New Wikileaks Dump is Unconscionable
- Thread starter countezero
- Start date
This has done the USA no damage at all, the speculation about fall out is concentrated only in the media. Even a former aide to Yeltsin said on Sky News today that there was absolutely nothing there for the US to defend, it is based on diplomatic opinion not policy and were never taken all that seriously by Washington. Its a non event but the wiki people sytill need to be proscuted and the leak punished for breaking own laws of employment and confidentiality.
Nothing Wikileaks did is against the law.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
@Hype
Stockholm will not keep him. He would be extradited to the US and face espionage laws. Also since he is on interpol red light he cannot leave the UK. He is awaiting arrest in the UK, the only reason why there is a lag in time is because the police are awaiting the arrest warrant which has yet to be approved. Conjuring reasons to arrest someone takes a bit of time you see.
The are literally in the midst of CHANGING US law just so they can go about arresting Assange.
You can keep abreast of the information here:
http://videos.wittysparks.com/id/2600657617
As for Sweden its obvious Hype you're having a bit of trouble keeping up:
Swedish authorities say they have revoked an arrest warrant that had alleged rape against Julian Assange, the founder and editor of the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks, less than a day after issuing it.
Assange is "no longer wanted" and "is not suspected of rape," Chief Prosecutor Eva Finne said in a statement posted on the agency's official website Saturday. He is also no longer arrested in absentia, the statement said.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-21/...molestation-charge-arrest-warrant?_s=PM:WORLD
Maybe you should stick to myopic tribal affairs.
Stockholm will not keep him. He would be extradited to the US and face espionage laws. Also since he is on interpol red light he cannot leave the UK. He is awaiting arrest in the UK, the only reason why there is a lag in time is because the police are awaiting the arrest warrant which has yet to be approved. Conjuring reasons to arrest someone takes a bit of time you see.
The are literally in the midst of CHANGING US law just so they can go about arresting Assange.
You can keep abreast of the information here:
http://videos.wittysparks.com/id/2600657617
As for Sweden its obvious Hype you're having a bit of trouble keeping up:
Swedish authorities say they have revoked an arrest warrant that had alleged rape against Julian Assange, the founder and editor of the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks, less than a day after issuing it.
Assange is "no longer wanted" and "is not suspected of rape," Chief Prosecutor Eva Finne said in a statement posted on the agency's official website Saturday. He is also no longer arrested in absentia, the statement said.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-21/...molestation-charge-arrest-warrant?_s=PM:WORLD
Maybe you should stick to myopic tribal affairs.
hype
lucy is deliberately lying in a bid to frame you as an incompetent fuck
/disgusted
this sort of deliberate deception should not be allowed to stand
check the date of her cnn link
this is the latest....
furthermore there were errors in that warrant so a fresh one was issued
lucy is deliberately lying in a bid to frame you as an incompetent fuck
/disgusted
this sort of deliberate deception should not be allowed to stand
check the date of her cnn link
this is the latest....
furthermore there were errors in that warrant so a fresh one was issued
Last edited:
Step back and read your logic. You are promoting a censored press. :m:No , lets put those who are doing treasonous things in jail like anyone else who would be doing that. Not all media were publishing these Wikileaks only a few so that would leave the ones who don't break the law in place and get rid of the ones who do. We will not have any justice if that isn't done and will allow anyone to disclose top secrets about the government and not be punished. Then let all of the spies out of jails too because they have the right to free speech .
This has done the US an incredible amount of damage. Their incredible level of cynicism is exposed for all to see. The fallout will continue for decades.
The huge reaction from the US to this leak as opposed to the other leaks is of course rather telling. :m:
us reaction to the leak?
In an online chat with El Pais in Spain, Assange said the hunt for him was tough. He remains free while his website spews daily embarrassment and potential diplomatic damage to the U.S.
"We have hundreds of specific death threats from U.S. military militants. That is not unusual, and we have become practiced from past experiences at ignoring such threats from Islamic extremists, African kleptocrats and so on," he said.
"Recently the situation has changed with these threats now extending out to our lawyers and my children," he added. "However, it is the specific calls from the elites of U.S. society for our assassination, kidnapping and execution that is more concerning."
poor guy
he is gonna end up dead
In an online chat with El Pais in Spain, Assange said the hunt for him was tough. He remains free while his website spews daily embarrassment and potential diplomatic damage to the U.S.
"We have hundreds of specific death threats from U.S. military militants. That is not unusual, and we have become practiced from past experiences at ignoring such threats from Islamic extremists, African kleptocrats and so on," he said.
