday, the judge said: "The defence refer to the alleged denigration of the defendant by the Swedish prime minister.

"For this reason and other reasons it is said Mr Assange will not receive a fair trial. I don't accept this was the purpose of the comment or the effect."

Mr Assange's lawyer, Geoffrey Robertson QC, had also argued that rape trials in Sweden were regularly "tried in secret behind closed doors in a flagrant denial of justice".

Clare Montgomery QC, for the Swedish authorities, told the hearing that evidence from a trial would be heard in private but the arguments would be made in public.

Judge Riddle said that did not mean the trial would be unfair or breach human rights.
Death penalty

Dismissing further arguments made by Mr Assange's lawyers, the judge found:

* The allegations against Mr Assange were extradition offences
* The prosecutor who issued the European Arrest Warrant for Mr Assange had been suitably qualified
* The warrant was issued for the purpose of prosecution and not simply for questioning

Mr Assange was arrested on 7 December and spent nine days in Wandsworth prison in London before being released on bail.

During the hearing two weeks ago, Mr Robertson said his client could later be extradited to the US on separate charges relating to Wikileaks - and could face the death penalty there.

In response, Ms Montgomery said Sweden provided "protection against that sort of threat and violation" taking place.

The European Court of Human Rights would intervene if Mr Assange was to face the prospect of "inhuman or degrading treatment or an unfair trial" in the US, she said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12564865
Image
User avatar
Agent 47
Member
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Agent 47 »

I feel sorry for Julian Assange. I don't think he's evil, but I think he's going to end up paying a huge price for all of this.

There was a good little documentary on TV about this whole WikiLeaks saga, called "The Forgotten Man", (45 minutes), and you can watch it online if you want -

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/ ... 135595.htm

And apparently, no harm has come from any of these leaks so far. (See half way down the transcript, in larger type) -

The Forgotten Man on ABC-TV wrote: The Forgotten Man
Reporter: Quentin McDermott
Date: 14/02/2011

KERRY O'BRIEN: Julian Assange - hero to untold millions, public enemy number one to the most powerful government in the world.

Welcome to Four Corners.

The WikiLeaks story is both monumental and complex. But while all eyes are on Julian Assange and the very visible battle over Swedenâ??s attempt to extradite him from Britain to face charges apparently unrelated to WikiLeaks, there is another crucial side to this saga being played out behind the walls of an American military prison, and in the power centres of Washington â?? one thatâ??s received little attention in this country.

As Julian Assange waits in an English country manor for the British courts to determine his immediate fate, the young US Army private who allegedly masterminded the biggest intelligence breach in history is languishing in solitary confinement in America facing jail for life.

Private Bradley Manning, who blew the whistle in such spectacular fashion from a humble military desk in Iraq, is the key to US efforts to force Julian Assange back to America for prosecution.

What follows is a story that reveals the personalities at play in WikiLeaks and the cyber world, and Americaâ??s fierce determination from the depths of its embarrassment to make an example of Julian Assange. Hereâ??s Quentin McDermottâ??s report.

(Audio from Apache helicopter)

SOLDIER: Hotel Two-Six: this is Crazy Horse One-Eight, have individual with weapons...
Yep, he's got a weapon too.

(End of audio)

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT, REPORTER: On April the fifth last year, the most shocking vision to come out of the war in Iraq was published by WikiLeaks.

(Audio from Apache helicopter)

SOLDIER 2: All right, firing.

Let me know when you've got them.

SOLDIER 3: Letâ??s shoot.

Light 'em all up.

SOLDIER2: Come on, fire!

SOLDIER 3: Keep shoot'n, keep shoot'n. Keep shoot'n.

(End of audio)

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: The US Army video, filmed in 2007, showed a group of men - almost all unarmed - being gunned down in a Baghdad street by an American Apache helicopter, and recorded the voices of the soldiers carrying out the attack.

(Audio from Apache helicopter)

SOLDIER 3: Come on buddy.

SOLDIER 2: All you gotta do is pick up a weapon.

(End of audio)

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: One man had reportedly been carrying an RPG, a rocket propelled grenade, but two of the unarmed men who died were Reuters news staff, and two young children in a van were seriously wounded in the onslaught.

(Audio from Apache helicopter)

SOLDIER 3: Clear... clear... Come around, clear.

