R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => R/E/P Saloon => Topic started by: Hallams on December 08, 2010, 06:26:16 pm

Title: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 08, 2010, 06:26:16 pm
I'm finding all of what is going on at the moment very interesting. It has to raise big questions about the ability of the US to keep state secrets confidential. I assume if a 23 yr old US army private can get access to this info and give it to Wikileaks then none of it is news to the international "intelligence" community. What is very interesting is that this info is now open to the general public and given the western media's pittiful lack of independance, this has to be a good thing. Does this all point to the internet being a platform where the media can act as a check and balance in the democratic process?
    Now that Julian Assange has been taken into custody over possibly trumped up charges of sexual assult in Sweeden will we now se him extradited to the US to face their "justice" system?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Berolzheimer on December 08, 2010, 07:04:31 pm
Or will he experience an unfortunate accident or heart attack before then?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 08, 2010, 07:17:53 pm
I certainly hope not.........that would be a futile endevour. The real issue for the keepers of the secrets is their inability to controll the internet. There would more than likely be another Assange to take up the Wikileaks model of information dissemination.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 08, 2010, 08:05:17 pm
Unfortunately the only way for most Americans to learn of the lack of independence in the media is through that very same media.  The reporting about WikiLeaks is not exactly un-biased.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 08, 2010, 08:16:27 pm
Seems to me that the best way to get to the unfortunate time when the internet is "controlled" is for irresponsible fools like the Wilileaks bunch to screw it up for everyone.

The thousands of documents leaked will certainly bear revelations that please all kinds of people, that meet their ends, but it is not worth it. As much as we may have issues with the way our leaders behave, at least they are elected. Nobody elected Assange, he doesn't answer to anyone or anything except for his punk-ass conscience or lack thereof.

Wikileaks' actions only heighten the "need" for MORE control of the internet.

He is a worthless prick.



Hallams wrote on Wed, 08 December 2010 19:17

I certainly hope not.........that would be a futile endevour. The real issue for the keepers of the secrets is their inability to controll the internet. There would more than likely be another Assange to take up the Wikileaks model of information dissemination.

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Barry Hufker on December 08, 2010, 08:53:35 pm
I see both sides of the argument but at the moment I am "pro-Assange" -- but who knows anyone's true motives, especially in this case.

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 08, 2010, 09:00:09 pm
Who does Assange answer to?

Is he some paragon of transparency or a vandal?

People like him will ultimately make the world a darker, more closed-in place.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jetbase on December 08, 2010, 09:18:29 pm
DarinK, from different comments I have seen from around the world (eg on Facebook) it seems to me that this is being reported by the media in a very different way in the US than it is in other parts of the world, or at least Australia.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: bblackwood on December 08, 2010, 09:22:10 pm
Barry Hufker wrote on Wed, 08 December 2010 19:53

I see both sides of the argument but at the moment I am "pro-Assange" -- but who knows anyone's true motives, especially in this case.



Ditto.

I'm probably naive, but I think as long as the info isn't putting soldiers in harm's way (and apparently, it isn't) then it should be out there.

If it makes some politicians uncomfortable, all the better...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Strummer on December 08, 2010, 11:02:28 pm
There was an interesting take on NPR a few days ago. Former CIA guy said that everything is secret and likened it to a giant prairie surrounded by a barbwire fence. His opinion was that shrinking the secret prairie down to a crypt with a giant fence around it was the solution. Which would also require real work and intelligent thought.

A shotgun is good at 10 feet. A rifle is good at 300 yards.

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 08, 2010, 11:52:48 pm
Disturbing what a klusterphuc our national security seems to be.

Mr. Private will be prosecuted.
Mr. Assange should get a visit from John Clark.
Perhaps he will at least learn a valuable lesson in safe-sex practices.

Seem like some people who need to get embarrassed will get an opportunity. The Brit/BP/Libya thing is most interesting.

The administration could have stopped the additional leaks if they really wanted to.

Kudos to Mastercard, BTW.

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Ryan Massey on December 09, 2010, 02:46:28 am
jetbase wrote on Wed, 08 December 2010 18:18

DarinK, from different comments I have seen from around the world (eg on Facebook) it seems to me that this is being reported by the media in a very different way in the US than it is in other parts of the world, or at least Australia.


It is being reported in a vastly different way.  While The Guardian UK (for example) is doing a number of thoughtful pieces on various cables and their implications, the SF Chronicle is mostly covering the angry reactions of the US gov, the sex allegations, and the Visa / Mastercard hacking.  TV news is about the same.

I have found the under-reporting to be disturbing.

I understand governments, businesses, etc need a certain amount of secrecy and cunning to operate effectively.  But shining a light on the sewage of international politics and the vast divide between what Americans like to think of their country and what it actually is, strikes me as a good thing.  

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: sui-city on December 09, 2010, 02:59:29 am
Paul,

It is not surprising to find someone who believes that the only way to transparency is through control.

Contradictory, no?

Now, with regards to elected officials.

When they run their campaigns, promising change to how things are done....

When they go ON RECORD in January 2010, and talk about how the Internet can be used to hold governments accountable....

And then turn their backs on their promises...

And directly contradict their statements about freedom of the Internet....

Then maybe you have to ask yourself:

Are these officials we really elected?

And if the answer is "yes", then:

Should we be electing them?

I'll say this much:

If there was a place for me to vote in someone who would help us hold these people accountable, then i would go there, and vote with my resounding support.

Members of the intelligence community have themselves said that there is no evidence that anyone has been harmed as a result of the leaks.

Our governments lie. And they don't only lie "to protect their citizens", they also lie to protect their interests. And sometimes, that is at the expense of the citizen.




Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 03:16

Seems to me that the best way to get to the unfortunate time when the internet is "controlled" is for irresponsible fools like the Wilileaks bunch to screw it up for everyone.

The thousands of documents leaked will certainly bear revelations that please all kinds of people, that meet their ends, but it is not worth it. As much as we may have issues with the way our leaders behave, at least they are elected. Nobody elected Assange, he doesn't answer to anyone or anything except for his punk-ass conscience or lack thereof.

Wikileaks' actions only heighten the "need" for MORE control of the internet.

He is a worthless prick.



Hallams wrote on Wed, 08 December 2010 19:17

I certainly hope not.........that would be a futile endevour. The real issue for the keepers of the secrets is their inability to controll the internet. There would more than likely be another Assange to take up the Wikileaks model of information dissemination.



Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 09, 2010, 03:51:55 am
Plenty of interesting editorial commentary here:

http://www.crikey.com.au/topic/wikileaks-australia/

...and this one in particular: (sorry it's a bit long)

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/09/welcome-to-the-internet- wars/


Welcome to the internet wars
by Bernard Keane

Whoever christened the WikiLeaks saga the first major war over the internet was right. Quite apart from what you’re seeing in the mainstream media, the internet equivalent of a shooting war has broken out and shows no signs of dying down.

The online group Anonymous – usually, but somewhat erroneously christened “hacker activists” by the mainstream media – have launched a series of attacks on the websites of those associated with the campaign against Wikileaks and Julian Assange. Targets under “Operation Payback”, coordinated via an IRC channel and Twitter, have included Joe Lieberman’s website, Sarah Palin’s website and the website of the Swedish prosecution service responsible for handling the s-xual assault case against Assange.

In the last 24 hours, however, it’s stopped being quite so symbolic. Yesterday Anonymous coordinated a distributed denial of service attack on Mastercard’s corporate website, www.mastercard.com, and took it offline for several hours. More to the point, the attacks took Mastercard’s Securecode service offline as well, preventing transactions from being processed. The website has since got back online.

This morning it was Visa’s turn. Anonymous gave a full hour’s notice via its Twitter account @Anon-Operation that it was going to target Visa. At 8am, the tweet went out:

   “TARGET: WWW.VISA.COM: FIRE FIRE FIRE!!! WEAPONS.”

They didn’t miss. The Visa site went down almost instantly, and stayed down for nearly three hours.

Twitter had by this stage woken up to the fact that its service was being used to coordinate DDOS attacks and suspended @anon_operation (Facebook had removed another Anonymous-related page earlier in the day). Anonymous was already using multiple accounts and immediately created another one, @anonops. Twitter’s action prompted participants to turn their attention to the service itself, and Twitter itself came under fire.

At that point, Anonymous appeared to secure a significant victory. Twitter was said to have advised that the deletion was “accidental” and restored the suspended account (minus previous tweets), although another ANonymous-related account remained suspended. The new account, @anonops, continued to operate. The attack on Twitter was then called off, and www.visa.com briefly went down again as the attack as redirected back at Visa.

A short while later the group declared via @anonops “IRC is not secure do not use unauthorized channels for operation #payback. We will announce next target here!! http://bit.ly/1hSngD #anonops”. Presumably law enforcement agencies had by this stage accessed the channel (it’s accessible if you know whom to ask and are happy to have the Federal Police start paying attention to you).

Meantime, in an unrelated development, PayPal had succumbed to criticism and released donations to Wikileaks.

Throughout, the mainstream media desperately tried to keep up. “Do you know more? email us” implored Fairfax, whose journalists took to haunting the birthplace of Anonymous, the 4chan site (warning – DEFINITELY NSFW) to find out what was going on. The coverage looked all a bit redundant, though, given much of what was going on was being played out under the Twitter hashtag #anonops.

This may look like a bunch of kids fooling around on the internet (one tweeter compared it to a “geek action movie”) but it’s altogether more serious than that. In the space of 24 hours two of the world’s key transactional sites have been taken offline. In the case of Visa, the company was actually given warning that it would be attacked, and yet it was still taken down for several hours. If we’re talking “critical infrastructure”, as per the WikiLeaks cables of earlier this week, we’ve had a clear demonstration of where it is on the internet.

This is the flipside of war against WikiLeaks being waged by the US Government and its proxies. Taking away its access to servers and taking away its financial conduits has undoubtedly harmed the organization – probably more so than arresting Julian Assange. It shows that, for all the decentralization of the internet, you can exploit the corporate control of key elements of the internet, particularly of financial transactions, to inconvenience or disrupt the operations of even an online entity. The further the balance tips toward private, corporate control of key online systems, the easier it becomes for governments - and other forces of centralised control, like large companies - to strike back at online opponents.

But it cuts both ways. The fragility of those transactional systems is suddenly on display with the successful attacks on Visa and Mastercard. Private control of key systems can be a vulnerability as well as a strength. And what’s been happening to key transactional systems in Australia in recent days? No one targeted NAB’s website – it managed to take itself offline without any help from “hacktivists”, causing massive financial disruption to its customers.

We’ve become dependent on online systems that are assumed to be both secure and resilient. Suddenly they look fragile, capable of disruption not just at the hands of Anonymous, but because of under-investment, or incompetence, or a single corrupted file.

There’ll doubtless be a lot of rubbish written about the Anonymous attacks, from both sides, in coming hours and days. There’ll be a strong sense of “the internet has fought back” from supporters, and law enforcement-flavoured outrage from opponents, governments and the mainstream media.

But at least one lesson is already clear – on the internet, the “critical infrastructure” may not be as resilient and stable as we all assume it is.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 09, 2010, 09:36:14 am
i was going to write some stuff here but james moore says it better than i could:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-moore/i-am-julian-assange_ b_793583.html

if we can't function as a nation if the world knows the truth, then we shouldn't function.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 09, 2010, 10:10:32 am
I'm going to assume that if the guy is proven to be a rapist you pro-Assange guys will change your tune.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 09, 2010, 10:21:20 am
Kris wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 10:10

I'm going to assume that if the guy is proven to be a rapist you pro-Assange guys will change your tune.


first of all, his personal conduct has no bearing either way on the rightness or wrongness of what Wikileaks is doing.

second, have you actually seen what he's been charged with? arguably the most absurd definition of "rape" that i've ever seen:    http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/sex-by-surprise-at-hear t-of-julian-assange-criminal-probe/19741444

"Assange's London attorney, Mark Stephens, told AOL News today that Swedish prosecutors told him that Assange is wanted not for allegations of rape, as previously reported, but for something called "sex by surprise," which he said involves a fine of 5,000 kronor or about $715."

one of the women initially pressing charges may have ceased cooperating with prosecutors:    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/09/anna-ardin-jullian- assange_n_794285.html
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: sui-city on December 09, 2010, 10:24:09 am
Kris,

Firstly, he has not been charged with rape. So I would appreciate it if sensationalising of the charge was kept to a minimum. And so that we can keep the chest-thumping to a minimum.

Secondly, you will notice in my response to Paul that i do not mention Assange once. I do not idolise him. He is one man within an organisation. And he happens to be the public face of it.

I do however support the need for transparent government. And since government cannot be trusted to be transparent, then there wil be people who are prepared to at least try and show them up for the hypocrits that they are. And they have my support.

So, finally, to answer your question:

No, even if Assange was found guilty of rape, even though that is not what he has been charged with, I would not change my tune.

Because it's not about Assange.

Kris wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 17:10

I'm going to assume that if the guy is proven to be a rapist you pro-Assange guys will change your tune.


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 09, 2010, 01:13:56 pm
Based on a quick skim of the linked article, it seems to me that the only quotes saying he's not being charged with rape are from his lawyers.  Everywhere else it says rape.

I know nothing of Swedish law or how the Swedes define rape, but I have heard the saying that no means no...

Sorry for the involuntary chest thumping!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 09, 2010, 01:18:14 pm
jonathan jetter wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 10:21

first of all, his personal conduct has no bearing either way on the rightness or wrongness of what Wikileaks is doing.



Agreed.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Berolzheimer on December 09, 2010, 01:19:47 pm
I think it's worth remembering who pays for, and (supposedly) on who's behalf, this government is operating.  This government and all it's actions & secrets belong to US, the citizens of the U.S.  I personally maintain a policy of not taking any actions that I wouldn't want other people to know about; I expect my government to behave the same way.  If it has to be kept secret maybe it shouldn't be done.

On the other hand I heard that NPR report too & what that intelligence expert was saying made a lot of sense.  He said "we" classify so much stuff that it's impossible to protect any of it or to sort the important stuff from teh not so important.  He also said that a lot of classifications are just people in the military & intelligence agencies protecting their paychecks, figuring that if the general public knew about the money they're wasting their projects would be shut down.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: sui-city on December 09, 2010, 04:39:27 pm
Kris,

My apologies. You may be right with the charge.

This may shed some light on it:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336291/Wikileaks-Ju lian-Assanges-2-night-stands-spark-worldwide-hunt.html?ito=f eeds-newsxml

I knew of the Sexual Molestation & Unlawful Coercion.