"Recently the situation has changed with these threats now extending out to our lawyers and my children," he added. "However, it is the specific calls from the elites of U.S. society for our assassination, kidnapping and execution that is more concerning."
poor guy
he is gonna end up dead
Hilary (and the rest of the US Admin) has been caught with her pants down. Thats a horrific sight. :m:
And there is way more to come.
Things like that have been exposed from the beginning of time, in one way or another, and rightfully so. BUT i think this last "leak" is a dangerous precedence.
Individuals losing their right to privacy does not bother you? Just because private conversations were sold from a specific group does not mean it will stop there and is this saying that anyones private conversations\communications can be documented\recorded and sold with no recourse. Is this really what you want? I dont see anything remotely resembling freedom there. Sure it may stimulate the economy and people will pay good money for it but is it worth the price? Why cry about freedom being taken away if you accept this?
Well were on our way.
Last edited:
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
So when Nixon was taped saying this on tape should be protected because it was a private conversation between himself and Kissinger?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGVfzwvtlJM
And since you have no evidence that Wikileaks purchased information, which is unlikely considering the massive costs that it would have incurred, you may want to stop spreading libelous lies about the organization.
Meanwhile under the Patriot Act you have the government not just listening to our private conversations but also tapping into our emails, our bank accounts and financial transactions.
If we are no longer protected under the bill of rights then I don't see why anyone in government should be either.
Tell me John doesn't it bother you that your private conversations and email exchanges are not private from the government? If it does then you will have to admit that to watch the eyes that are watching you is only fair game and that's exactly what Wikileaks is doing.
That was a recording from the white houses own internal recording system. Just like someone overhearing a conversation where a criminal activity can be brought forward but these last cables there were no crimes being committed and seemed like casual conversations...could have been anyone.
I didnt say the information was paid for but WikiLeaks accepted payment through PayPal.
So according to you the government is listening to everyones phone conversations and emails? And interestingly enough not many people seem to be held accountable for crimes they discuss...must be no crime.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Really? They were recording themselves. Presidents since then do not record everything they say in the White House. He taped himself because he was paranoid and vain. By the way when the tapes were subpoenaed he claimed they were matters of 'national security', you know, to sensitive to be released. Kind of like the claims being made now about the Wikileak cables
"Haldeman and Nixon discussed installing a recording system in early 1971. Nixon finally agreed. Haldeman and Butterfield decided that the best solution was to install a voice-activated recording system. They felt that Nixon would forget to turn a manually controlled system on and off. In addition, they felt that the President was “far too inept with machinery ever to make success of a switch system.” Butterfield ordered the head of the Technical Services Division of the Secret Service, Alfred Wong, to install a taping system that required minimal maintenance. "
http://whitehousetapes.net/tapes/nixon/overview
Paypal is used so people can send money to aid in Assange's defense fund not for anything else:
Julian Assange Defence Fund
Please donate directly to the Julian Assange and other WikiLeaks Staff Defence Fund. These funds will be used exclusively for defence costs
To donate please do an electronic bank transfer (EFT) to:
1. PostFinance
SWISS POST
Account number: 91-765019-6
IBAN:CH55 0900 0000 9176 5019 6
BICOFICHBEXXX
Account name:Assange Julian Paul, Geneve
Address::Swiss Post
PostFinance
Engehaldenstrasse, 37
3030
Bern, Switzerland
2. Online Transfer via Credit Card
Using our friendly credit card processing partner Datacell Switzerland.
3. Bank Transfer - Option 1: via Sunshine Press Productions ehf:
Skulagötu 19, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland
Landsbanki Islands Account number 0111-26-611010
BANK/SWIFT:NBIIISREXXX
ACCOUNT/IBAN:IS97 0111 2661 1010 6110 1002 80
4. Bank Transfer - Option 2: via the not-for-profit Wau Holland Stiftung Foundation:
This support is tax deductible in Germany
Bank Account: 2772812-04
IBAN: DE46 5204 0021 0277 2812 04
BIC Code: COBADEFFXXX
Bank: Commerzbank Kassel
German BLZ: 52040021
Subject: WIKILEAKS / WHS Projekt 04
5. PayPal via Wau Holland Foundation
We don't accept paypal donations anymore. And here is why
6. Via Postal Mail
You can post a donation via good old fashion postal mail to:
WikiLeaks
(or any suitable name likely to avoid interception in your country)
BOX 4080
Australia Post Office - University of Melbourne Branch
Victoria 3052
Australia
http://213.251.145.96/support.html
Check under number five and you'll see how they say they no longer can be paid through Paypal.