(End of audio)

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: The title given to the video, Collateral Murder, marked the launch of a new, highly politicised agenda for WikiLeaks, driven by the websiteâ??s founder Julian Assange.

JULIAN ASSANGE, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, WIKILEAKS: Of course the title is absolutely correct. It speaks about very specific incidents.

If you go to collateralmurder.com you will see the exact incident it's talking about when a man is crawling in the street completely unarmed, wounded and he is killed by a 30 millimetre cannon from the air very intentionally, and his rescuers.

DANIEL ELLSBERG, FMR US MILITARY ANALYST: I watched the Apache helicopter attack in the video with the eyes of a former marine infantry officer. I was a platoon leader and company commander and I was also a battalion training officer who had trained troops on Nuremberg in the laws of war.

It was very clear to me that what I was looking at was a war crime, was murder.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: The videoâ??s credits paid tribute to "Our courageous source", and advertised WikiLeaksâ?? â??unbroken record in protecting confidential sources.â?

But just seven weeks later Private Bradley Manning, an army intelligence analyst based in Baghdad, was arrested and charged with leaking the video.

It was a shattering blow, as a former spokesman for WikiLeaks, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, recalled when he spoke to Four Corners in Berlin last month.

DANIEL DOMSCHEIT-BERG, FMR SPOKESPERSON, WIKILEAKS: When that happened and when it was black and white that an alleged source of us was arrested and it was in connection to these high profile, to this high profile video, and it was by the US military and he was detained in a prison in Kuwait, that was really devastating.

And I canâ??t even put words on how I felt. This was like falling into a pit that had no end.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Private Manningâ??s arrest wasnâ??t triggered by a lapse in security from WikiLeaks, a tip-off from a fellow soldier, or security checks in Iraq.

Instead â?? and bizarrely â?? it was instigated by this man, a former hacker from California called Adrian Lamo.

Mr Lamo spoke to Four Corners on Skype. He says Bradley Manning approached him online after learning of their shared interest in WikiLeaks and that their conversations ranged over several days.

The words Private Manning is alleged to have used in their chats are voiced here by an actor.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged correspondence): I'm an army intelligence analyst, deployed to eastern Baghdad, pending discharge for "adjustment disorder".

ADRIAN LAMO, FORMER HACKER: Mr Manning introduced himself factually as an intelligence analyst stationed at Forward Operating Base Hammer in Iraq. His initial communication was unremarkable. There was nothing that would lead a casual reader to believe that there was anything out of the ordinary about it. However, he soon began to drop hints about his access to classified information.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged conversation): Hypothetical question: if you had free reign over classified networks for long periods of time, say, eight to nine months, and you saw incredible things, awful things... things that belonged in the public domain, and not on some server stored in a dark room in Washington DC... what would you do? ...things that would have an impact on 6.7 billion people.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Adrian Lamo says Bradley Manning sensationally confessed that he passed vast amounts of classified material to WikiLeaks, including a war log from Iraq, containing 400,000 events.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged conversation): Let's just say *someone* I know intimately well, has been penetrating US classified networks, mining data like the ones described... sorting the data, compressing it, encrypting it, and uploading it to a crazy white haired Aussie who canâ??t seem to stay in one country very long.

Crazy white haired dude =Julian Assange.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: According to the records of these chats, Private Manning saw his own connection with WikiLeaks as significant.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged correspondence): I'm a source, not quite a volunteer I mean, I'm a high profile source ...and I've developed a relationship with Assange.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Adrian Lamo says a moment came when he decided he had to act.

ADRIAN LAMO: For me, the precise moment at which I felt that what Bradley Manning was doing was a danger to national security and to the lives of others was when he characterised one of his leaks as being in excess of a quarter of a million state department documents.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged correspondence): Say... 260,000 state department cables from embassies and consulates all over the world, explaining how the first world exploits the third, in detail, from an internal perspective?

ADRIAN LAMO: I knew for a fact, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he could not possibly have vetted all of these documents himself for safety. It was simply being released in bulk to an unauthorised third party, a third party that had an unknown agenda.

And this was of course a conduct that he was going to continue to engage in unless interdicted.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Adrian Lamo says he kept a record of the alleged confessions made by the 22-year-old soldier in Iraq, and when he tipped off military intelligence, it was like a scene from a spy thriller.