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 09, 2010, 04:43:03 pm
I find these cries for openness and transparency to be simplistic and naive (as well as shallow and pedantic*). Do you really think that diplomacy could actually happen in the real world without some bit of duplicity going on?

Have you ever said "No, honey, those jeans do not make your ass look fat"?

Is there any reason to believe that Wikileaks' dumping is at all measured in any way to make a specific point, or is it just vandalism?

We all enjoy the fruits of our advanced modern societies, we depend on the institutions and structures that make our modern life possible. I think we are spoiled by the comforts of this life so much that we lose sight of what holds it up. Our societies are made up of millions of people all with their own ideas and interests. None of this could be held together by we flawed people without some unsightly actions and secrets. It's a crappy aspect of life. There should be as much openness as there can be, but just throwing an info-bomb into  the workings of the world community doesn't seem to serve a good cause.

This Wikileaks support seems to come from some trippy, far out kind of idealism.

As far as controlling the internet goes, my point is that I want an open internet, but if the people of the cyber world don't exercise some SELF control, the great forces of the world will make the internet less open because they are threatened.


*Family Guy reference, fyi.

PC

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 09, 2010, 05:28:59 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 13:43

As far as controlling the internet goes, my point is that I want an open internet, but if the people of the cyber world don't exercise some SELF control, the great forces of the world will make the internet less open because they are threatened.




Avoiding exposing the truth because of the fear of consequences is the way of cowards. And I understand that sometimes the cowardly path is necessary for self-preservation.  
If nothing should ever be done that might threaten the "great forces of the world," then that's really saying something.  It reminds me of abuse victims who try to convince themselves that if they can only somehow manage to not anger their abusers, everything will work out okay. But abusers will always find an excuse to abuse, and the great powers of the world are not on the side of the average person.

btw, I really like the fact that Assange does not answer to anyone at all.  I've never been a big fan of authority & obedience.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Jay Kadis on December 09, 2010, 05:34:16 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 13:43

I find these cries for openness and transparency to be simplistic and naive (as well as shallow and pedantic*). Do you really think that diplomacy could actually happen in the real world without some bit of duplicity going on?
And how well is that duplicitous approach working?
Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 13:43

Is there any reason to believe that Wikileaks' dumping is at all measured in any way to make a specific point, or is it just vandalism?
There are redactions in the material where it would endanger specific individuals.  It is being edited.
Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 13:43

We all enjoy the fruits of our advanced modern societies, we depend on the institutions and structures that make our modern life possible. I think we are spoiled by the comforts of this life so much that we lose sight of what holds it up. Our societies are made up of millions of people all with their own ideas and interests. None of this could be held together by we flawed people without some unsightly actions and secrets. It's a crappy aspect of life. There should be as much openness as there can be, but just throwing an info-bomb into  the workings of the world community doesn't seem to serve a good cause.
There is so much duplicity and opaque activity that moneyed special interests are able to conduct clandestine deals about which we know nothing and are obliged to support through our tax dollars.  I would prefer to have more of this in the open - maybe it will wake up those who seem to think our government is acting in our best interest rather than the interests of those who prowl K Street.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 09, 2010, 05:44:10 pm
Interesting point in this article that there was never this much outrage when Wikileaks revealed all sorts of nastiness about the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.  Apparently the "powers that be" care much more about hiding diplomatic cables than they do about hiding war crimes:  http://www.counterpunch.org/floyd12072010.html

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 09, 2010, 05:55:29 pm
Jay, the whole system isn't based on duplicity, yet there is a certain amount in any human society. What alternative vision is there? What great path forward is revealed by the Wiki kids?

One has to be unsatisfied with the system, but reckless tearing-down isn't the answer. There has to be better ways to fight for openness and accountability.


DarinK, another word for someone who doesn't answer to anyone is "despot". No matter how shitty the government is, it is still run by people who need to get elected.

There's always going to be a "system" made up of people. You either work with it to try to change it or try to tear it down. I think we have too much good to lose applaud those who only tear it down.

PC
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 09, 2010, 06:10:26 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 14:55


No matter how shitty the government is, it is still run by people who need to get elected.





Yep, and the best chance of electing the best people to government is when the public has access to information beyond only stuff which been selected based on what that government finds acceptable.

That's why Freedom of the Press was so important to the Founding Fathers.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jetbase on December 09, 2010, 06:12:11 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Fri, 10 December 2010 09:55

Jay, the whole system isn't based on duplicity, yet there is a certain amount in any human society. What alternative vision is there? What great path forward is revealed by the Wiki kids?

One has to be unsatisfied with the system, but reckless tearing-down isn't the answer. There has to be better ways to fight for openness and accountability.



Hey Paul, why do you call them "Wiki kids"? I think you answer your own question regarding what "alternative vision", or "great path forward", is revealed when you mention "openness & accountability". How do you perceive Wikileaks is recklessly tearing down (& what)? From what I understand, which is only info reported by the media, they are leaked info from within the US government & they have made public only a portion of what they recieved. Of course, then that would beg the question who determines what is appropriate to release & how? But ultimately it seems to me that the US government (& I'm definitely NOT anti-US) is working hard to make this all about Wikileaks &, specifically, Julian Assange, and they are avoiding accountability for themselves.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Jay Kadis on December 09, 2010, 06:44:59 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 14:55

Jay, the whole system isn't based on duplicity, yet there is a certain amount in any human society.
PC
Did you see the movie "Charlie Wilson's War"?  That is the kind of behavior at the root of what I object to in the actions of the US government vis-a-vis foreign sovereign governments.  It is unfortunate that so many citizens of this country are oblivious to the machinations of ignorant politicians who have engineered the situation we face in Afghanistan.  That is but one example of failure in our approach to foreign policy.

I still think duplicity is bad in the long run, albeit necessary in a very few instances.  It is the rare ability to parse those situations that makes a truly great statesman.  It should certainly not be the cornerstone of American diplomacy.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tomas Danko on December 10, 2010, 06:52:23 am
sui-city wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 21:39

Kris,

My apologies. You may be right with the charge.

This may shed some light on it:

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336291/Wikileaks-Ju  lian-Assanges-2-night-stands-spark-worldwide-hunt.html?ito=f eeds-newsxml

I knew of the Sexual Molestation & Unlawful Coercion.



With our Swedish laws being a bit odd and different from other countries, to begin with he has not yet been charged with rape. Only accused. This discrepancy compared to British law has caused some issues already.

It's not very wise for a person in Assange's position to screw around on his globetrotting, since these actions are historically what brings people down. I guess he's just a man like most men, and he took advantage of his "Jesus" image...

The scenario is apparently that he had consensual sex a couple of times with this woman, and then afterwards he woke up in the middle of the night and "hit it on" again while she was asleep. No violence was involved, in any way. Since she wanted sex earlier that evening and night, he probably thought it to be OK. (She was the one that actively contacted him and tried to step into his life, btw) And it seems it was OK until a few days later, when she found out he had been sexing it on with another woman. When they both found out they weren't planned to become his wife they started the whole carousel. There are SMS and Twitter messages from the women after the rape and molestation dates where they were braggingly and happily mentioning Assange in a positive way. Only several days later, once the women got together, it became rape and so forth.

The initial prosecutor dropped the charges immediately, the second one didn't. There were leaks from the police to the press at this time. Between this, a highly questionable lawyer took charge of the women and their case (whith is really not theirs anymore). This man has said that the women did not know if they had been raped or not, because they are not lawyers. (I kid you not) Assange stayed in Sweden for forty days waiting to be heard a second time, nothing happened until he left the country. (There was no legal cause hindering him to do so, either)

And since a rape accusation in Sweden automatically becomes a public accusation, the woman is out of the picture and the prosecution will own and lead the case even if the woman would take it all back. The lawyer can run such an errand for ages, and get paid while doing so. This in itself is a sad state of affairs that has negative consequences on every serious accusation of rape, but that's Sweden for you. (The former politician and lawyer of the two women, he owns a law firm together with another politician, they actually created this new law and then they started a law firm that specialised in these kind of cases...)

Go figure.

There is an awful lot more circumstances going on, but I'll save you the details. I'm just sharing some of it, I'm not even mentioning Wikileaks and all of that.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 10, 2010, 09:02:59 am
sui-city wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 16:39

Kris,

My apologies. You may be right with the charge.

This may shed some light on it:

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336291/Wikileaks-Ju  lian-Assanges-2-night-stands-spark-worldwide-hunt.html?ito=f eeds-newsxml

I knew of the Sexual Molestation & Unlawful Coercion.




No apology necessary.  The 'facts' and the 'truth' are tough (if not impossible) to discern.  It is interesting to read those articles and also to hear more detail from Tomas.

And speaking of the 'truth' I'd guess that a nice chunk of the wiki leaks are far from it as well.  Lot's of grade school gossip there it seems!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 10, 2010, 10:58:32 am
Last night I dreamt of the following:

I am a revolutionary.

I am fighting against the US.

I started in Costa Rica, and worked my way up the continent.

No one stopped me, but joined in. Even some of the soldiers fighting against me.

When I got to the US territory, there was nothing but desert there. No one around to fight.

Maybe my grandfathers opium dream came to visit me last night...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: MagnetoSound on December 10, 2010, 11:20:42 am


Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 21:43

We all enjoy the fruits of our advanced modern societies





This sort of thing is necessarily written from a privileged perspective, and is simply not true.



Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 10, 2010, 05:13:46 pm
The calls by congressmen and people in positions of power in the USA to have Julian Assange killed are an indictment to their nation and a sad example of the morally corrupt attitude their comments represent. Making a threat to murder is an offense in Australia and as these people are making a threat to murder an Australian citizen they should face extradition orders to face the charge in an Australian court of law.
That Americans see as a legitimate exercise in the protection of its interests, the Murder of citizens from other countries not engaged in legitimate or illegitimate war (another story altogether) is the pits and i'm sure many decent Americans bear the shame of such an attitude with dismay and despair.

Sarah Palin
Whilliam Kristoll
Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York.
Jeffrey T Kuhner of the NY Times
John Hawkins.
Jonah Goldberg.......many others I'm sure.

.......OK in reality I know extradition is not on the cards however steps are taking place in Australia to put pressure on the Australian Govt to advocate on behalf of Assange in ensuring he is protected by the law, not abused.

An open letter to the Australian Prime Minister

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41914.html

Open letter: To Julia Gillard, re Julian Assange [signed by Noam Chomsky & Others]
We wrote the letter below because we believe that Julian Assange is entitled to all the protections enshrined in the rule of law – and that the Australian Government has an obligation to ensure he receives them.

The signatures here have been collected in the course of a day-and-a-half, primarily from people in publishing, law and politics. The signatories hold divergent views about WikiLeaks and its operations. But they are united in a determination to see Mr Assange treated fairly.

We know that many others would have liked to sign. But given the urgency of the situation, we though it expedient to publish now rather than collect more names.

If, however, you agree with the sentiments expressed, we encourage you to leave your name in the comments section.

Source: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41914.html

Dear Prime Minister,

We note with concern the increasingly violent rhetoric directed towards Julian Assange of WikiLeaks.

“We should treat Mr Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him,” writes conservative columnist Jeffrey T Kuhner in the Washington Times.

William Kristol, former chief of staff to vice president Dan Quayle, asks, “Why can’t we use our various assets to harass, snatch or neutralize Julian Assange and his collaborators, wherever they are?”

“Why isn’t Julian Assange dead?” writes the prominent US pundit Jonah Goldberg.

“The CIA should have already killed Julian Assange,” says John Hawkins on the Right Wing News site.

Sarah Palin, a likely presidential candidate, compares Assange to an Al Qaeda leader; Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania senator and potential presidential contender, accuses Assange of “terrorism”.

And so on and so forth.

Such calls cannot be dismissed as bluster. Over the last decade, we have seen the normalisation of extrajudicial measures once unthinkable, from ‘extraordinary rendition’ (kidnapping) to ‘enhanced interrogation’ (torture).

In that context, we now have grave concerns for Mr Assange’s wellbeing.

Irrespective of the political controversies surrounding WikiLeaks, Mr Assange remains entitled to conduct his affairs in safety, and to receive procedural fairness in any legal proceedings against him.

As is well known, Mr Assange is an Australian citizen.

We therefore call upon you to condemn, on behalf of the Australian Government, calls for physical harm to be inflicted upon Mr Assange, and to state publicly that you will ensure Mr Assange receives the rights and protections to which he is entitled, irrespective of whether the unlawful threats against him come from individuals or states.

We urge you to confirm publicly Australia’s commitment to freedom of political communication; to refrain from cancelling Mr Assange's passport, in the absence of clear proof that such a step is warranted; to provide assistance and advocacy to Mr Assange; and do everything in your power to ensure that any legal proceedings taken against him comply fully with the principles of law and procedural fairness.

A statement by you to this effect should not be controversial – it is a simple commitment to democratic principles and the rule of law.

We believe this case represents something of a watershed, with implications that extend beyond Mr Assange and WikiLeaks. In many parts of the globe, death threats routinely silence those who would publish or disseminate controversial material. If these incitements to violence against Mr Assange, a recipient of Amnesty International’s Media Award, are allowed to stand, a disturbing new precedent will have been established in the English-speaking world.

In this crucial time, a strong statement by you and your Government can make an important difference.

We look forward to your response.

Dr Jeff Sparrow, author and editor
Lizzie O’Shea, Social Justice Lawyer, Maurice Blackburn
Professor Noam Chomsky, writer and academic
Antony Loewenstein, journalist and author
Mungo MacCallum, journalist and writer
Professor Peter Singer, author and academic
Adam Bandt, MP
Senator Bob Brown
Senator Scott Ludlam
Julian Burnside QC, barrister
Jeff Lawrence, Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions
Professor Raimond Gaita, author and academic
Rob Stary, lawyer
Lieutenant Colonel (ret) Lance Collins, Australian Intelligence Corps, writer
etc,etc,etc

.......see the link for the full list.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 10, 2010, 08:40:07 pm
So you are saying that all of the REP, Whatever Works peeps who get to gather over the interwebs don't enjoy the fruits of modern society?

Ok, I bet you were taking the "we" to mean the people of the world. My point would be that the only way the great masses of the world are going to enjoy the fruits of modernity is if they emulate the people who have achieved such a lifestyle. That means Western values, rule of law, etc. I know it isn't the correct thing to write, but it is true.

The poor people all around the world aren't that way because of genetics or heritage, they just have societies that are built around relatively crappy ideas.

(ducking, covering my head)



PC



MagnetoSound wrote on Fri, 10 December 2010 11:20



Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 21:43

We all enjoy the fruits of our advanced modern societies





This sort of thing is necessarily written from a privileged perspective, and is simply not true.





Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: MagnetoSound on December 10, 2010, 08:52:44 pm


Yes, I meant the people of the world.