With the patriot act the government has the right to listen to ANYONE'S telephone, cell or tap into emails without a court order or without cause. Since you seem under-informed I suggest you watch this by Frontline called 'Spying on the Home Front':
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...aign=viewpage&utm_medium=grid&utm_source=grid
And no they don't need probably cause under the patriot act.
"Haldeman and Nixon discussed installing a recording system in early 1971. Nixon finally agreed. Haldeman and Butterfield decided that the best solution was to install a voice-activated recording system. They felt that Nixon would forget to turn a manually controlled system on and off. In addition, they felt that the President was “far too inept with machinery ever to make success of a switch system.” Butterfield ordered the head of the Technical Services Division of the Secret Service, Alfred Wong, to install a taping system that required minimal maintenance. "
http://whitehousetapes.net/tapes/nixon/overview
Paypal is used so people can send money to aid in Assange's defense fund not for anything else
:Julian Assange Defence Fund
Please donate directly to the Julian Assange and other WikiLeaks Staff Defence Fund. These funds will be used exclusively for defence costs
To donate please do an electronic bank transfer (EFT) to:
1. PostFinance
SWISS POST
Account number: 91-765019-6
IBAN:CH55 0900 0000 9176 5019 6
BIC
OFICHBEXXXAccount name:Assange Julian Paul, Geneve
Address::Swiss Post
PostFinance
Engehaldenstrasse, 37
3030
Bern, Switzerland
2. Online Transfer via Credit Card
Using our friendly credit card processing partner Datacell Switzerland.
3. Bank Transfer - Option 1: via Sunshine Press Productions ehf:
Skulagötu 19, 101 Reykjavik, Iceland
Landsbanki Islands Account number 0111-26-611010
BANK/SWIFT:NBIIISREXXX
ACCOUNT/IBAN:IS97 0111 2661 1010 6110 1002 80
4. Bank Transfer - Option 2: via the not-for-profit Wau Holland Stiftung Foundation:
This support is tax deductible in Germany
Bank Account: 2772812-04
IBAN: DE46 5204 0021 0277 2812 04
BIC Code: COBADEFFXXX
Bank: Commerzbank Kassel
German BLZ: 52040021
Subject: WIKILEAKS / WHS Projekt 04
5. PayPal via Wau Holland Foundation
We don't accept paypal donations anymore. And here is why
6. Via Postal Mail
You can post a donation via good old fashion postal mail to:
WikiLeaks
(or any suitable name likely to avoid interception in your country)
BOX 4080
Australia Post Office - University of Melbourne Branch
Victoria 3052
Australia
http://213.251.145.96/support.html
Check under number five and you'll see how they say they no longer can be paid through Paypal.
With the patriot act the government has the right to listen to ANYONE'S telephone, cell or tap into emails without a court order or without cause. Since you seem under-informed I suggest you watch this by Frontline called 'Spying on the Home Front':
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...aign=viewpage&utm_medium=grid&utm_source=grid
And no they don't need probably cause under the patriot act.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
For other members this is off-topic but I'm placing it for John's benefit:
The Patriot Act allows:
1) Under the Patriot Act, the FBI can secretly conduct a physical search or wiretap on American citizens to obtain evidence of crime without proving probable cause, as the Fourth Amendment explicitly requires.
"Nationwide" pen register warrants
2) Under the Patriot Act PR/TT orders issued by a judge are no longer valid only in that judge's jurisdiction, but can be made valid anywhere in the United States. This "nationwide service" further marginalizes the role of the judiciary, because a judge cannot meaningfully monitor the extent to which his or her order is being used. In addition, this provision authorizes the equivalent of a blank warrant: the court issues the order, and the law enforcement agent fills in the places to be searched. That is a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment's explicit requirement that warrants be written "particularly describing the place to be searched."
Pen register searches applied to the Internet
3) The Patriot Act applies the distinction between transactional and content-oriented wiretaps to the Internet. The problem is that it takes the weak standards for access to transactional data and applies them to communications that are far more than addresses. On an e-mail message, for example, law enforcement has interpreted the "header" of a message to be transactional information accessible with a PR/TT warrant. But in addition to routing information, e-mail headers include the subject line, which is part of the substance of a communication - on a letter, for example, it would clearly be inside the envelope.