ADRIAN LAMO: As any good crime movie will tell you, I met them at a diner. The meetings were ultimately multi-jurisdictional and, at points, involving individuals from the FBI, Army Counter Intelligence, the Army Criminal Investigation Division, the National Security Agency and other entities.

I did not expect them to immediately arrest Mr Manning, but they determined that that was the best course of action and that is what happened.

KEVIN POULSEN, SENIOR EDITOR, WIRED.COM: So the magazineâ??s actually been around since the early 1990s, before there even was a web.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: In an equally sensational move, Adrian Lamo then offered his story and the alleged chat logs to Kevin Poulsen at Wired Magazine in San Francisco.
The two men met at this coffee shop near Sacramento.

KEVIN POULSEN: I finally met up with Adrian in Sacramento at the Starbucks. He finally got his laptop working, he finally got the logs on his screen, and I was able to start skimming through what he had there.

It kind of started to dawn on me that maybe, maybe this is real. Maybe this actually, actually turned in, turned in WikiLeaksâ?? most important whistleblower.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Adrian Lamo says he gave the story to Kevin Poulsen as insurance, in case something happened to him.

ADRIAN LAMO: I discussed with Kevin my interaction with government agents up to that point. I provided him with a copy of the logs for safekeeping and at that point I went on to meet with government agents.

I myself did not know if I was necessarily going to be coming back from that meeting or if they would want to hold on to me for some unknown reason based on the information that I already had in my possession.

KEVIN POULSEN: It was on the drive back from Sacramento where I found myself wondering if I was going to be stopped on the Bay Bridge by the Feds saying, hey, you have something of ours. I mean that, that, I began to think that, yeah, this was- this was actually a big story.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: In the weeks following Private Bradley Manningâ??s arrest, an even bigger story was building.

Julian Assange by now was a wanted man, as he circled the globe with the treasure-trove of documents he had allegedly received from Private Manning.

In conditions of great secrecy, Assange did a deal with two of the worldâ??s major newspapers, The New York Times and The Guardian.

ALAN RUSBRIDGER, EDITOR, THE GUARDIAN: There was a lot of cloak and dagger about it because he was, I think, probably the most hunted man on earth at that point because of what he had, and it sounded extraordinary.

And when I, when he first came back with his sort of password and we opened up the website and this was just the first tranche, so this was just the first set of war logs, you could immediately see that this was, you know, of tremendous significance and was going to make an awful lot of people in governments really unhappy.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: What Assange had given The Guardian was the Afghan war logs - a vast compilation of army reports from the war, stretching back to 2004.
More revelations would follow.

JULIAN ASSANGE (At press conference, October 2010): This disclosure is about the truth.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: In late October, the Iraqi War Logs were published, detailing allegations of torture by the Iraqi Federal Police, and complicity in that torture by the US Armed Forces in Iraq.

JULIAN ASSANGE (At press conference, October 2010): And this is a list of reports with key words and contacts...

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: The logs revealed the militaryâ??s own inside story of the wars, and for the journalists charged with sifting through the documents, it was a god-given gift.

DEAN BAQUET, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, NEW YORK TIMES: We always thought about the issues of what do we have in these documents that could jeopardise lives, so we had this serious, the moments of seriousness and we realised the gravity of it.

But we were also like kids in a candy store. I mean we had the greatest story, to my mind, of this era for a journalist, is the way, at least in the West, at least for the US, is the way September 11th has transformed American foreign policy.

Not only in the ways that are very noticeable, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in other ways too. And suddenly these journal- as journalists whoâ??ve had to rely on third hand, fourth hand you know late night interviews with people who knew pieces of this, we had the whole story. So we were elated, of course we were.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: The publication of the Afghan and Iraqi war logs made Julian Assange a global celebrity. But Private Bradley Manning was largely forgotten.

The soldier, on his arrest, had been charged with leaking more than 50 diplomatic cables to a person outside the Army. But the authorities who had Adrian Lamoâ??s version of the chat logs believed he had passed on 260,000 cables.

Just how seriously they viewed this leak became clear when Dean Baquet and his colleagues approached the White House to discuss redacting the cables before their publication last November, to ensure no lives were endangered.

DEAN BAQUET: We walked in with some cables just to show then what we had, and we walked in expecting you know maybe two or three people from the government and it was a packed conference room of people from the Defence Intelligence Agency, the State Department, the White House, and it was a tense discussion, it was very tense.