But I could also have meant that not everybody finds all of the 'fruits of modernity' particularly enjoyable.

That kind of thing is highly subjective, after all.


(I am not personally drawn to fast, thirsty cars for example, although I know that many on this forum are and I do not particularly have a problem with that.)



Paul Cavins wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 01:40

The poor people all around the world ... just have societies that are built around relatively crappy ideas.




That assertion is ridiculous. A lot of the poorer countries have been severely disadvantaged by the West and damaged by colonialism throughout modern history.

The playing field is not exactly level.



Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 10, 2010, 09:01:29 pm
Fair enough, but we in the West have the luxury of picking and choosing, or taking or leaving the various fruits of modern society. That is quite a fortunate situation, to even have the choice.

PC


MagnetoSound wrote on Fri, 10 December 2010 20:52




Yes, I meant the people of the world.



But I could also have meant that not everybody finds all of the 'fruits of modernity' particularly enjoyable.

That kind of thing is highly subjective, after all.


(I am not personally drawn to fast, thirsty cars for example, although I know that many on this forum are.)




Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: MagnetoSound on December 10, 2010, 09:13:31 pm


Yes, we are fortunate but we are not necessarily better, in any moral sense, because of that.


A lot of that privilege has been built on lies - which, I think, brings us nicely back on topic.



Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 10, 2010, 09:17:34 pm
I'm sorry, I missed the last part of your post.

My assertion is not at all ridiculous.

It is a shite idea that poorer countries are that way because of Western misbehavior. The reason they are disadvantaged is related to why they were so ripe to be colonized back in the the bad old days. They were and are behind in the race of human development. I know it's not all that simple and that it would be tragic for people all over to abandon the whole of their cultures to copy the West. I'm speaking generally.

Look at India now. It was colonized, and got over it (which is nice), but would it be in it's present position without a shot of Western culture?

It is about ideas, not big piles of resources being grabbed.

PC


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: sui-city on December 11, 2010, 09:17:26 am
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_o n_poverty.html

Paul Cavins wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 04:17

I'm sorry, I missed the last part of your post.

My assertion is not at all ridiculous.

It is a shite idea that poorer countries are that way because of Western misbehavior. The reason they are disadvantaged is related to why they were so ripe to be colonized back in the the bad old days. They were and are behind in the race of human development. I know it's not all that simple and that it would be tragic for people all over to abandon the whole of their cultures to copy the West. I'm speaking generally.

Look at India now. It was colonized, and got over it (which is nice), but would it be in it's present position without a shot of Western culture?

It is about ideas, not big piles of resources being grabbed.

PC




Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kassonica on December 11, 2010, 09:44:40 am
Here is a yet to be released rough cut of a documentary about Julian assange and wikileaks.

http://svtplay.se/v/2264028/wikirebels___the_documentary?cb, a1364145,1,f,-1/pb,a1364142,1,f,-1/pl,v,,2264028/sb,p118750, 1,f,-1


For the record I think  Julian Assange is a modern hero and probably the 1st internet hero.

What he is doing is changing the rules and the world......

 
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 11, 2010, 11:06:52 am
Assange is no hero. Just another cyber brat who happened to illegally obtain information that did not belong to him, distribute it, then had his cronies mount cyber terrorist attacks against others for not kissing his ass.

Is any of this stuff he exposed actually "news" to anyone?

Who appointed him "Monitor of the World"?



Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Jay Kadis on December 11, 2010, 11:28:16 am
Gio wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 08:06


Is any of this stuff he exposed actually "news" to anyone?


Yes, to many people it IS news.  It exposes a pattern of duplicity that undermines our political standing in the world.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 11, 2010, 12:13:07 pm
Hallams wrote on Fri, 10 December 2010 14:13

The calls by congressmen and people in positions of power in the USA to have Julian Assange killed are an indictment to their nation and a sad example of the morally corrupt attitude their comments represent.



Nothing new here.

They have been assassinating people all over the world, pretty much since the United States became the United States.

To me, the United States Government has not represented the interests of ALL the U.S. Citizens for a very long time, if ever.

Just like most other "Democratic" countries, where it is almost always the rich who control everything.

Cheers
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: sui-city on December 11, 2010, 12:22:39 pm
Gio,

If you can watch this, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0, and not feel disgusted by it, then no matter your opinion of JA, I recommend you ask yourself why you are unmoved.

And to accept that this is justified, by the people who lead our countries, not just the USA, but many countries, as a part of war, shows that there is something severely wrong in all of us.

This needs to be exposed. It is what journalism was. Only now the tools have changed.


Gio wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 18:06

Assange is no hero. Just another cyber brat who happened to illegally obtain information that did not belong to him, distribute it, then had his cronies mount cyber terrorist attacks against others for not kissing his ass.

Is any of this stuff he exposed actually "news" to anyone?

Who appointed him "Monitor of the World"?





Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 11, 2010, 05:24:27 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Fri, 10 December 2010 21:17



It is about ideas, not big piles of resources being grabbed.

PC






I am not going to be taking any shots in this thread about a traitorous piece of shit committing espionage, I just wanted to hug Paul for being awesome.

(((Paul)))
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 11, 2010, 05:26:30 pm
Gio wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 11:06

Assange is no hero. Just another cyber brat who happened to illegally obtain information that did not belong to him, distribute it, then had his cronies mount cyber terrorist attacks against others for not kissing his ass.






Ok, and Gio is also a thinker. (bows)
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kassonica on December 11, 2010, 07:01:29 pm
Gio wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 03:06

Assange is no hero. Just another cyber brat who happened to illegally obtain information that did not belong to him, distribute it, then had his cronies mount cyber terrorist attacks against others for not kissing his ass.

Is any of this stuff he exposed actually "news" to anyone?

Who appointed him "Monitor of the World"?







Your understanding of Julian Assange and wikileaks is quite underwhelming.....

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 11, 2010, 07:04:24 pm
Jay Kadis wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 11:28

Yes, to many people it IS news.  It exposes a pattern of duplicity that undermines our political standing in the world.


If by that you mean exposing our current administration's lack of "transparency" they promised, then I agree. Twisted Evil  

The U.S. is not, of course, the only country on the planet that practices this kind of duplicity, and I somehow doubt the world could survive with an "I'll take your word for it" policy between nations.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 11, 2010, 07:06:24 pm
Kassonica wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 19:01



Your understanding of Julian Assange and wikileaks is quite underwhelming.....



Perhaps because I find the idea of wikileaks underwhelming.....
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 11, 2010, 07:58:02 pm
sui-city wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 12:22

Gio,

If you can watch this, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0, and not feel disgusted by it, then no matter your opinion of JA, I recommend you ask yourself why you are unmoved.

And to accept that this is justified, by the people who lead our countries, not just the USA, but many countries, as a part of war, shows that there is something severely wrong in all of us.

This needs to be exposed. It is what journalism was. Only now the tools have changed.


Sui-city,

The very fact that acts of war continue suggests that something is severely wrong in all of us. Again, atrocious as that event is, it is not news, and that was my point. "Safe" wars where only military personnel are killed is the stuff of TV and movies. Am I disgusted by it? Sure. But it's a stretch to think that innocents will not be killed, whether intentional or not. I've never been in combat, so I don't know what it would be like. I imagine there are those who play by the rules, and those who's own mental deficiencies override any rational thinking.....
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 11, 2010, 10:31:14 pm
Humanity is foul. It's made of people.

We need a committee.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 11, 2010, 11:15:07 pm
Tidewater wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 22:31

Humanity is foul. It's made of people.

You're my hero.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 12, 2010, 06:48:04 am
If you guys are gonna start making out, I'm moving to another thread...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Jay Kadis on December 12, 2010, 11:43:23 am
Gio wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 16:04

Jay Kadis wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 11:28

Yes, to many people it IS news.  It exposes a pattern of duplicity that undermines our political standing in the world.


If by that you mean exposing our current administration's lack of "transparency" they promised, then I agree. Twisted Evil  

The U.S. is not, of course, the only country on the planet that practices this kind of duplicity, and I somehow doubt the world could survive with an "I'll take your word for it" policy between nations.

What goes around comes around.  Are you duplicitous in your day-to-day dealings?  I bet not.  So why should governments be any different?

The current administration is less opaque that the previous one, but that's comparing it to a black hole.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 12, 2010, 12:05:24 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Thu, 09 December 2010 01:16

As much as we may have issues with the way our leaders behave, at least they are elected. Nobody elected Assange, he doesn't answer to anyone or anything except for his punk-ass conscience or lack thereof.

Wikileaks' actions only heighten the "need" for MORE control of the internet.

He is a worthless prick.

I suppose the fact that the politicians were elected gives them the right to lie to you and the rest of the country.  who do they (the politicians) answer to by the way?  Will they ever be brought to justice for lying to the country or for any other crimes they may have committed?

I find it interesting that you would put those same lying, conniving politicians in control of the internet.

Those lying assholes broke their oath of office, but he's the worthless prick....
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 12, 2010, 12:28:53 pm
Hallams wrote on Fri, 10 December 2010 22:13

The calls by congressmen and people in positions of power in the USA to have Julian Assange killed are an indictment to their nation and a sad example of the morally corrupt attitude their comments represent. Making a threat to murder is an offense in Australia and as these people are making a threat to murder an Australian citizen they should face extradition orders to face the charge in an Australian court of law.
That Americans see as a legitimate exercise in the protection of its interests, the Murder of citizens from other countries not engaged in legitimate or illegitimate war (another story altogether) is the pits and i'm sure many decent Americans bear the shame of such an attitude with dismay and despair.

I totally agree wit this and find their behavior disgusting and shameful...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 12, 2010, 12:58:24 pm
Sam, I DO NOT WANT the gubmint in control of the internet!! How many times do I have to say it?

Assange types are behaving in ways that force the issue about "needing" central powers to control the internet. I don't want that to happen.

The point about people being elected is that they can be unelected.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 12, 2010, 01:14:17 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 12:58



The point about people being elected is that they can be unelected.


can they?  can they really?

http://www.opensecrets.org/bigpicture/reelect.php

in response to your other points about Assange forcing the issue.....i would say that liberty is always taken away piecemeal until the issue is forced.

America once had to buy all its tea from the East India Company until a bunch of "terrorists" dumped it in the river.

Martin Luther King Jr.'s pacifist approach became a lot more effective once Malcolm X stepped up with something more severe.

if, leaving aside your other thoughts in the validity of Wikileaks, the "powers that be" decide they need to "control" the internet due to Julian Assange's actions, then that is not an indictment of Wikileaks.

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 12, 2010, 01:20:51 pm
Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 06:48

If you guys are gonna start making out, I'm moving to another thread...



If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 12, 2010, 01:24:19 pm
What's wrong with a little foreplay?
As long as it's in the interest of National Security...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 12, 2010, 01:34:10 pm
I don't want a government getting to 1st, 2nd.. or 3rd base with me. The government has one thing on it's mind, and we all know what that is.

Homer!

Doh!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: mukul on December 12, 2010, 01:35:13 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 07:47

I'm sorry, I missed the last part of your post.

My assertion is not at all ridiculous.

It is a shite idea that poorer countries are that way because of Western misbehavior. The reason they are disadvantaged is related to why they were so ripe to be colonized back in the the bad old days. They were and are behind in the race of human development. I know it's not all that simple and that it would be tragic for people all over to abandon the whole of their cultures to copy the West. I'm speaking generally.

Look at India now. It was colonized, and got over it (which is nice), but would it be in it's present position without a shot of Western culture?

It is about ideas, not big piles of resources being grabbed.

PC





I don't know if I should be angry at such a condescending opinion, or sad at self-proclaimed superiority of western culture.

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 12, 2010, 02:11:49 pm
The ability of one country to successfully colonize another would require a disparity in technological and military development which should have no bearing on "cultural superiority", whatever that means.

As to why one society might have that advantage over another I would think (just my un-researched opinion) that in the framework being discussed, it would be due to population density vs. resources forcing an acceleration of industrialization.

Did India benefit from an influx of Western technology?
Just an open question. I have no idea and no agenda.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 12, 2010, 04:53:50 pm
mukul wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 18:35

Paul Cavins wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 07:47

I'm sorry, I missed the last part of your post.

My assertion is not at all ridiculous.

It is a shite idea that poorer countries are that way because of Western misbehavior. The reason they are disadvantaged is related to why they were so ripe to be colonized back in the the bad old days. They were and are behind in the race of human development. I know it's not all that simple and that it would be tragic for people all over to abandon the whole of their cultures to copy the West. I'm speaking generally.

Look at India now. It was colonized, and got over it (which is nice), but would it be in it's present position without a shot of Western culture?

It is about ideas, not big piles of resources being grabbed.


I don't know if I should be angry at such a condescending opinion, or sad at self-proclaimed superiority of western culture.


I'm just personally amazed at the level of ignorance and presumption displayed in the above post.  Claiming that people are "behind in the race of human development." is not just condescending, it's racist...

Hey Paul, did the people of India tell you that they "got over" hundred's of years of colonization when their country was raped of it's natural resources?  What facts or study did you use to arrive at the conclusion that India got to where it is because it was colonized rather than in spite of it?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 12, 2010, 04:57:02 pm
Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 19:11


Did India benefit from an influx of Western technology?
Just an open question. I have no idea and no agenda.

This assumes that there was an influx of western technology into India during colonization...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 12, 2010, 05:00:03 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 17:58

Sam, I DO NOT WANT the gubmint in control of the internet!! How many times do I have to say it?

Assange types are behaving in ways that force the issue about "needing" central powers to control the internet. I don't want that to happen.

The point about people being elected is that they can be unelected.

Can you explain how and why Assange is the villain in this saga, why is he and not the politicians who are at the root of the situation?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 12, 2010, 05:52:05 pm
Samc wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 16:57

Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 19:11


Did India benefit from an influx of Western technology?
Just an open question. I have no idea and no agenda.

This assumes that there was an influx of western technology into India during colonization...


No Sam. No assumption at all.
As I said-I have no idea whether or not there was an influx at that time or whether it was of any benefit.

And I'm not implying anything by the question, which I tried to make clear.


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 12, 2010, 05:55:33 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 09:58

Sam, I DO NOT WANT the gubmint in control of the internet!! How many times do I have to say it?

Assange types are behaving in ways that force the issue about "needing" central powers to control the internet. I don't want that to happen.




I still don't get the point of a non-government-controlled internet if it can only be used for things that governments approve of.  
That's like saying, "don't use your freedom of speech for anything that might make the government want to restrict your freedom of speech."  It's basically a cry for self-censorship to save the government the trouble of real censorship.  
Freedoms that can't be used for fear of how the government will respond are not freedoms.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kassonica on December 12, 2010, 06:28:53 pm
Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 09:00


Can you explain how and why Assange is the villain in this saga, why is he and not the politicians who are at the root of the situation?