The government also argues that the transactional data for Web surfing is a list of the URLs or Web site addresses that a person visits. For example, it might record the fact that they visited "www.aclu.org" at 1:15 in the afternoon, and then skipped over to "www.fbi.gov" at 1:30. This claim that URLs are just addressing data breaks down in two different ways:
Web addresses are rich and revealing content. The URLs or "addresses" of the Web pages we read are not really addresses, they are the titles of documents that we download from the Internet. When we "visit" a Web page what we are really doing is downloading that page from the Internet onto our computer, where it is displayed. Therefore, the list of URLs that we visit during a Web session is really a list of the documents we have downloaded - no different from a list of electronic books we might have purchased online. That is much richer information than a simple list of the people we have communicated with; it is intimate information that reveals who we are and what we are thinking about - much more like the content of a phone call than the number dialed. After all, it is often said that reading is a "conversation" with the author.
Web addresses contain communications sent by a surfer. URLs themselves often have content embedded within them. A search on the Google search engine, for example, creates a page with a custom-generated URL that contains material that is clearly private content, such as: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=sexual+orient...
Similarly, if I fill out an online form - to purchase goods or register my preferences, for example - those products and preferences will often be identified in the resulting URL.
4) Allows for the indefinite detention of non-citizens. The Patriot Act gives the attorney general unprecedented new power to determine the fate of immigrants. The attorney general can order detention based on a certification that he or she has "reasonable grounds to believe" a non-citizen endangers national security. Worse, if the foreigner does not have a country that will accept them, they can be detained indefinitely without trial.
There are others you can check on the ACLU website that you can check for yourself
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/surveillance-under-usa-patriot-act
THERE IS NO MORE FISA ACT TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM THE GOVERNMENT! And I won't even get into how the Constitution and Bill of Rights have been undermined by the Patriot Act. So please save me all the outrage over what Assange is doing in the interest of transparency. If the government is above the law then they have no right to try and use it against others.
The Patriot Act allows:
1) Under the Patriot Act, the FBI can secretly conduct a physical search or wiretap on American citizens to obtain evidence of crime without proving probable cause, as the Fourth Amendment explicitly requires.
"Nationwide" pen register warrants
2) Under the Patriot Act PR/TT orders issued by a judge are no longer valid only in that judge's jurisdiction, but can be made valid anywhere in the United States. This "nationwide service" further marginalizes the role of the judiciary, because a judge cannot meaningfully monitor the extent to which his or her order is being used. In addition, this provision authorizes the equivalent of a blank warrant: the court issues the order, and the law enforcement agent fills in the places to be searched. That is a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment's explicit requirement that warrants be written "particularly describing the place to be searched."
Pen register searches applied to the Internet
3) The Patriot Act applies the distinction between transactional and content-oriented wiretaps to the Internet. The problem is that it takes the weak standards for access to transactional data and applies them to communications that are far more than addresses. On an e-mail message, for example, law enforcement has interpreted the "header" of a message to be transactional information accessible with a PR/TT warrant. But in addition to routing information, e-mail headers include the subject line, which is part of the substance of a communication - on a letter, for example, it would clearly be inside the envelope.
The government also argues that the transactional data for Web surfing is a list of the URLs or Web site addresses that a person visits. For example, it might record the fact that they visited "www.aclu.org" at 1:15 in the afternoon, and then skipped over to "www.fbi.gov" at 1:30. This claim that URLs are just addressing data breaks down in two different ways:
Web addresses are rich and revealing content. The URLs or "addresses" of the Web pages we read are not really addresses, they are the titles of documents that we download from the Internet. When we "visit" a Web page what we are really doing is downloading that page from the Internet onto our computer, where it is displayed. Therefore, the list of URLs that we visit during a Web session is really a list of the documents we have downloaded - no different from a list of electronic books we might have purchased online. That is much richer information than a simple list of the people we have communicated with; it is intimate information that reveals who we are and what we are thinking about - much more like the content of a phone call than the number dialed. After all, it is often said that reading is a "conversation" with the author.
Web addresses contain communications sent by a surfer. URLs themselves often have content embedded within them. A search on the Google search engine, for example, creates a page with a custom-generated URL that contains material that is clearly private content, such as: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=sexual+orient...
Similarly, if I fill out an online form - to purchase goods or register my preferences, for example - those products and preferences will often be identified in the resulting URL.
4) Allows for the indefinite detention of non-citizens. The Patriot Act gives the attorney general unprecedented new power to determine the fate of immigrants. The attorney general can order detention based on a certification that he or she has "reasonable grounds to believe" a non-citizen endangers national security. Worse, if the foreigner does not have a country that will accept them, they can be detained indefinitely without trial.
There are others you can check on the ACLU website that you can check for yourself
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/surveillance-under-usa-patriot-act
THERE IS NO MORE FISA ACT TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM THE GOVERNMENT! And I won't even get into how the Constitution and Bill of Rights have been undermined by the Patriot Act. So please save me all the outrage over what Assange is doing in the interest of transparency. If the government is above the law then they have no right to try and use it against others.