Initially it was they were making the argument that we, these are not things that should be made public. There were people in the room who said this would have a devastating impact on foreign policy. And we made the argument back for why we felt obliged to publish.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: What not been revealed until now is that within WikiLeaks itself there was also a fierce debate about whether it was in Bradley Manningâ??s best interests to publish the cables.

DANIEL DOMSCHEIT-BERG: If the cables had not been published, there wouldâ??ve been no proof that anyone had given the material to a different entity. So from my perspective, whatever wouldâ??ve- shouldâ??ve happened with these cables, for the sake of Bradley Manning, wouldâ??ve been to just keep them back as long as possible until you find out what is happening with him before you publish them.

Because I mean, thatâ??s just feeding, thatâ??s just feeding allegations of spreading material to other entities, and that might mean new charges that have not come up at this point in time.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Did Julian Assange agree with you?

DANIEL DOMSCHEIT-BERG: Obviously not.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Was there a discussion within WikiLeaks as to whether or not the cables should be published in the light of the charges that were laid against Bradley Manning?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Yes, we were concerned as to how that would possibly play into his case and we saw that his charges only included some 50 cables and so we're not sure whether that is related to the material that weâ??ve released but we could see that extra accusations would probably be made against him given that that he was the only name being floated around by the US Military.

(Excerpt from TV interview)

INTERVIEWER: Thereâ??s been this US intelligence analyst, Bradley Manning arrested, and itâ??s alleged that he confessed in a chat-room that he leaked this video to you, along with 280,000 classified US Embassy cables. I mean, did he?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well we have denied receiving those cables. He has been charged about five days ago with obtaining 150,000 cables and releasing 50.

INTERVIEWER: I mean if you did receive thousands of US Embassy diplomatic cables...

JULIAN ASSANGE: We would have released them.

INTERVIEWER: You would?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Yeah.

(End of excerpt)

Because we donâ??t know who our sources are, we cannot be in a position where upcoming publications can be affected by taking hostages. That is, would be a very dangerous precedent to set.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: But doesnâ??t that mean that those hostages, those potential sources themselves become, if youâ??ll forgive me, collateral damage?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well I mean if a particular government wants to engage in abusive action, it engaged in abusive action. But we have a promise to our sources that we will publish.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Julian Assange has asserted that the technology used by WikiLeaks prevents the organisation knowing the identity of its sources.

(Archive footage, Julian Assange at the Frontline Club in London, October, 2010)

JULIAN ASSANGE: I mean I had never heard the name Bradley Manning before I saw media reports about this, but given that this is a man who is now wrapped up in our publishing operations, whether he was a source or not, whether he was peripherally involved or directly involved, he is now in a position where he is in a prison cell, awaiting trial.

(End of archive footage)

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: If Adrian Lamoâ??s chat logs are genuine, Bradley Manning knew the man he was talking to was Assange.

But according to Daniel Domscheit-Berg, itâ??s quite plausible that Julian Assange did'nt know the soldierâ??s identity.

DANIEL DOMSCHEIT-BERG: They couldâ??ve talked without exchanging their names, or Bradley Manning wouldnâ??t have necessarily told Julian his name. Iâ??m not aware of what has been discussed or if anything at all had been discussed, so I canâ??t really comment on that.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged correspondence): Hilary Clinton, and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and finds an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format to the public...

(Archive footage, November 2010)

HILLARY CLINTON, US SECRETARY OF STATE: The United States strongly condemns the illegal disclosure of classified information. It puts peopleâ??s lives in danger, threatens our national security and undermines our efforts to work with other countries to solve shared problemsâ?¦

(End of footage)

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: What has angered the United States Government more than anything is the wholesale leaking of the State Departmentâ??s diplomatic cables. Opinions differ as to how much damage this has done.

JOHN BELLINGER, FMR LEGAL ADVISOR, US DEPT OF STATE: The government overall is horrified. This is sort of the worst crisis in release of leaks of government documents I think in history and for the State Department itâ??s really almost apocalyptic to have 250,000 cables lost.

It affects our relations with every country in the world and puts sources of information, not only government sources but human rights activists and dissidents and others, at great risk.