Answer that question and we're getting close.


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 12, 2010, 08:20:25 pm
Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 22:52

Samc wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 16:57

Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 19:11


Did India benefit from an influx of Western technology?
Just an open question. I have no idea and no agenda.

This assumes that there was an influx of western technology into India during colonization...


No Sam. No assumption at all.
As I said-I have no idea whether or not there was an influx at that time or whether it was of any benefit.

I'm going to TRY and answer this, albeit in a very general way because the answer is a little more complicated than a simple yes or no.

The aim of colonization (generally speaking) was always very simple, the colonizers used the resources of the colony to enrich themselves.  Any benefit that the colony reaps from this is incidental; modern transportation systems had to be built to take merchandise to the ports for export and hospitals had to be built to maintain a healthy workforce for example but there was no wholesale importation of education and technology into colonies.

Education was on a limited need to know basis, which means that a very small percentage of the population get educated, and even then they only get what's necessary to keep the wheel turning.  The British colonization of India did not bring the advanced tools and education necessary to bring India to where it is today...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: mukul on December 12, 2010, 09:28:24 pm
Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 03:23

mukul wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 18:35

Paul Cavins wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 07:47

I'm sorry, I missed the last part of your post.

My assertion is not at all ridiculous.

It is a shite idea that poorer countries are that way because of Western misbehavior. The reason they are disadvantaged is related to why they were so ripe to be colonized back in the the bad old days. They were and are behind in the race of human development. I know it's not all that simple and that it would be tragic for people all over to abandon the whole of their cultures to copy the West. I'm speaking generally.

Look at India now. It was colonized, and got over it (which is nice), but would it be in it's present position without a shot of Western culture?

It is about ideas, not big piles of resources being grabbed.


I don't know if I should be angry at such a condescending opinion, or sad at self-proclaimed superiority of western culture.


I'm just personally amazed at the level of ignorance and presumption displayed in the above post.  Claiming that people are "behind in the race of human development." is not just condescending, it's racist...

Hey Paul, did the people of India tell you that they "got over" hundred's of years of colonization when their country was raped of it's natural resources?  What facts or study did you use to arrive at the conclusion that India got to where it is because it was colonized rather than in spite of it?


+1 for exposing the so-called White man's burden in the original post.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 13, 2010, 12:51:07 am
Ha-

My post is not at all racist. The charge of racism is the first refuge of poopy-heads.

"Got over it" refers to the fact that India is advancing quite a lot and it's people are using their talents and hard work to move ahead.

You people need to get past this whole resentment mentality and get on with life. No one is defending what happened centuries ago. We are past that, just like we are past slavery and other past behaviors we see as sins today.

It is a plain fact that different parts of the world have developed at different rates. Is Afghanistan as far along as Sweden? Do they even have a Starbucks?

It is just pure moral narcissism that causes a guilty Westerner to deny such a basic truth.

That the West is further along at this point in time says nothing positive or negative about the people who inhabit it's territories. It happened. That other areas are not as far along says not one damn thing negative about the people there. It is just how things are. It's called history.

Because of modern technology the world is getting smaller and smaller. In historical terms, the rest of the world will "catch up" in a very short time. That is because there are talented, hard working people all over the world who will enhance the world with their great ideas.

Save the racism bilge for someone else. It bores me.

PC
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 13, 2010, 06:58:01 am
Paul Cavins wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 05:51

My post is not at all racist. The charge of racism is the first refuge of poopy-heads.

No, your post was not racist, but claiming that some people are "behind in the race of human development" smacks of racism.  This has been one of the main arguments of racist since the beginning of time... You went as far as to suggest that India is where it is today because of it's colonization by England which gave them "a shot of western culture".  Yes, a shot of (superior) western culture gave them what they needed to progress.


Quote:

You people need to get past this whole resentment mentality and get on with life. No one is defending what happened centuries ago. We are past that, just like we are past slavery and other past behaviors we see as sins today.

"Poopy head", "you people" you really are laying it on Paul.  Maybe if you people had suffered through generations of colonization, slavery and constant racism you would not be in such a hurry to to "get past this whole resentment mentality" (as you call it).  "You people" profited (for the most part) from that little stain in human history, no wonder you want everybody else to just forget about it as if it didn't happen.  And in case you haven't noticed 'we people' are getting on with our lives, the evidence is all around you.

Maybe after you have spent a day in the shoes of 'us people' you will earn the right to tell us how to deal with this tragedy that is only just an annoyance to you...


Quote:

It is a plain fact that different parts of the world have developed at different rates. Is Afghanistan as far along as Sweden? Do they even have a Starbucks?

What is a plain fact is that you keep moving the goal posts; you make statements and when challenged you redefine their meaning.  Glad to know that Starbucks is the yardstick we use to measure 'human development'...


Quote:

Save the racism bilge for someone else. It bores me.

Racism is a constant and seemingly permanent fact of life for some of 'us people', its existence has been the bane of our existence for several hundred years now.  Does it concern you one bit that some of your remarks do more than just bore other people?  Think about that for a second or two.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 13, 2010, 08:00:03 am
By the way Paul, you have not answered my question as to why you consider julian Assange the bad guy in all this, when all the politicians and governments at the root of this scandal and those yahoos who are calling for his murder get a free ride?

Didn't the NY Times and the Guardian among others also published some of this information?  Why aren't those publishers being assassinated in the streets of NY, London or wherever they are?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: KB_S1 on December 13, 2010, 08:39:20 am
Paul Cavins wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 05:51


It is a plain fact that different parts of the world have developed at different rates. Is Afghanistan as far along as Sweden? Do they even have a Starbucks?





I don't know if there are any Starbucks serving vendors in Afghanistan but I would expect there to be much better coffee on offer than any Starbucks can provide.

I have seen a little US based coverage of the Wikileaks scenario. At the moment it looks like classic political method of blaming the other guy and ignore the actual problems inherent.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 13, 2010, 09:04:53 am
Quick before I'm more late to work that I am already-

The Starbucks reference was an attempt at humor, which isn't always apparent coming from me-

PC
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: mukul on December 13, 2010, 12:45:52 pm
Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 06:50

Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 22:52

Samc wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 16:57

Bill_Urick wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 19:11


Did India benefit from an influx of Western technology?
Just an open question. I have no idea and no agenda.

This assumes that there was an influx of western technology into India during colonization...


No Sam. No assumption at all.
As I said-I have no idea whether or not there was an influx at that time or whether it was of any benefit.

I'm going to TRY and answer this, albeit in a very general way because the answer is a little more complicated than a simple yes or no.

The aim of colonization (generally speaking) was always very simple, the colonizers used the resources of the colony to enrich themselves.  Any benefit that the colony reaps from this is incidental; modern transportation systems had to be built to take merchandise to the ports for export and hospitals had to be built to maintain a healthy workforce for example but there was no wholesale importation of education and technology into colonies.

Education was on a limited need to know basis, which means that a very small percentage of the population get educated, and even then they only get what's necessary to keep the wheel turning.  The British colonization of India did not bring the advanced tools and education necessary to bring India to where it is today...



Sam, you hit the nail on the head about colonization.

Have people wondered why there were such concerted efforts by Europeans to `discover India', from Columbus to Vasco da Gama?  To teach Indians Western Culture?  No, they wanted to trade with a country that was rich in material wealth (also rich in philosophy, culture, mathematics, textiles, agriculture, astronomy and a whole lot more, but that is besides the point).  

Just one British officer (I think it was Robert Clive) was instrumental in sending some 900 ships fully loaded with Gold, silver, jewels and other wealth from India to England in late 19th century.  Now when I travel on the Motorway from Manchester to London, I can't help but thinking that much of this highly developed infrastructure came on the back of wealth purloined from my country.  And our Kohinoor is still proudly on display in British crown jewels.

India and Indians have since moved on.  They are trying to make a mark in this world by sheer hard work and intellect.  They don't hold any grudge against Westerners in general for what they had to go through.  But when some one says that old colonies were themselves to blame for colonization since they were ripe for it, and they should be thankful for a shot of Western culture, it still rankles.

And yes, it is very convenient to call people names when your ignorance and prejudice shows clearly.

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2010, 01:16:59 pm
Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 08:00

By the way Paul, you have not answered my question as to why you consider julian Assange the bad guy in all this, when all the politicians and governments at the root of this scandal and those yahoos who are calling for his murder get a free ride?

Didn't the NY Times and the Guardian among others also published some of this information?  Why aren't those publishers being assassinated in the streets of NY, London or wherever they are?


I'm not Paul but I'd wager a guess that there's a possibility that he may have broken U.S. law and some people consider law breakers to be bad guys.  (I'm no lawyer though, thank God!)  Lucky for him he's innocent until proven guilty, and no one is getting assassinated over this gossip (so far)!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 13, 2010, 02:16:50 pm
Kris wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 10:16

Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 08:00

By the way Paul, you have not answered my question as to why you consider julian Assange the bad guy in all this, when all the politicians and governments at the root of this scandal and those yahoos who are calling for his murder get a free ride?

Didn't the NY Times and the Guardian among others also published some of this information?  Why aren't those publishers being assassinated in the streets of NY, London or wherever they are?


I'm not Paul but I'd wager a guess that there's a possibility that he may have broken U.S. law and some people consider law breakers to be bad guys.  (I'm no lawyer though, thank God!)  Lucky for him he's innocent until proven guilty, and no one is getting assassinated over this gossip (so far)!



Innocent until proven guilty but the big corporations (Amazon, PayPal, Visa, etc.) have cut off his access without even a court order.  There's no longer even any attempt to pretend that there's actual rule of law - if the government says "jump," businesses say "how high" without any regard for what the law actually says.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 13, 2010, 02:20:47 pm
DarinK wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 14:16


Innocent until proven guilty but the big corporations (Amazon, PayPal, Visa, etc.) have cut off his access without even a court order.  There's no longer even any attempt to pretend that there's actual rule of law - if the government says "jump," businesses say "how high" without any regard for what the law actually says.


almost.

when *business* says "jump," (only certain mega-corporations, though), *government* says "how high?"

what you're seeing now from amazon, visa, paypal, etc., is just the quid pro quo in order to maintain the current situation.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 13, 2010, 02:27:21 pm
jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 11:20

DarinK wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 14:16


Innocent until proven guilty but the big corporations (Amazon, PayPal, Visa, etc.) have cut off his access without even a court order.  There's no longer even any attempt to pretend that there's actual rule of law - if the government says "jump," businesses say "how high" without any regard for what the law actually says.


almost.

when *business* says "jump," (only certain mega-corporations, though), *government* says "how high?"

what you're seeing now from amazon, visa, paypal, etc., is just the quid pro quo in order to maintain the current situation.

 

I agree it goes both ways.  I don't think either one is in charge any more than the other - they're both in charge, together, and both are hostile to any attempts to change that situation.  Only businesses that are willing to operate that way have any chance of getting & staying really big, and only politicians that operate that way have any chance of becoming powerful.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 13, 2010, 03:59:51 pm
Kris wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:16

Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 08:00

By the way Paul, you have not answered my question as to why you consider julian Assange the bad guy in all this, when all the politicians and governments at the root of this scandal and those yahoos who are calling for his murder get a free ride?

Didn't the NY Times and the Guardian among others also published some of this information?  Why aren't those publishers being assassinated in the streets of NY, London or wherever they are?


I'm not Paul but I'd wager a guess that there's a possibility that he may have broken U.S. law and some people consider law breakers to be bad guys.  (I'm no lawyer though, thank God!)  Lucky for him he's innocent until proven guilty, and no one is getting assassinated over this gossip (so far)!

What US law did he break?  Has he been charged with a crime?  How come the NY Times and the Guardian etc aren't also being persecuted?  Why are the people who are calling for him to be murdered aren't being charged with a crime, and more importantly, why are the politicians who are at the root of this not guilty of anything?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2010, 04:16:54 pm
Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 15:59

What US law did he break?  Has he been charged with a crime?  How come the NY Times and the Guardian etc aren't also being persecuted?  Why are the people who are calling for him to be murdered aren't being charged with a crime, and more importantly, why are the politicians who are at the root of this not guilty of anything?


(a few Google searches later...)

1)  Possibly the Espionage Act of 1917 and several other unnamed 'charges'
2)  Not yet
3)  Probably because they are 'the Press'
4)  Free Speech issues
5)  ?  Name some names and what they are guilty of?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 13, 2010, 06:18:52 pm
Sam, I can see where the phrase "behind in the race of human development" could be taken as racist, but amidst all of the other stuff I wrote about it all being about ideas and such, I think one doesn't have to bend over backwards in generosity to conclude it is innocent. My version of "the race of human development" is about culture and technology and such, not about DNA or the evolution of the human species.

As for Assange, I fear a future where we have all of these tech vigilantes running around with their own agendas. With the advance of technology, it will be possible for a small number of people to cause a lot of disruption and damage.

There is no guarantee you are always going to agree with the tech vigilante's point of view.

Again, the idea that governments can do diplomatic and military business without secrets and duplicity is childish and naive.

He has no standing to do what he is doing, compounding Manning's crime by zapping all of this data everywhere.

PC
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 13, 2010, 06:27:38 pm
Kris wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 21:16


1)  Possibly the Espionage Act of 1917 and several other unnamed 'charges'

He was spying in the US?

Quote:

2)  Not yet

You mean he hasn't even been charged with a crime but he's guilty???


Quote:

3)  Probably because they are 'the Press'

What makes the NY Times more 'press' than Wikileaks and what law gives them the exclusive right to publish certain documents?  

Quote:

4)  Free Speech issues

Since when is it a free speech issue to call for the murder of someone...last I checked that is illegal in most countries.

I'll get back to you on number 5...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 13, 2010, 06:59:19 pm
Kris wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 16:16



(a few Google searches later...)

1)  Possibly the Espionage Act of 1917 and several other unnamed 'charges'
2)  Not yet
3)  Probably because they are 'the Press'
4)  Free Speech issues
5)  ?  Name some names and what they are guilty of?


1.  the vast majority of the paragraphs in the Espionage Act repeatedly reference "when the United States is at war" or "in a time of war."  last i checked the politicians are playing politics games and not passing any official declarations of war, no matter how many times the phrase "war on terror" is parroted about on Fox News or CNN.

3.  i echo sam's comment.

4.  also echo sam's comment.  it is not legal to call for the murder of someone.