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
Hardly.
They knew about this dump months before it happened.
The US government was told in advance the areas or themes covered, and "representations" were invited in return. These were considered. Details of "redactions" were then shared with the other four media recipients of the material and sent to WikiLeaks itself, to establish, albeit voluntarily, some common standard.
The state department knew of the leak several months ago and had ample time to alert staff in sensitive locations. Its pre-emptive scaremongering over the weekend stupidly contrived to hint at material not in fact being published. Nor is the material classified top secret, being at a level that more than 3 million US government employees are cleared to see, and available on the defence department's internal Siprnet. Such dissemination of "secrets" might be thought reckless, suggesting a diplomatic outreach that makes the British empire seem minuscule.
(Source)
The state department knew of the leak several months ago and had ample time to alert staff in sensitive locations. Its pre-emptive scaremongering over the weekend stupidly contrived to hint at material not in fact being published. Nor is the material classified top secret, being at a level that more than 3 million US government employees are cleared to see, and available on the defence department's internal Siprnet. Such dissemination of "secrets" might be thought reckless, suggesting a diplomatic outreach that makes the British empire seem minuscule.
(Source)
It appears that some in the US are now trying to say that Mr Assange is a Terrorist and worse:
McConnell tells NBC's "Meet the Press" that he hopes WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will be prosecuted for the disclosures. And he says that if it's found that Assange hasn't violated the law, then the law should be changed.
Of Assange, McConnell says, "I think the man is a high-tech terrorist."
(Source)
Of Assange, McConnell says, "I think the man is a high-tech terrorist."
(Source)
Hmmm...
Best tell Premier Bligh to keep an eye out on the horizon in case the US decides to invade Queensland (Assange's home State and where his family still live).
An interesting development in the leaks themselves:
Qatar is using the Arabic news channel al-Jazeera as a bargaining chip in foreign policy negotiations by adapting its coverage to suit other foreign leaders and offering to cease critical transmissions in exchange for major concessions, US embassy cables released by WikiLeaks claim.
The memos flatly contradict al-Jazeera's insistence that it is editorially independent despite being heavily subsidised by the Gulf state.
They will also be intensely embarrassing to Qatar, which last week controversially won the right to host the 2022 World Cup after presenting itself as the most open and modern Middle Eastern state.
In the past, the emir of Qatar has publicly refused US requests to use his influence to temper al-Jazeera's reporting.
But a cable written in November 2009 predicted that the station could be used "as a bargaining tool to repair relationships with other countries, particularly those soured by al-Jazeera's broadcasts, including the United States" over the next three years.
(Source)
The memos flatly contradict al-Jazeera's insistence that it is editorially independent despite being heavily subsidised by the Gulf state.
They will also be intensely embarrassing to Qatar, which last week controversially won the right to host the 2022 World Cup after presenting itself as the most open and modern Middle Eastern state.
In the past, the emir of Qatar has publicly refused US requests to use his influence to temper al-Jazeera's reporting.
But a cable written in November 2009 predicted that the station could be used "as a bargaining tool to repair relationships with other countries, particularly those soured by al-Jazeera's broadcasts, including the United States" over the next three years.
(Source)
So lets see:
1. Assange is now a terrorist
2. The US is trying to change its laws so as to ensure they can capture him by applying these laws retrospectively
3. Sweden has issued a warrant for his arrest for the same crime for which they had dismissed a warrant in August
4. The UK will not let him leave because he is on notice from Interpol
5. The Australians want to cancel his passport, if possible and will cooperate fully with whatever the US wants
5. The Americans are now threatening to have him kidnapped and or assassinated and also threatening his lawyers and children.
6. Amazon and Paypal have dropped wikileaks
Did I miss anything?
1. Assange is now a terrorist
2. The US is trying to change its laws so as to ensure they can capture him by applying these laws retrospectively
3. Sweden has issued a warrant for his arrest for the same crime for which they had dismissed a warrant in August
4. The UK will not let him leave because he is on notice from Interpol
5. The Australians want to cancel his passport, if possible and will cooperate fully with whatever the US wants
5. The Americans are now threatening to have him kidnapped and or assassinated and also threatening his lawyers and children.
6. Amazon and Paypal have dropped wikileaks
Did I miss anything?
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Yes dear you missed that this is the new worldwide democracy at work. Its the post-Bush death of the US Bill of rights and US Constitution in action.
You also missed that this is the new assault on journalists, political dissidents and whistelblowers worldwide.
countezero
Registered Senior Member
You're comparing apples and oranges.