ALAN RUSBRIDGER: I think the interesting thing is that nobody at the end of it can really point to any danger. I mean everyone was saying that the sky was going to fall in, that that people would be killed, that that states would never be able to speak, but none of that happened and now in fact the State Department is tacitly admitting that that actually they canâ??t point to any harm.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Ironically, this gigantic leak of diplomatic cables was only made possible by the US Governmentâ??s decision post 9/11 to bring in a policy of greater information sharing, in the wake of the intelligence failures that allowed Al Qaedaâ??s attacks to occur.

The new strategy meant that a lowly Private stationed in Iraq was able to access enormous databases of secret and classified material.

That policy was called Net-Centric Diplomacy.

KEVIN POULSEN: Net-Centric Diplomacy put the bulk of US State Department cables on the militaryâ??s private intranet, its classified network called SIPRNet, where it could be accessed by hundreds of thousands of people in the US and at foreign bases and posts. And that is what Manning apparently took advantage of.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Given this unparalleled access, Private Manning is believed to have breached security on the SIPRNet computer with almost farcical ease.

(Sound of Telephone by Lady Gaga)

Lady Gaga played a starring role, according to the chat logs, as Manning downloaded a quarter of a million diplomatic cables.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged conversation): I would come in with music on a CD-RW labelled with something like "Lady Gaga"... erase the music... then write a compressed split file no-one suspected a thing.

Listened and lip-synced to Lady Gagaâ??s Telephone while exfiltratrating possibly the largest data spillage in American history.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Private Manningâ??s brief Army career had been a troubled one. Heâ??d been disciplined more than once and appears to have been suffering great emotional stress.

But he says the turning point for him came when he watched a group of detainees heâ??d been told to investigate being taken by the Iraqi Federal Police, almost certainly to be tortured.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged conversation): Everything started slipping after that... I saw things differently.

I had always questioned the things worked, and investigated to find the truth but that was a point where I was a *part* of something... I was actively involved in something that I was completely againstâ?¦

DANIEL ELLSBERG: What weâ??ve heard from the people he unburdened himself to, Adrian Lamo, in the chat logs, was that his motives sound exactly like mine. He said, I was actively participating in something I was totally against.

(Speaking to an assembled audience): Why is the Obama administration so particularly sensitive about these releases?

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Daniel Ellsberg is Bradley Manningâ??s most prominent American supporter and Americaâ??s most famous whistleblower.

Forty years ago, he leaked the Pentagon Papers, revealing the duplicity with which successive American Presidents had waged the war in Vietnam.

But by leaking them, like Bradley Manning, Daniel Ellsberg risked being sent to jail for life.

DANIEL ELLSBERG: In my case, it was when I finally came to see, late in the game, in 1969 when I looked at the origins of the war in the Pentagon Papers and realised that it had never been legitimate, that it had never been a legitimate basis for our killing Vietnamese, that I began to see all that killing as murder.

And murder it seemed to me was something that had to be stopped, even if it put me in prison to do it. I would say that Bradley Manning has shown a willingness to give his life, his freedom, a life of freedom, for his country. And you canâ??t be more patriotic than that.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Daniel Domscheit-Berg has fallen out with Julian Assange and left WikiLeaks. He believes that taking on the US was always Julian Assangeâ??s priority.

DANIEL DOMSCHEIT-BERG: I think he was aiming at taking up the biggest fight possible, and that fight was by taking up a fight against the United States maybe in that case, as the biggest political player in the, in the sphere. And that has some megalomaniac tendencies.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Is that your ultimate aim now, to radically change the behaviour of the worldâ??s superpowers?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Yes thatâ??s correct. We all, we are all too well aware of the abuses by not just superpowers, but other powers and by companies.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: So are you a revolutionary?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well weâ??ll see. If we end up with a decent revolution then perhaps others can make that judgment.

STEPHEN YATES, FMR ADVISOR TO VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY: These are photos taken in late 2005.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Stephen Yates is a former advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney. He wants the United States to hit back hard against Private Manning and Julian Assange.

STEPHEN YATES: I consider it to be an act of political warfare.

The acts appear to have been done by some US citizens, including a member of the US military who is subject to all the penalties attached to that office, but others have been foreign nationals and when foreign nationals gather illegal, classified information and disclose it to try to influence US policy, that is espionage.