5.  long, long list.  for starters:

George W. Bush - for the illegal invasion of Iraq
Donald Rumsfeld- for allowing the pentagon to have over $2 trillion in transactions that cannot be traced or documented
Barack Obama - for endorsing the extrajudicial killing of American citizens.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 13, 2010, 07:00:33 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 23:18

Sam, I can see where the phrase "behind in the race of human development" could be taken as racist, but amidst all of the other stuff I wrote about it all being about ideas and such, I think one doesn't have to bend over backwards in generosity to conclude it is innocent. My version of "the race of human development" is about culture and technology and such, not about DNA or the evolution of the human species.

It's not about their evolution as humans, they are just behind in their cultural development... Dude, I think you should stop.


Quote:

As for Assange, I fear a future where we have all of these tech vigilantes running around with their own agendas. With the advance of technology, it will be possible for a small number of people to cause a lot of disruption and damage.

It's already possible for a small group to cause a lot of damage; the US and it's allies invaded Iraq based on the lies of a small powerful group....


Quote:

He has no standing to do what he is doing, compounding Manning's crime by zapping all of this data everywhere.

What about the NY Times!?!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 13, 2010, 07:05:02 pm
jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:59

Barack Obama - for endorsing the extrajudicial killing of American citizens.


Huh?
Please elucidate...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 13, 2010, 07:08:26 pm
Bill_Urick wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 19:05

jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:59

Barack Obama - for endorsing the extrajudicial killing of American citizens.


Huh?
Please elucidate...


http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/07 /assassinations
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 13, 2010, 07:28:39 pm
Yes I should stop. I should stop attempting to have reasonable discourse with you.


PC


Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 19:00

Paul Cavins wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 23:18

Sam, I can see where the phrase "behind in the race of human development" could be taken as racist, but amidst all of the other stuff I wrote about it all being about ideas and such, I think one doesn't have to bend over backwards in generosity to conclude it is innocent. My version of "the race of human development" is about culture and technology and such, not about DNA or the evolution of the human species.

It's not about their evolution as humans, they are just behind in their cultural development... Dude, I think you should stop.


Quote:

As for Assange, I fear a future where we have all of these tech vigilantes running around with their own agendas. With the advance of technology, it will be possible for a small number of people to cause a lot of disruption and damage.

It's already possible for a small group to cause a lot of damage; the US and it's allies invaded Iraq based on the lies of a small powerful group....


Quote:

He has no standing to do what he is doing, compounding Manning's crime by zapping all of this data everywhere.

What about the NY Times!?!

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 13, 2010, 08:02:29 pm
While the thread derailment continues on it's boring, mundane meanderings, here is a bit of reading, an  overview from a Britt's perspective.
 
WikiLeaks backlash: The first global cyber war has begun, claim hackers

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/11/wikileaks-backla sh-cyber-war


There has also been a very interesting shift taking place in the Australian media. In The Herald Sun a Melbourne Murdoch owned paper i read a commentary on the Assange/Wickileaks issue where the US response was coming under a fair bit of detailed criticism. Unusual for this conservative tabloid. Can't find a link to the article but will post from the hardcopy when i have time.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 13, 2010, 08:37:37 pm
Yeah, "hacktivists".

Operation Payback are the same jackwads who we as musicians and artists are at odds with re: illegal downloading.

Are we to allow these anonymous hackers to dictate what's right and what's wrong in the world? F**k them.

 
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2010, 08:40:13 pm
Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:27

Quote:

2)  Not yet

You mean he hasn't even been charged with a crime but he's guilty???




(Trying my hardest not to give you another 'gotcha' moment ...)

Not yet, meaning there are lots of reports from news organizations (I Googled) stating that charges are being seriously considered. (period)
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 13, 2010, 08:46:30 pm
Hallams wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 01:02

While the thread derailment continues on it's boring, mundane meanderings, here is a bit of reading, an  overview from a Britt's perspective.

My apologies for the part I've played in the boring, mundane derailment of the thread and I promise to only discuss the points that interest, entertain and amuse you from now on....

I'll get onto that link you posted right away.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 13, 2010, 08:51:19 pm
Gio wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 01:37

Yeah, "hacktivists".

Operation Payback are the same jackwads who we as musicians and artists are at odds with re: illegal downloading.

Stop waving the red herring around dude, most illegal downloading is done by regular people, you don't need to be a hacker to to do that.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 13, 2010, 09:05:19 pm
Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 20:51

Gio wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 01:37

Yeah, "hacktivists".

Operation Payback are the same jackwads who we as musicians and artists are at odds with re: illegal downloading.

Stop waving the red herring around dude, most illegal downloading is done by regular people, you don't need to be a hacker to to do that.

Quote:

Before WikiLeaks, Operation Payback's initial target was America's recording industry, chosen for its prosecutions of music file downloaders. From those humble origins, Payback's anti-censorship, anti-copyright, freedom of speech manifesto would go viral, last week pitting an amorphous army of online hackers against the US government and some of the biggest corporations in the world.


Right, dude. So you're OK with some amorphous, anonymous entity  disrupting whatever they want, whenever some "member" gets a wild hair on his ass about whatever.

Anonymous cowards. This is not how to effect any positive change.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 13, 2010, 09:11:08 pm
Kris wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 01:40

Samc wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:27

Quote:

2)  Not yet

You mean he hasn't even been charged with a crime but he's guilty???




(Trying my hardest not to give you another 'gotcha' moment ...)

Not yet, meaning there are lots of reports from news organizations (I Googled) stating that charges are being seriously considered. (period)

What part of this makes him guilty, the fact that a lot of news organizations are reporting about it, or the fact that the someone is seriously considering charging him with committing unspecified crimes.  We can't talk about him being guilty when he hasn't even been charged with a crime, it does not matter how seriously 'they' are considering to actually charge him.  
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 13, 2010, 09:29:35 pm
jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 19:08

Bill_Urick wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 19:05

jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:59

Barack Obama - for endorsing the extrajudicial killing of American citizens.


Huh?
Please elucidate...



 http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/07 /assassinations


Oh. That.

index.php/fa/15986/0/
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 13, 2010, 10:04:27 pm
I'm pretty sure I didn't declare him guilty of anything here in this thread Sam.  

I will admit that I think what he has done is wrong (IMO) and just leave it at that.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 13, 2010, 10:22:32 pm
Bill_Urick wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 21:29

jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 19:08

Bill_Urick wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 19:05

jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 18:59

Barack Obama - for endorsing the extrajudicial killing of American citizens.


Huh?
Please elucidate...



    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/07 /assassinations


Oh. That.

index.php/fa/15986/0/


Hi Bill,

serious question here- in the real world, when you are in heated discussion and strongly disagreeing with a group of people whom you mostly respect as decent, intelligent human beings, do you normally choose interact with responses like that?

i have gone out of my way to debate ideas without belittling anyone else.

Jon
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 13, 2010, 11:20:19 pm
jonathan jetter wrote on Mon, 13 December 2010 22:22

Hi Bill,

serious question here- in the real world, when you are in heated discussion and strongly disagreeing with a group of people whom you mostly respect as decent, intelligent human beings, do you normally choose interact with responses like that?

i have gone out of my way to debate ideas without belittling anyone else.

Jon



Jon-serious answer: I didn't think I was, at present, in a heated discussion. There have been some heated moments but I don't think they involved me. I am deliberately not becoming emotionally involved in this, while I am following it with a great deal of interest.

I really did not know what you were originally referring to and appreciate the clarification.

And yes "a group of people whom you mostly respect as decent, intelligent human beings" is a fair assessment. Well stated.

My response was not at all intended to be belittling. Rather, I chose to communicate my opinion in a spirit of humor, the intention being to pull the tone away from being quite so heated and confrontational. My apologies if you found the response in any way condescending or offensive.

Edited.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 14, 2010, 06:55:49 am
Samc wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 12:46

Hallams wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 01:02

While the thread derailment continues on it's boring, mundane meanderings, here is a bit of reading, an  overview from a Britt's perspective.

My apologies for the part I've played in the boring, mundane derailment of the thread and I promise to only discuss the points that interest, entertain and amuse you from now on....

I'll get onto that link you posted right away.


Ok ......Cool
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 14, 2010, 07:34:22 am
Hallams wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 11:55

Samc wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 12:46

Hallams wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 01:02

While the thread derailment continues on it's boring, mundane meanderings, here is a bit of reading, an  overview from a Britt's perspective.

My apologies for the part I've played in the boring, mundane derailment of the thread and I promise to only discuss the points that interest, entertain and amuse you from now on....

I'll get onto that link you posted right away.


Ok ......Cool


Thanks for seeing it this way man...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 14, 2010, 08:11:05 am
Paul Cavins wrote on Tue, 14 December 2010 00:28

Yes I should stop. I should stop attempting to have reasonable discourse with you

No, maybe you should ask questions and stop trying to define complicated social issues and conditions that you don't know enough about...especially to people who have lived through those conditions all their lives.

A number of your statements (which are basically opinions posing as facts) assumes and disregards a lot, and are also highly presumptuous, prejudicial and offensive all at the same time.

Nothing is wrong with asking questions you know, it's actually a lot more intelligent than going off half-cocked all the time...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 15, 2010, 01:48:44 am
Another link to Crickey....if you feel so inclined....enjoy.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/15/rundle-cue-the-circus-an d-the-end-of-wikileaks-as-we-know-it/
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 15, 2010, 02:21:31 am
Something a bit smelly here:

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/13/funding-illegal-israeli- settlements-priceless/

Funding illegal Israeli settlements?
Priceless.
by Bernard Keane

Visa, Mastercard and PayPal all enable donations to be made to US-registered groups funding illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank in defiance of international law.

It appears at least one of the major credit cards also enables donations to an extremist Jewish group that has placed a bounty on the lives of Palestinians.

All three have in the last week ceased enabling donations to WikiLeaks. Neither Mastercard nor Visa have explained the basis for their decision to do so. PayPal has backed away from its initial claim that the US State Department told PayPal WikiLeaks had broken the law after the claim was discredited. This is the third occasion on which PayPal has suspended payment services for WikiLeaks.

Israel subsidises over 100 settlements in the West Bank in defiance of international law. Another 100+ are “illegal outposts” even under Israeli law. All benefit from extensive support from the United States, channelled through a range of Jewish and right-wing Christian bodies, all of which have charitable status under US law. The International Crisis Group’s report on settlements in July 2009 identified the important role played by US charities. Israeli newspaper Haaretz has investigated the strong support provided via US charities, and Israeli peace groups have also targeted the generous support provided via private donations from the US and Canada.

Credit card transactional systems play a key role in facilitating this support for illegal settlements. Here are some examples.

   * The Shuva Israel group, an evangelical Christian group based in Texas, is accused by Israeli group Gush Shalom of channelling money to fund the illegal West Bank settlement of Revava. You can donate to it, says the Shuva Israel website, via Mastercard, Visa and Paypal.

   * The One Israel Fund, used as an example in the International Crisis Group report, boasts of being “the largest North American charity whose efforts are dedicated solely to the citizens and communities of Yesha”. You can donate to the One Israel Fund, according to its website, via Mastercard, Visa and Amex.

   * The website of another right-wing Christian group, the Christian Friends of Israeli Communities describes support for settlements like Argaman, which are illegal under international law. You can donate, their website says, via Mastercard, Visa and PayPal.

   * One of the highest-profile groups is the Hebron Fund, the centre of a 2009 row when the New York Mets were criticised for hosting a fundraising dinner for the group. It provides extensive support for the extraordinarily aggressive Hebron settlement, described by one Israeli group as “an ongoing war crime”, while the Fund itself has been linked to praise for an Israeli mass murderer. According to its website, it receives donations via all major credit cards.

   * Worst of all is the extremist SOS Israel group, which has incurred even the wrath of the Israeli Defence Force by rewarding Israeli soldiers who disobey orders to evict settlers from illegal outposts (i.e. inciting mutiny), and which has offered a bounty for Palestinians shot by IDF soldiers. The SOS Israel website describes a number of ways you can make your “generous donation” to it, including credit cards. Crikey’s token $2 donation via a Visa card was successful last night.

At this stage WikiLeaks has breached no international law and no laws of any country, but Mastercard, Visa and PayPal have all blacklisted it. All three continue to enable the support of settlements that are in breach of international law, in some cases of Israeli law, and in defiance of US policy on settlements under successive Republican and Democrat administrations.

Crikey invited Visa, Paypal and Mastercard to comment but none had responded by deadline.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 15, 2010, 06:12:49 am
Hallams wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 01:48

Another link to Crickey....if you feel so inclined....enjoy.

 http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/15/rundle-cue-the-circus-an d-the-end-of-wikileaks-as-we-know-it/

Why do you need to register to access the article?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 15, 2010, 06:53:06 am
Would it be safe to say that Assange is a free-lance propagandist?

If so, whose interests is he serving?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 15, 2010, 07:14:42 am
Gio wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 22:12

Hallams wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 01:48

Another link to Crickey....if you feel so inclined....enjoy.

  http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/15/rundle-cue-the-circus-an d-the-end-of-wikileaks-as-we-know-it/

Why do you need to register to access the article?


Crikey is an independent Australian electronic magazine comprising an open access website. From what i gather the registration gives you free trial access to the media content for 21 days or there about. After there is a small fee for subscription.

Here is some background info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crikey
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 15, 2010, 07:27:02 am
Hallams wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 07:21


All three have in the last week ceased enabling donations to WikiLeaks. Neither Mastercard nor Visa have explained the basis for their decision to do so. PayPal has backed away from its initial claim that the US State Department told PayPal WikiLeaks had broken the law after the claim was discredited. This is the third occasion on which PayPal has suspended payment services for WikiLeaks.

The US government has embarked on the biggest propaganda and arm-twisting campaign since the cold war and have been able to convince many people into believing that someone whom they cannot even charge with a crime is guilty of something... The gullibility of some people would have been funny if this situation was not so serious.

The scary part of this affair is the cynicism and total disregard for honesty and decency by the people who are conducting this charade who are not even being discrete about their activities.  It is scary to think that they can operate in this manner and still have the support of vast sections of the society.

We should be very concerned about the power and reach of any government that can do what is happening now, and the citizens of Sweden, Australia and most European countries need to also be concerned about the autonomy of their governments.  More and more they behave like an extension or agency of the US government.  
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 15, 2010, 07:34:53 am
Bill_Urick wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 11:53

Would it be safe to say that Assange is a free-lance propagandist?

If so, whose interests is he serving?

I think he's serving the same interest as those being served by the NY Times, the Guardian and other media houses that published these papers...

But to be honest, I'm really more concerned by the massive arm-twisting and propaganda campaign being waged by the US government against a person they can't even charge with a crime.

I'm really surprised more people aren't concerned about this and about the lack of independence being displayed by certain other governments.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 15, 2010, 07:38:45 am
Hallams wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 07:14


Crikey is an independent Australian electronic magazine comprising an open access website. From what i gather the registration gives you free trial access to the media content for 21 days or there about. After there is a small fee for subscription.

Here is some background info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crikey

But I thought all information is to be free?  Twisted Evil  Cool
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 15, 2010, 07:49:13 am
The little jerk that passed the info should be shot for treason, TODAY.

The other guy should be shot for insanely bad taste. Have you seen that life laid out to peruse? Wow. Seriously? That's anarchy right there. He is a serious revolutionary, in the worst sense.

Government and business? Please. Government sucks.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 15, 2010, 07:51:44 am
Bill_Urick wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 22:53

Would it be safe to say that Assange is a free-lance propagandist?

If so, whose interests is he serving?


It would be safe Bill, but i'm not sure to what extent it's correct. Some of the definition below would apply and some would not.
 
The definition of a propaganda from wickipedia:

[Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position.

As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda, in its most basic sense, presents information primarily to influence an audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus possibly lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or uses loaded messages to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the attitude toward the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda. Propaganda can be used as a form of political warfare.

While the term propaganda has acquired a strongly negative connotation by association with its most manipulative and jingoistic examples, propaganda in its original sense was neutral, and could refer to uses that were generally benign or innocuous, such as public health recommendations, signs encouraging citizens to participate in a census or election, or messages encouraging persons to report crimes to the police, among others.]

To me such a label could imply a list of assumptions as to what his motivations are and those assumptions could well be based on  prejudice rather than knowledge of the man and what drives him.
Regarding whose interests he is serving, initially that can be answered by seeing whose interests he obviously isn't serving.
I would say he is serving the interests of an international or multinational disgruntled electorate, if that makes any sense.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Lovely on December 15, 2010, 08:07:58 am
Hallams wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 01:21

Something a bit smelly here:

...Israel subsidises over 100 settlements in the West Bank in defiance of international law.


Smelly indeed, because according to international law the West Bank is part of the Jewish national home. The right to settle in the West Bank was granted by the League of Nations specifically to the Jews, and thus can never be revoked.

Short history:

The area known as "Palestine" was part of the Turkish Empire until its capitulation in WW1, then sovereignty was passed to the League of Nations, which appointed Britain to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine. The Arabs rebelled against the British Mandate and attacked the Jews. The British gave up and left, leaving Palestine as 'no man's land' with no sovereignty. In Response the state of Israel was established and immediately attacked by the local Arabs and the neighboring states. In this conflict the West Bank was invaded and illegally occupied by Jordan (according to international law land cannot be acquired by war) for 19 years, until 1967 when Israel was attacked (again) by its neighboring states, and (again) defeated them.

...So when Israel "subsidises over 100 settlements in the West Bank", it's not "in defiance of international law", quite the opposite, because according to the League of Nations' resolution it has a right to settle Jews in the West Bank. THIS is the (international) legal status of the West Bank, FYI.

Here a quote from the League of Nations' document:

Quote:

Preamble:

The Council of the League of Nations:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

...confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows:

...ART. 6.

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.




Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 15, 2010, 08:14:49 am
I know propaganda when I see it. (and it's effect on the willing)

International law... roflmao.. bunch of thugs.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Kris on December 15, 2010, 08:35:19 am
...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 15, 2010, 08:59:14 am
Lovely wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 08:07

Hallams wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 01:21

Something a bit smelly here:

...Israel subsidises over 100 settlements in the West Bank in defiance of international law.


Smelly indeed, because according to international law the West Bank is part of the Jewish national home. The right to settle in the West Bank was granted by the League of Nations specifically to the Jews, and thus can never be revoked.

Short history:

The area known as "Palestine" was part of the Turkish Empire until its capitulation in WW1, then sovereignty was passed to the League of Nations, which appointed Britain to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine. The Arabs rebelled against the British Mandate and attacked the Jews. The British gave up and left, leaving Palestine as 'no man's land' with no sovereignty. In Response the state of Israel was established and immediately attacked by the local Arabs and the neighboring states. In this conflict the West Bank was invaded and illegally occupied by Jordan (according to international law land cannot be acquired by war) for 19 years, until 1967 when Israel was attacked (again) by its neighboring states, and (again) defeated them.

...So when Israel "subsidises over 100 settlements in the West Bank", it's not "in defiance of international law", quite the opposite, because according to the League of Nations' resolution it has a right to settle Jews in the West Bank. THIS is the (international) legal status of the West Bank, FYI.

Here a quote from the League of Nations' document:

Quote:

Preamble:

The Council of the League of Nations:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

...confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows:

...ART. 6.

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.







Wonderful post. Welcome to the forum.
I think we have most of the pieces now.
Smile
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 15, 2010, 02:02:43 pm
One could disagree with the idea that something granted by the League of Nations must last for all eternity, never to be revoked.  
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Lovely on December 15, 2010, 03:35:52 pm
DarinK wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 13:02

One could disagree with the idea that something granted by the League of Nations must last for all eternity, never to be revoked.  


"One" could disagree with any idea he chooses to disagree with, but not according to international law:

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), article 70:

Quote:

Consequences of the termination of a treaty

1. Unless the treaty otherwise provides or the parties otherwise agree, the termination of a treaty under its provisions or in accordance with the present Convention:

(a) ...

...(b) does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination.



Charter of the United Nations, article 80:

Quote:

...nothing in this Chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 15, 2010, 03:49:34 pm
Lovely wrote on Thu, 16 December 2010 00:07

Hallams wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 01:21

Something a bit smelly here:

...Israel subsidises over 100 settlements in the West Bank in defiance of international law.


Smelly indeed, because according to international law the West Bank is part of the Jewish national home. The right to settle in the West Bank was granted by the League of Nations specifically to the Jews, and thus can never be revoked.

Short history:

The area known as "Palestine" was part of the Turkish Empire until its capitulation in WW1, then sovereignty was passed to the League of Nations, which appointed Britain to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine. The Arabs rebelled against the British Mandate and attacked the Jews. The British gave up and left, leaving Palestine as 'no man's land' with no sovereignty. In Response the state of Israel was established and immediately attacked by the local Arabs and the neighboring states. In this conflict the West Bank was invaded and illegally occupied by Jordan (according to international law land cannot be acquired by war) for 19 years, until 1967 when Israel was attacked (again) by its neighboring states, and (again) defeated them.

...So when Israel "subsidises over 100 settlements in the West Bank", it's not "in defiance of international law", quite the opposite, because according to the League of Nations' resolution it has a right to settle Jews in the West Bank. THIS is the (international) legal status of the West Bank, FYI.

Here a quote from the League of Nations' document:

Quote:

Preamble:

The Council of the League of Nations:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

...confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows:

...ART. 6.

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.







Re your selective quote of my post and the Crikey article:
The west bank settlement might be a contentious issue and the one you take acception to in the Crikey article. The point i was referring to in the article was the withholding of funds from Wickileaks by Visa, Mastercard while funds have never been stoped to the groups mentioned in the article..... here is the rest of the article that should illistrate my point:
[Quote From the Crikey Article]
The Shuva Israel group, an evangelical Christian group based in Texas, is accused by Israeli group Gush Shalom of channelling money to fund the illegal West Bank settlement of Revava. You can donate to it, says the Shuva Israel website, via Mastercard, Visa and Paypal.

* The One Israel Fund, used as an example in the International Crisis Group report, boasts of being “the largest North American charity whose efforts are dedicated solely to the citizens and communities of Yesha”. You can donate to the One Israel Fund, according to its website, via Mastercard, Visa and Amex.

* The website of another right-wing Christian group, the Christian Friends of Israeli Communities describes support for settlements like Argaman, which are illegal under international law. You can donate, their website says, via Mastercard, Visa and PayPal.

* One of the highest-profile groups is the Hebron Fund, the centre of a 2009 row when the New York Mets were criticised for hosting a fundraising dinner for the group. It provides extensive support for the extraordinarily aggressive Hebron settlement, described by one Israeli group as “an ongoing war crime”, while the Fund itself has been linked to praise for an Israeli mass murderer. According to its website, it receives donations via all major credit cards.

* Worst of all is the extremist SOS Israel group, which has incurred even the wrath of the Israeli Defence Force by rewarding Israeli soldiers who disobey orders to evict settlers from illegal outposts (i.e. inciting mutiny), and which has offered a bounty for Palestinians shot by IDF soldiers. The SOS Israel website describes a number of ways you can make your “generous donation” to it, including credit cards. Crikey’s token $2 donation via a Visa card was successful last night.

At this stage WikiLeaks has breached no international law and no laws of any country, but Mastercard, Visa and PayPal have all blacklisted it. All three continue to enable the support of settlements that are in breach of international law, in some cases of Israeli law, and in defiance of US policy on settlements under successive Republican and Democrat administrations.

Crikey invited Visa, Paypal and Mastercard to comment but none had responded by deadline. [end Quote]

None of these groups have had funding with held. The issue i really find interesting is what is wickileaks and the surrounding reactions by interested or affected interest groups and power brokers....... hysteria is an appropriate word.....I am not wanting to single out the US or the Israeli cause..... I am equally dismayed at the reaction of Julia Gillard our PM although our EX PM the current foreign minister,Kevin Rudd,  has had a more well thought out response.
 
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 15, 2010, 04:29:17 pm
Lovely wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 12:35

DarinK wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 13:02

One could disagree with the idea that something granted by the League of Nations must last for all eternity, never to be revoked.  


"One" could disagree with any idea he chooses to disagree with, but not according to international law:

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), article 70:

Quote:

Consequences of the termination of a treaty

1. Unless the treaty otherwise provides or the parties otherwise agree, the termination of a treaty under its provisions or in accordance with the present Convention:

(a) ...

...(b) does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination.



Charter of the United Nations, article 80:

Quote:

...nothing in this Chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.






Point taken.  Of course, there is this part of the agreement you quoted, "The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced..."  Perhaps there is room for disagreement over whether the treatment of the Palestinians is "prejudiced."  However, that is a large argument for another day, as this is a thread specifically about Wikileaks.  
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Lovely on December 15, 2010, 09:35:01 pm
Hallams wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 14:49


Re your selective quote of my post and the Crikey article:
The west bank settlement might be a contentious issue and the one you take acception to in the Crikey article.




True, IMHO lies should not be promoted by propaganda and false pretexts masquerading as "the public's right to know".  

------------------------------------------------------

Quote:


The point i was referring to in the article was the withholding of funds from Wickileaks by Visa, Mastercard while funds have never been stoped to the groups mentioned in the article..... here is the rest of the article that should illistrate my point:




It all depends on whether the allegations regarding these groups are true, don't you think?

------------------------------------------------------

Quote:



Quote From the Crikey Article

The Shuva Israel group, an evangelical Christian group based in Texas, is accused by Israeli group Gush Shalom of channelling money to fund the illegal West Bank settlement of Revava. You can donate to it, says the Shuva Israel website, via Mastercard, Visa and Paypal.




Here are the facts:

Quote:



Quote from Wikipedia:

The history of the settlement on the ground began in the spring of 1991 when 14 trailers were installed on land purchased by "The Fund for Redeeming the Land", with the assistance of Amana, and with permission from the Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and Minister of Defense Moshe Arens.

...Doubts to the real ownership of the land of the village was dispelled when Peace Now and related activists were convicted by an Israeli court of smearing the village by publishing a false report which claimed that 71% of Revava was built on "stolen" Arab land. The writers of the report tried to compromise and revised that that number down to 22%, but the court sentenced them to pay compensation of NIS 20,000 and print advertisements in two mass market newspapers. The Fund owns 100% of the land that Revava is built on.




...So Revava is a perfectly legal settlement, and the accusations are false.

------------------------------------------------------

Quote:



* The One Israel Fund, used as an example in the International Crisis Group report, boasts of being “the largest North American charity whose efforts are dedicated solely to the citizens and communities of Yesha”. You can donate to the One Israel Fund, according to its website, via Mastercard, Visa and Amex.




"Yesha" is the Hebrew acronym for Judea, Samaria and Gaza.
Israel withdrew from Gaza, so "Judea and Samaria" is just another name for the West Bank.

As I have explained, settling on privately owned Jewish lands in the West Bank is perfectly legal (illegal settlements are only those that were built illegally on lands privately owned by Palestinians) - so there's no crime in being "dedicated solely to the citizens and communities of Yesha", i.e. "citizens and communities in the West Bank".

------------------------------------------------------

Quote:



* The website of another right-wing Christian group, the Christian Friends of Israeli Communities describes support for settlements like Argaman, which are illegal under international law. You can donate, their website says, via Mastercard, Visa and PayPal.




Argaman is a perfectly legal settlement in the Jordan Valley, far from Palestinian cities. No legal problems here either.

------------------------------------------------------

Quote:



* One of the highest-profile groups is the Hebron Fund, the centre of a 2009 row when the New York Mets were criticised for hosting a fundraising dinner for the group. It provides extensive support for the extraordinarily aggressive Hebron settlement, described by one Israeli group as “an ongoing war crime”, while the Fund itself has been linked to praise for an Israeli mass murderer. According to its website, it receives donations via all maj1or credit cards.




The settlement in Hebron is also legal, under the "Protocol Concerning the Redeployment in Hebron" between Israel and the Palestinian authority. I won't go into the complicated politics and history of the region, but just FYI Jews have lived in Hebron since the 16th century, until 67 of them were murdered and the rest driven out by the Arabs in 1929.

------------------------------------------------------

Quote:



* Worst of all is the extremist SOS Israel group, which has incurred even the wrath of the Israeli Defence Force by rewarding Israeli soldiers who disobey orders to evict settlers from illegal outposts (i.e. inciting mutiny), and which has offered a bounty for Palestinians shot by IDF soldiers. The SOS Israel website describes a number of ways you can make your “generous donation” to it, including credit cards. Crikey’s token $2 donation via a Visa card was successful last night.




SOS Israel is an extremist group. It did reward Israeli soldiers who disobeyed orders to evict settlers, but this action is legal, being a political protest. Had it been illegal they would have been prosecuted, and they weren't.
This organization did reward one soldier who shot a Palestinian, but what Crikey fails to mention is that "the Palestinian" was a terrorist, armed with a knife and an axe, that arrived at a gas station and started to stab and chop people indiscriminately. The soldier saved many innocent lives that day, and rewarding him with a ceremony and a small token of appreciation (~ $380 US) did not raise any eyebrows.