JOHN BELLINGER: The US Governmentâ??s challenge in this case will be to show that what Mr Assange was doing was not classic journalism and press but in fact really theft of government property in a way thatâ??s not protected by the First Amendment.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: To date, there is no evidence that Julian Assange directly helped Bradley Manning extract the files.

Adrian Lamo says Bradley Manning did receive help but he isnâ??t saying from whom.

ADRIAN LAMO: A third party with whom I had interaction subsequent to my interactions with Bradley Manning indicated that they gave Bradley Manning assistance in setting up encryption software but that, that in and of itself is not a criminal act.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Who is that third party?

ADRIAN LAMO: Well, theyâ??re a private citizen and I would hesitate to draw undue attention on to them because in this case the good of the one does outweigh the good of the many.

DANIEL DOMSCHEIT-BERG: Lots of people were coming and asking how they could upload material to us. Thatâ??s- you could tell them how to safely use a computer and maybe how to encrypt information, so that certainly was done. But I think that is- that is pretty much valid. Thatâ??s the same thing as a journalist would tell you, that you shouldnâ??t write your senderâ??s address on a brown envelope or something like this.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Adrian Lamoâ??s word appears to have been accepted by the military investigators who arrested Private Manning. But within the hacker community he hails from, he is treated with far greater scepticism.

KEVIN POULSEN: In the early 2000s he hacked large corporations and a couple of media outlets, including The New York Times. And unlike most computer criminals, he was very public about it.

KEVIN MITNICK, MITNICK SECURITY CONSULTING: Adrian is a kind of guy that loves attention and he loves to read about himself in newspaper articles and magazines and online blogs and it seems that he goes out of his way, and even subjecting himself to Federal prosecution by, he used to do this, you know, break into computer systems and go to the press and tell them about it so they could write about it and it would be available on the internet.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Kevin Mitnick is himself a former computer felon. He is also a friend of Kevin Poulsen and Adrian Lamo.

KEVIN MITNICK: I call into question the authenticity of those chat logs. Because I know his personality, then I call into question, well if he is the sole person that had access to these chat logs, couldâ??ve he modified them so he would have a great story to tell, so he would attention? I donâ??t know.

Itâ??s, you know, itâ??s really hard to come up with the answer because I simply do not know.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: But you think itâ??s possible?

KEVIN MITNICK: Oh absolutely possible.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Did you modify the chat logs in any way?

ADRIAN LAMO: Absolutely not. The chat logs were vouched for in a sworn deposition which I gave under penalty of perjury and every line remains as it was spoken.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Doubt has also been cast on Adrian Lamoâ??s state of mind when he says he was chatting with Bradley Manning. Shortly before, heâ??d been admitted to a psychiatric hospital.

KEVIN POULSEN: Heâ??d been picked up by the police for behaving oddly, and he spent, he spent some days in a mental, you know, in a hospital, where they diagnosed him as having Aspergerâ??s Syndrome.

KEVIN MITNICK: So here weâ??re dealing with somebody that may have been mentally unbalanced at the time of these chats with these chates, alleged chats with the soldier, so itâ??s all very murky, you know itâ??s, you know, who do you trust?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Mr Lamo is a convicted felon who just three weeks before making these statements was in a psychiatric hospital. Wired Magazine worked with that individual to bring out that story. I have no idea as to how credible that story is but certainly it comes from a source which has no credibility at all.

ADRIAN LAMO: Mr Assange is certainly entitled to his opinions. I make no denials about the fact that I am a convicted felon or that I have spent time in a psychiatric institution for Aspergerâ??s Syndrome, a syndrome, which I should add, does not affect the ability of its sufferers to recall facts. I should note that Mr Assange is also a convicted computer criminal so we have that in common. Perhaps one day we can get together over beer and discuss it.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: While the claims and counter-claims continue to rage over the chat logsâ?? legitimacy and Julian Assangeâ??s involvement, Bradley Manning remains locked up inside this US Marine Corps base outside Washington.

When he joined the military, Private Bradley Manning took an oath of allegiance to his country which his accusers say he betrayed. Following his arrest in Iraq, he was moved here to Quantico where he remains a maximum custody detainee in a cell measuring six feet by 12.

Bradley Manningâ??s supporters want to know why heâ??s been locked away in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day without a trial taking place. They argue that his incarceration here is tantamount to torture.

DAVID HOUSE, 'BRADLEY MANNING SUPPORT NETWORK': From meeting with Bradley, from getting to know him and from watching his state degrade over time, the only conclusion I can reach is that this is torture.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: David House is a computer researcher at MIT, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

He first met Bradley Manning last May at a hacker space heâ??d founded in Boston.
Heâ??s now the only friend allowed to visit Bradley Manning regularly, and travels to see him at Quantico twice a month.

DAVID HOUSE: Bradley Manning, you hear him coming from a long way away. He has to come from the other side of the brig and you hear the chains. Heâ??s unable to exercise, heâ??s kept in his cell for 23 hours a day and the only exercise he gets is walking around an empty room in chains.

I went and saw him again in December, this last December, and it was completely alarming this transition that had happened to him. He was ashen faced, had huge bags under his eyes and he had trouble keeping up with topics of conversation, something that had never been a problem for him.

So itâ??s this confinement, this solitary confinement has really taken a huge toll on him definitely.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Since his arrest Bradley Manning has been held in conditions which, his supporters argue, are designed to break him, and lead him to co-operate with the agencies who are investigating Julian Assange and his part in the leaks.

JULIAN ASSANGE: If the allegations against Bradley Manning are true, he is the United Statesâ?? foremost political prisoner. The increase in the severity of his treatment according to my legal advice is an attempt to pressure him into trying to embroil us in some sort of espionage related challenge.

KEVIN MITNICK: I was held in solitary confinement back in 1988/1989 by the Federal Government as a national security threat because a federal prosecutor had told a judge that I could whistle into a telephone and launch a nuclear weapon.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Kevin Mitnick is another former hacker who fell foul of the law. He is under no illusions as to why he was held in solitary confinement â?? and what effect it had on his case.

KEVIN MITNICK: What the governent did is they stuck me in solitary confinement to one, punish me and two, get me to cooperate so they wouldnâ??t have to really try the case. And it was extremely effective and after eight and a half months of sitting in a room for 23 out of 24 hours a day, I just signed the deal.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: So they want him to do a deal? They want him to turn the tables on Julian Assange?

DAVID HOUSE: I think thatâ??s completely correct. Itâ??s like a sledge hammer trying to crack a very small nut. The US Government is just trying to put immense pressure on him in order to get him to crack open.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: The pressure now being applied by US Intelligence agencies, not just to Bradley Manning, but to supporters like David House, is intense.

DAVID HOUSE: I think the US Government is trying to take down the WikiLeaks organisation at all costs and they are willing to embroil any individuals who get in their way, legitimate legal advocates or not, in order to do so.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Last June, federal agents came knocking on David Houseâ??s front door.

DAVID HOUSE: At one point in this conversation one of the gentlemen said flatly whilst staring me directly in the eyes, if you can keep your ear to the ground on this thing there might be a very large cash reward in it for you. Itâ??s very alarming to me. I mean I didn't think the US Government offered bribes to people.

BRADLY MANNING (Answering machine): Hi, youâ??ve reached Brad Manning at my deployment phone number.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: This is the only known recording of Bradley Manningâ??s voice, taped when on deployment to Baghdad.

BRADLY MANNING (Answering machine): Please leave a message or call me back later. Thank you.

PROTESTORS (Chanting): Free Bradley Manning.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Itâ??s the voice of a man who, following his arrest, has now been silenced by the American military.

PROTESTORS (Chanting): Free Bradley Manning.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Bradley Manningâ??s fate is now extremely uncertain. If the charges against him are upheld in a court martial, he could face up to 52 years in prison.
But David House is confident this will not happen.

DAVID HOUSE: I think that Bradley has a very large base of support in the US and internationally. Many Americans believe heâ??s a very principled young man and if the alleged leaks from him did happen, many Americans are willing to stand up and say this was something that was done with our best interests in mind. This was a move towards transparency, a move towards open government and we respect this young man.

I think with all these voices joining in unison for his defence and support, thereâ??s no way heâ??s going to be in prison the rest of his life.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: On Americaâ??s Fox TV, the right wing commentators donâ??t hold back in discussing Julian Assangeâ??s future.

FOX TV COMMENTATOR: This guyâ??s a traitor, a treasonous, and he has broken every law of the United States. The guy ought to be - and Iâ??m not for the death penalty, so if Iâ??m not for the death penalty thereâ??s only one way to do it - illegally shoot the son-of-a-bitch.