Describing the group as "offering a bounty for Palestinians shot by IDF soldiers" is just a stupid lie (?) - Israel is a modern democracy (the only one in the Middle East), and its legal system is highly praised in Europe and the US for being extra- activist:
Had they "offered a bounty for Palestinians shot by IDF soldiers" they would have been locked up in no time.

------------------------------------------------------

Quote:



At this stage WikiLeaks has breached no international law and no laws of any country, but Mastercard, Visa and PayPal have all blacklisted it. All three continue to enable the support of settlements that are in breach of international law, in some cases of Israeli law, and in defiance of US policy on settlements under successive Republican and Democrat administrations.

Crikey invited Visa, Paypal and Mastercard to comment but none had responded by deadline. [end Quote]




As I have shown here, there was no "breach of international law, in some cases of Israeli law" in the examples quoted by Crikey.  

The only thing "breached" here were Crikey's own journalism ethics, by preaching obvious hostile political propaganda without (in the best case scenario) checking out the facts.

------------------------------------------------------

Quote:



None of these groups have had funding with held. The issue i really find interesting is what is wickileaks and the surrounding reactions by interested or affected interest groups and power brokers....... hysteria is an appropriate word.....I am not wanting to single out the US or the Israeli cause..... I am equally dismayed at the reaction of Julia Gillard our PM although our EX PM the current foreign minister,Kevin Rudd,  has had a more well thought out response.




As you have mentioned, the west bank settlement is a contentious issue, and I'm not going to explain it in this thread. Just FYI, in Israel there's a heated debate about the right solution, with extreme left and right groups preaching propaganda to promote their cause. Much of this propaganda is false, and Israel's enemies are quick to quote these lies as 'facts from Israeli sources', not to mention the lies in the Arab and Muslim propaganda, which is used in order to weaken Israel's international status.

Many extreme left groups in Israel are funded by European countries and the EU itself via NGO's (non-governmental organizations), in an effort to influence Israeli politics, bad form IMO -
Hammas and all other major terrorist groups are also funded by Arab states and Muslim charity organizations, and I assume that all these groups also use "Paypal, Visa and all maj1or credit cards":

However, this is not protested by Crikey, nor did it "invite Visa, Paypal and Mastercard to comment" on this issue.  

With all due respect, don't believe everything you read without checking out the facts first. If you have more questions, I'll be happy to answer.  

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Barkley McKay on December 16, 2010, 03:34:52 am
Back On Topic...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/15/julian-assange-b ail-decision-uk


Julian Assange bail decision made by UK authorities, not Sweden

Swedish prosecutor's office says it has 'not got a view at all on bail' and that Britain made decision to oppose it
The decision to have Julian Assange sent to a London jail and kept there was taken by the British authorities and not by prosecutors in Sweden, as previously thought, the Guardian has learned.


The Crown Prosecution Service will go to the high court tomorrow to seek the reversal of a decision to free the WikiLeaks founder on bail, made yesterday by a judge at City of Westminster magistrates court.

It had been widely thought Sweden had made the decision to oppose bail, with the CPS acting merely as its representative. But today the Swedish prosecutor's office told the Guardian it had "not got a view at all on bail" and that Britain had made the decision to oppose bail.

Lawyers for Assange reacted to the news with shock and said CPS officials had told them this week it was Sweden which had asked them to ensure he was kept in prison.

Karin Rosander, director of communications for Sweden's prosecutor's office, told the Guardian: "The decision was made by the British prosecutor. I got it confirmed by the CPS this morning that the decision to appeal the granting of bail was entirely a matter for the CPS. The Swedish prosecutors are not entitled to make decisions within Britain. It is entirely up to the British authorities to handle it."

As a result, she said, Sweden will not be submitting any new evidence or arguments to the high court hearing tomorrow morning. "The Swedish authorities are not involved in these proceedings. We have not got a view at all on bail."

After the Swedish statement was put to the CPS, it confirmed that all decisions concerning the opposing of bail being granted to Assange had been taken by its lawyers. It said: "In all extradition cases, decisions on bail issues are always taken by the domestic prosecuting authority. It would not be practical for prosecutors in a foreign jurisdiction … to make such decisions."

Last week Sweden issued a warrant for Assange's arrest and extradition over sexual assault allegations. On 7 December the British prosecutor, Gemma Lindfield, convinced the senior district court judge Howard Riddle that Assange must be kept in custody because he was a flight risk.

Yesterday the judge accepted that Assange could be released on bail, but he was kept in Wandsworth prison after the CPS said it wanted to appeal against the decision to grant bail to a higher court.

The CPS's formal grounds of appeal for the hearing tomorrow morning, seen by the Guardian, will say that Assange must be kept in prison until a decision is made whether to extradite him, which could take months.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 16, 2010, 08:31:51 pm
Barkley McKay wrote on Thu, 16 December 2010 08:34



Julian Assange bail decision made by UK authorities, not Sweden


Doesn't everybody already know who the real puppet master is in this affair?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 16, 2010, 08:40:34 pm
index.php/fa/16014/0/
?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Edvaard on December 16, 2010, 11:14:25 pm



It is encouraging to see things being said, what needs to be said.


Someone has finally recognized that the US has invented international arm-twisting, and that the rest of the world, France and Britain most especially, have been entirely devoid and unaware of this most useful tactic here prior.

All that endearing outreach to Algeria and South Africa and Vietnam and India with nothing of resemblance to arm-twisting, has been proven to be of the greatest benefit to all concerned, just ask the Algerians and Vietnamese.


But oldies politics and history is just so oldies. I hate oldies stations. It's quite clear that some Europeans hate oldies too, in the political sense, as it takes away from the new and hot trend of "super power bashing," the likes of which were not available in Rome or Paris, when it mattered.


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Edvaard on December 16, 2010, 11:36:37 pm

Hang the bastard, today. OK, I'm just ignoring for the moment that somebody said "shoot him," but I didn't have a gun.


Some Marine twink spills what somebody intentionally, obviously, tossed his way.

We need to bring back the traditional treatment for such as these sorts.


Valarie Plame:

Case in hand; significant penetration into al Qaeda cell, major operation, through years-long investment into the operation.

Blown in one day by Karl Rove.


Those who say for shooting them are woosies. Garroting by your own hand provides the greatest satisfaction.


(as long as we are on the subject of unhung heroes. just sayin' ... )








Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 17, 2010, 06:08:33 am
Edvaard wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 04:36


Hang the bastard, today. OK, I'm just ignoring for the moment that somebody said "shoot him," but I didn't have a gun.


Some Marine twink spills what somebody intentionally, obviously, tossed his way.

We need to bring back the traditional treatment for such as these sorts.


Valarie Plame:

Case in hand; significant penetration into al Qaeda cell, major operation, through years-long investment into the operation.

Blown in one day by Karl Rove.


Those who say for shooting them are woosies. Garroting by your own hand provides the greatest satisfaction.


(as long as we are on the subject of unhung heroes. just sayin' ... )

Are you well?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 17, 2010, 07:22:17 am
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/3352

Ed, is all this just wrong?

Hope you get to feeling better...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 17, 2010, 08:28:53 am
Edvaard wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 04:14

Someone has finally recognized that the US has invented international arm-twisting, and that the rest of the world, France and Britain most especially, have been entirely devoid and unaware of this most useful tactic here prior.

All that endearing outreach to Algeria and South Africa and Vietnam and India with nothing of resemblance to arm-twisting, has been proven to be of the greatest benefit to all concerned, just ask the Algerians and Vietnamese.

The various and cruel machinations that were used by colonizers and slavers were, and are another matter all together and were not international in scope and reach...like this is.  But this shouldn't need to be explained...
 
If your comprehension skills don't allow you to see the difference between the dastardly acts of colonization and what's happening in this particular 'incident' it's probably a waste of time to debate this with you...

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 17, 2010, 08:32:00 am
Bill_Urick wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 01:40

index.php/fa/16014/0/
?


He's just a cog in the wheel...an important cog, but just a cog.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 17, 2010, 01:19:26 pm
Edvaard wrote on Thu, 16 December 2010 20:14




It is encouraging to see things being said, what needs to be said.


Someone has finally recognized that the US has invented international arm-twisting, and that the rest of the world, France and Britain most especially, have been entirely devoid and unaware of this most useful tactic here prior.

All that endearing outreach to Algeria and South Africa and Vietnam and India with nothing of resemblance to arm-twisting, has been proven to be of the greatest benefit to all concerned, just ask the Algerians and Vietnamese.


But oldies politics and history is just so oldies. I hate oldies stations. It's quite clear that some Europeans hate oldies too, in the political sense, as it takes away from the new and hot trend of "super power bashing," the likes of which were not available in Rome or Paris, when it mattered.



Hi Edvaard.

The US has not invented this at all.

This is just typical human behavior, taken into country VS country.

Please go back and read some history, especially early history of man.

If you want a good primer on "natural human behavior" and what it has been for thousands of years, all you need to do is read the Code of Hammurabi.

Here:

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM

Enjoy.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 17, 2010, 01:28:31 pm
From the Code of Hammurabi :

1

If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death.


In layman's terms : If you accuse someone of wrongdoing and have no evidence of the crime committed, you will be put to death.

I wonder if this law existed in Sweden, what would have happened to the current accusations to Mr. Assange. The charges would have probably not have even been brought up. But, since there is NO repercussions to bringing charges on anyone, there we go.

Modern laws similar to this : none.

Most corporal punishment laws were banned from "civilized" society as far back as 300 years ago in some cases, in some cases more or less.

Who made those changes to the law? Most of the changes were done by people in power not wanting these laws to be applied to them. And guess what? The same mentality occurs now in the States.

A friend of mine sent me this:

Many citizens have no idea that:

-Members of Congress currently can retire with the same pay for life after only one term.
-They do not pay into Social Security or depend on it in retirement.  
-They have specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws.  
-The latest example of the above is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform that is being considered...in all of its forms thus far.  

Now, do these things seem anything but grossly hypocritical?  

We must no longer tolerate an elite ruling class that is above the laws that we as "mere citizens" must follow.  

This is an idea whose time has come.


          Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States  Constitution:
       
         "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to all elected and/or appointed governmental officials without exception, including all members of Congress, Senators and Representatives alike, and the President; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to elected and/or appointed governmental officials, without exception, that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States".



I think that short of a revolution, we need to take control of the gov't, and change some laws back to a more brutal form, which will discourage some of these people in power from abusing the citizens.

Cheers
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 17, 2010, 01:50:40 pm
hi nick-

mostly agree with a lot of what you say.  but in terms of the specifics about the "28th admendment:"

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp

i think that our elected officials are criminals for the most part, and should be taken to task for any number of reasons.  but it's important to make sure that we have our information correct, or it can de-legitimize the cause.

jon
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 17, 2010, 01:53:51 pm
jonathan jetter wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 10:50

hi nick-

mostly agree with a lot of what you say.  but in terms of the specifics about the "28th admendment:"

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp

i think that our elected officials are criminals for the most part, and should be taken to task for any number of reasons.  but it's important to make sure that we have our information correct, or it can de-legitimize the cause.

jon


Hi,

I just pasted what my friend sent. It probably is a fake number, or one from a while back. It is not a real amendment... but would be funny to see on there. It would never pass.

Cheers
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 17, 2010, 01:59:36 pm
Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 13:53


Hi,

I just pasted what my friend sent. It probably is a fake number, or one from a while back. It is not a real amendment... but would be funny to see on there. It would never pass.

Cheers


nick,

yes- i wasn't suggesting that it's a real amendment, but, rather, pointing out that a lot of what is talked about in the email your friend sent, i.e. "congress not paying into social security," is not exactly true.

i do think in general the text of the proposed amendment would be a good thing, and Ron Paul recently proposed similar legislation, specifically targeted at the TSA, in response to all the x-rays and molestation (though i think it would be a good start toward opening the floodgates in general....):

 http://polizeros.com/2010/11/18/ron-paul-introduces-anti-tsa -bill/



Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Jay Kadis on December 17, 2010, 03:28:31 pm
Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 10:28


          Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States  Constitution:
       
         "Congress shall make no law
It should stop right there.

Personally, I think we have enough laws and if they want a new one, they should have to do away with an old one to make room.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 17, 2010, 07:14:05 pm
Jay Kadis wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 15:28

Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 10:28


          Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States  Constitution:
       
         "Congress shall make no law
It should stop right there.

Personally, I think we have enough laws and if they want a new one, they should have to do away with an old one to make room.



+1

As my new best friend Ren
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 17, 2010, 09:04:43 pm
"Rene Descartes was a drunken fart, "I drink therefore I am..."



Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 17, 2010, 09:30:52 pm
Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 13:28



I think that short of a revolution, we need to take control of the gov't, and change some laws back to a more brutal form, which will discourage some of these people in power from abusing the citizens.

Cheers



Are you seeing anybody? Married?

Call me!

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 17, 2010, 09:44:57 pm
Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 13:28

Who made those changes to the law? Most of the changes were done by people in power not wanting these laws to be applied to them. And guess what? The same mentality occurs now in the States.

I don't know..... proponents of civil rights would argue some of these laws are meant to protect the innocent. You know, those on death row who don't belong there, etc.....


Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 13:28

I think that short of a revolution, we need to take control of the gov't, and change some laws back to a more brutal form, which will discourage some of these people in power from abusing the citizens.

Cheers


I think stiffer adherence to laws in general would be a good start. Oh, but the lawyers just entered the room..... Let the semantics begin!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Edvaard on December 17, 2010, 09:50:39 pm
Jay Kadis wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 15:28


Personally, I think we have enough laws and if they want a new one, they should have to do away with an old one to make room.




I was wondering when this might happen, but I held every faith that it would happen eventually: Jay K. and myself being entirely on the same page about something.


I had come up with this scheme more than 20 years ago, after investigating all the laws in existence and how so many that were outdated were not enforced, but still in place for selective enforcement when the occasion arose for political, etc. purpose.


My proposal was that no new law could be passed, not even an appropriations act, until five previous laws were taken off the books as requirement to proceed further. As things were to be calculated at the time, even with that stipulation in place, it would have taken at least 20 years to clean out the garage.

Who knows how long it would take proceeding from this point.  


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 17, 2010, 11:40:27 pm
Tidewater wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 18:30

Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 13:28



I think that short of a revolution, we need to take control of the gov't, and change some laws back to a more brutal form, which will discourage some of these people in power from abusing the citizens.

Cheers



Are you seeing anybody? Married?

Call me!




Oh I'm married allright. And I see her every day and night. Smile
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Edvaard on December 17, 2010, 11:52:25 pm
Samc wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 08:28

Edvaard wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 04:14

Someone has finally recognized that the US has invented international arm-twisting, and that the rest of the world, France and Britain most especially, have been entirely devoid and unaware of this most useful tactic here prior.