FOX TV COMMENTATOR 2: This little punk. Now I stand up for Obama, Obama if youâ??re listening today, you should take this guy out, have the CIA take him out.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Even within the more politically considered circles of Washington, there is a strong commitment to nail Julian Assange.

STEPHEN YATES: We may need to detain Mr Assange if he will not cease and desist from further disclosures. Thatâ??s his choice. If he will not cease, then I think that we may have to consider extrajudicial measures in order to detain him and stop him from proceeding.

JOHN BELLINGER: He would not be sent to Guantanamo, he would not be treated as an enemy combatant. If he were charged he would be charged under federal criminal statutes, prosecuted in federal court and if he were ultimately convicted, would be held in a federal penitentiary.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: This courthouse in Washington is where a sealed indictment will be drawn up by a grand jury sitting in secret, if the United States government decides it has built a sufficiently strong case against Julian Assange to warrant his extradition to America.
But after falling out with The New York Times, he wonâ??t be able to count on their support.

DEAN BAQUET: Itâ??s been an uncomfortable, tense, sometimes toxic relationship. He doesnâ??t like us; we cover him aggressively. We think heâ??s one thing, we think heâ??s a source, a public source not an anonymous source; he thinks heâ??s a journalist. So no itâ??s been a tough relationship.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Julian Assange argues that he is a journalist, entitled to the same protection under the First Amendment as any other publication.

And he says he isnâ??t finished yet.

JULIAN ASSANGE: I am a publisher and weâ??re a publishing organisation. I invented and created a structure to do not just a Pentagon Papers but to do the Pentagon Papers we hope for every country in the world every year.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: Julian Assange now lives under a curfew imposed by the courts, in a country house in the Norfolk village of Ellingham, north-east of London.
Every afternoon he is driven to a nearby village to sign on at the local police station.
He has signed a deal worth $1.5 million to write his memoirs - money he says he needs to pay for his fight to avoid extradition to Sweden.

The worldâ??s attention is on Julian Assange and not on Bradley Manning.

DANIEL DOMSCHEIT-BERG: All the fame and all this hype about WikiLeaks and Julian and Julianâ??s problems in Sweden, I mean what are these problems in Sweden compared to the trouble that this Private is in? I mean this person who potentially is, I think, one of the biggest heroes for freedom of information in our time. So how does that relate?

Thereâ??s no relation in between these two things anymore. So thatâ??s what I donâ??t get. Everyone should be talking about Manning and not about Julianâ??s trouble in Sweden or in Great Britain or wherever.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged conversation): God knows what happens now hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms. If not... than (sic) weâ??re doomed as a species. I will officially give up on the society we have if nothing happens.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: One thing is for sure, Julian Assangeâ??s fate is inextricably linked with Bradley Manningâ??s.

And the two men, whether they ever communicated or not, share a common idealism.

BRADLEY MANNING (Actor voiceover of alleged conversation): I want people to see the truth... regardless of who they are... because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.

JULIAN ASSANGE: That truth provides an historical scaffold, a true scaffold on which a real state can be built, on which societies can be built.

QUENTIN MCDERMOTT: If he could speak from his cell to the rest of the world, what would he say now?

DAVID HOUSE: Pay attention.

KERRY O'BRIEN: Well thereâ??s no doubt WikiLeaks is going to continue to demand our attention for a long time to come. Incidentally we asked the US Government to participate in this program. It declined.

[End of Transcript]
"We can’t find a healthy brain in an ex-football player."

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2873539.htm
User avatar
recovering_fan
Member
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:08 am
Gender: M
Location: in my apartment :-)

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by recovering_fan »

You guys have got to see this SNL sketch on Wikilinks and Facebook.

Hurry, before Youtube deletes it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9LqnowYVQE
User avatar
Agent 47
Member
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Are you in favour of wikileaks?

Post by Agent 47 »

There is now an interesting documentary about WikiLeaks, called "Wikirebels," available to download.

It covers some good background information about the early days of Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks organisation, and the "Chaos Computer Club," and goes right up to present day controversies.

There are several versions of it available on YouTube, or you can download a copy of it in one single file here if you want - (57 minutes, 348 MB) -

http://www.archive.org/details/WikirebelsTheDocumentary

Fascinating stuff.
"We can’t find a healthy brain in an ex-football player."

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2873539.htm
Post Reply