All that endearing outreach to Algeria and South Africa and Vietnam and India with nothing of resemblance to arm-twisting, has been proven to be of the greatest benefit to all concerned, just ask the Algerians and Vietnamese.

The various and cruel machinations that were used by colonizers and slavers were, and are another matter all together and were not international in scope and reach...like this is.  But this shouldn't need to be explained...
 
If your comprehension skills don't allow you to see the difference between the dastardly acts of colonization and what's happening in this particular 'incident' it's probably a waste of time to debate this with you...





My comprehension skills have thus far not allowed me to see where colonization in the historical sense could ever exist today. Nor that I have caught up with your completely outdated comparison thereby. Colonization, in the traditional sense, could not exist today, and so other methods are required to achieve the same end.


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Edvaard on December 17, 2010, 11:55:28 pm
Nick Sevilla wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 13:19

Edvaard wrote on Thu, 16 December 2010 20:14




It is encouraging to see things being said, what needs to be said.


Someone has finally recognized that the US has invented international arm-twisting, and that the rest of the world, France and Britain most especially, have been entirely devoid and unaware of this most useful tactic here prior.

All that endearing outreach to Algeria and South Africa and Vietnam and India with nothing of resemblance to arm-twisting, has been proven to be of the greatest benefit to all concerned, just ask the Algerians and Vietnamese.


But oldies politics and history is just so oldies. I hate oldies stations. It's quite clear that some Europeans hate oldies too, in the political sense, as it takes away from the new and hot trend of "super power bashing," the likes of which were not available in Rome or Paris, when it mattered.



Hi Edvaard.

The US has not invented this at all.

This is just typical human behavior, taken into country VS country.

Please go back and read some history, especially early history of man.

If you want a good primer on "natural human behavior" and what it has been for thousands of years, all you need to do is read the Code of Hammurabi.

Here:

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM

Enjoy.




Oh thank heavens! as it  obvious to readers limited to your  perception that I have never read a single history book in my whole life. Hence the initial post based entirely upon a reading of  history. Some can perceive the intention there, some can't.




 
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Edvaard on December 18, 2010, 02:03:56 am


The whole issue, as it turns out, was to identify who stood where, and an exercise in identifying perceptional capacity.

I left it to others to show themselves in whatever manner they chose.

So much commentary prior to my initial post demonstrated significant ignorance of history, so I made facetious commentary as from that standpoint.

No one commented on any posts that flouted history in every way,  but then my silly commentary thencefrom was greeted with "are you OK?"

It's not me that needs be questioned here. The question was directed to you to begin with, however much the intent was missed.


People were calling for Assange to be shot. Followed by typical political BS as response. Nobody had anything of original precept to add. Nobody asked if such poster "was OK." All I said was, "shoot Assange? OK, sounds good, let's shoot Karl Rove as a starting point, however many years after the fact, and proceed from there."

So now everybody asks me if I am OK or not. Apparently and in fact belligerently in opposition to facts as have played out.

You most definitely are not "OK", and you have no business asking anything of others under any pretense.




Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: sui-city on December 18, 2010, 02:06:59 am
After having been out of this thread for a while, and now reading through these posts, there is one thing that is so glaringly obvious. And that is, how few of you actually have any idea of what it's like to live in a police state. Or more specifically, under a repressive government.

Wikileaks is important to me because i grew up in apartheid-era South Africa. Myself, my friends, my teachers, so many i knew, were involved in marches, protests, and behind the scenes trying to affect change.

When i was a child, I distinctly remember a day going to school, and in an English class making a negative comment about our then president. I was about 10. My teacher glared at me but said nothing. When i got home, i told my parents about it, and they said i must never do anything like that again.

Recently in South Africa, there has been government talk of curtailing our media. And we don't have a situation here like you do in the USA. The majority of our press is not politically aligned. We don't have the likes of Fox on one side, and the MSNBC on the other. Not to the same degree at least. Our local press wouldn't dare post an article from the Onion is if it's real. And we have had marches in the street about the "Media Tribunal" as it's called.

I've had an argument with the opposition leader in the street. She led a campaign in the last election that was divisive. The kind of thing that i see between Dems and the GOP. And i made quite clear to her that, while i don't agree with the current ruling party, I will not support her push for that kind of politicking.

Anyway, my point is that our sense of fight and freedom in SA is still very dear to us. We only truly became an independent democracy 16 years ago. And the people i have known throughout my life, still have that "fight" in them. The attempted curtailing of the press, is being met by harsh criticism from those who have in the past supported the government.

"Freedom of Speech" is something that will be pried from our dead cold hands. And i guess it's just hard for us, and for me, to understand why there is so little focus on how much manipulation and lying goes on within your government, and how the outrage is focused on the people who expose it, and not on those who perpetuate it.

And let me add one disclaimer: I am aware that this doesn't only happen in the USA. It happens the world over. I am just stunned by your acceptance of it.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 18, 2010, 09:00:15 am
Edvaard wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 04:52

Samc wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 08:28

Edvaard wrote on Fri, 17 December 2010 04:14

Someone has finally recognized that the US has invented international arm-twisting, and that the rest of the world, France and Britain most especially, have been entirely devoid and unaware of this most useful tactic here prior.

All that endearing outreach to Algeria and South Africa and Vietnam and India with nothing of resemblance to arm-twisting, has been proven to be of the greatest benefit to all concerned, just ask the Algerians and Vietnamese.

The various and cruel machinations that were used by colonizers and slavers were, and are another matter all together and were not international in scope and reach...like this is.  But this shouldn't need to be explained...
 
If your comprehension skills don't allow you to see the difference between the dastardly acts of colonization and what's happening in this particular 'incident' it's probably a waste of time to debate this with you...


My comprehension skills have thus far not allowed me to see where colonization in the historical sense could ever exist today. Nor that I have caught up with your completely outdated comparison thereby. Colonization, in the traditional sense, could not exist today, and so other methods are required to achieve the same end.


Dude, how can you mention France, Britain, Algeria, South Africa and Vietnam in the same post and not expect to get mention of their former relationships, especially when your aim was to establish that the two former (France and Britain) had treated the others badly in the past...  You do realize that Algeria, Vietnam and South Africa were former colonies of either France or Britain?  You also realize that this fact greatly influences their relationships today?  The fact that colonization in the historical sense could not exist today was never the point...

Edvaard wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 07:03

The whole issue, as it turns out, was to identify who stood where, and an exercise in identifying perceptional capacity.

I left it to others to show themselves in whatever manner they chose.

So much commentary prior to my initial post demonstrated significant ignorance of history, so I made facetious commentary as from that standpoint.

No one commented on any posts that flouted history in every way,  but then my silly commentary thencefrom was greeted with "are you OK?"

It's not me that needs be questioned here. The question was directed to you to begin with, however much the intent was missed.


People were calling for Assange to be shot. Followed by typical political BS as response. Nobody had anything of original precept to add. Nobody asked if such poster "was OK." All I said was, "shoot Assange? OK, sounds good, let's shoot Karl Rove as a starting point, however many years after the fact, and proceed from there."

So now everybody asks me if I am OK or not. Apparently and in fact belligerently in opposition to facts as have played out.

You most definitely are not "OK", and you have no business asking anything of others under any pretense.
 
I suggest you get off that horse you rode in on...it's lame.  Your post failed at proving your superior intellect and knowledge of history...get over it.

Why haven't you corrected or commented on any of the numerous post which display historical inaccuracy as observed by you?  You might want to address specific points, and/or make corrections where you see fit instead of directing your (not so subtle) sleight of hand barbs at other posters...

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 18, 2010, 09:08:18 am
sui-city wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 07:06


And i guess it's just hard for us, and for me, to understand why there is so little focus on how much manipulation and lying goes on within your government, and how the outrage is focused on the people who expose it, and not on those who perpetuate it.

And let me add one disclaimer: I am aware that this doesn't only happen in the USA. It happens the world over. I am just stunned by your acceptance of it.

I've also been puzzled by this since the beginning of this affair.  The people on the other side have never addressed these issues or given a credible response.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 18, 2010, 09:56:29 am
It's called allegiance. A duty of fidelity. That is what makes people chase down those who would spill their state secrets.

The topic of whether a government deserves respect or does the right thing is a seperate issue, and we would be committing 90 logical fallacies to try to prove one with the other.

I see this all the time. Scientist must be baffled again.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Edvaard on December 18, 2010, 11:03:48 am
Samc wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 09:00



 You do realize that Algeria, Vietnam and South Africa were former colonies of either France or Britain?  






You don't say? Really?


Damn.


Shoot, I only came up with those names by throwing a few darts at the map on my wall, but now you come to tell me that the first three you mention were actually former colonies of the latter two?

What a freaky scary coincidence ...

But thanks for that valuable information in any case.


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Edvaard on December 18, 2010, 11:34:38 am
Samc wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 09:00



Why haven't you corrected or commented on any of the numerous post which display historical inaccuracy as observed by you?  





As observed by historians.


In any case, because at least 70% of posts in any forum display either historical inaccuracy or just plain ignorance of history at all. And that's even without getting to the lack of comprehension by some regarding what history they might trouble themselves with in the first place. Someone here trying to claim that Ho Chi Minh was not really a communist and never believed in communism at all would be one example. Hilarious? Certainly. Historically accurate? ~ sigh ... ~

A waste of time venturing into others' belief systems which they perceive as "history."

And this case is no different, I just wanted some fingertip massage is all. Sorry to have troubled.


Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Nick Sevilla on December 18, 2010, 05:18:04 pm
Edvaard wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 08:34

Samc wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 09:00



Why haven't you corrected or commented on any of the numerous post which display historical inaccuracy as observed by you?  





As observed by historians.


In any case, because at least 70% of posts in any forum display either historical inaccuracy or just plain ignorance of history at all. And that's even without getting to the lack of comprehension by some regarding what history they might trouble themselves with in the first place. Someone here trying to claim that Ho Chi Minh was not really a communist and never believed in communism at all would be one example. Hilarious? Certainly. Historically accurate? ~ sigh ... ~

A waste of time venturing into others' belief systems which they perceive as "history."

And this case is no different, I just wanted some fingertip massage is all. Sorry to have troubled.





Fascinating. Truly fascinating.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: sui-city on December 19, 2010, 12:51:19 am
Tidewater wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 16:56

It's called allegiance. A duty of fidelity. That is what makes people chase down those who would spill their state secrets.

The topic of whether a government deserves respect or does the right thing is a seperate issue, and we would be committing 90 logical fallacies to try to prove one with the other.

I see this all the time. Scientist must be baffled again.


So what you're saying is that "Stockhom Syndrome" is acceptable as long as it is one's government holding you captive. No?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 19, 2010, 07:21:16 am
No. I am saying that there is always a deference to the team one associates themselves with.

People understand that the system is a frame. When they defend something that you might think is undefendable, I offer that they may have wider considerations than you.

I am a non-conforming system lover. It's dehumanizing, as any system will be, but in the best practice, it keeps civilization.

Civilization is crumbling.

The criminality of espionage is really moot. This should have been handled in 24 hours. There are much more pertinant problems at hand.

I don't care that other countries state departments know that we think they are fucking assholes too. I care about the classification of that information. Rules are rules. These particular rules were not made to be broken, bent, twisted, nor used by politically motivated people inside the system.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 19, 2010, 08:04:20 am
+1 to the 24th, Miles.

It was nice, however, to be reminded how Ms. Clinton would be attempting to run things were she in the oral office.

It must irritate the hell out of her to watch the comedic antics of the current crop of amateurs.

There's your (potential) police state, Dan.

A chicken in every pot and a file on every citizen.

But there's always 2012.

Question: Does the current administration have it together enough to deliberately allow the additional leaks to provide ammunition against a Clinton primary challenge for the next election?

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 19, 2010, 08:12:40 am
The politics are too deep, and as uninteresting as the reruns of season one of any TV show ever made.

My problem is having to care about what they want most, and try to deny them that very thing. I'd rather have pie!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 19, 2010, 10:43:17 am
Tidewater wrote on Sun, 19 December 2010 12:21


The criminality of espionage is really moot. This should have been handled in 24 hours. There are much more pertinant problems at hand.

Couldn't agree wit you more...but the distraction of keeping this thing going serves to keep people from thinking about those "more pertinent problems" that need attention.  

I would bet that the folks in the American government don't give a rat's ass that some other country reads what they already know or suspect what the US state Dept. think about them.  This however is a good chance to flex muscle and influence, anything they get away with now can always be used again in the future, and so far they've gotten away with a lot.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 19, 2010, 10:45:26 am
Tidewater wrote on Sun, 19 December 2010 13:12


My problem is having to care about what they want most, and try to deny them that very thing. I'd rather have pie!

The short answer is Power.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 19, 2010, 11:26:08 am
Brilliant!

Shunt power to ground. Simple.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 20, 2010, 06:14:02 pm
Samc wrote on Sun, 19 December 2010 07:43

Tidewater wrote on Sun, 19 December 2010 12:21


The criminality of espionage is really moot. This should have been handled in 24 hours. There are much more pertinant problems at hand.

Couldn't agree wit you more...but the distraction of keeping this thing going serves to keep people from thinking about those "more pertinent problems" that need attention.  

I would bet that the folks in the American government don't give a rat's ass that some other country reads what they already know or suspect what the US state Dept. think about them.  This however is a good chance to flex muscle and influence, anything they get away with now can always be used again in the future, and so far they've gotten away with a lot.



They don't care about the other countries reading this stuff because the other countries already know.  The people that don't know are most of the American citizenship, and our media is doing its best to focus on Wikileaks itself, rather than on what Wikileaks is revealing.  This is a nice essay on the subject:
http://www.barrycrimmins.com/index.php?page=news&family= &category=&display=9218

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tomas Danko on December 21, 2010, 11:46:09 am
So it turns out the alleged rape was him doing her while she was sleeping. Remember that they did have sex prior to this, that both had agreed upon.

This is some kind of "rape light" here in Sweden, by the way.

Now it turns out maybe she was not really sleeping, but merely relaxing/resting/dozing a bit.

And that because he had already done the deed long enough, she felt she wouldn't bother to say no at this point and so went on with it.

Apparently, the second woman (Anna Ardin) behind the other sexual abuse/harassment accusation felt that he had already undressed her well enough so that she didn't feel it was right to say no when he finally undressed her completely. He should have understood this even though she never said a word about not wanting to have sex.

However, it may be the case that Julian Assange is a bit of an asperger struck prick and that he handled things a bit unsmooth. Then again, it's not a crime to be a bad and insensitive lover nor a prick.

It's probably good time to start learning telepathy so that we won't get accused of rape in the future...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 21, 2010, 03:43:23 pm
lmao he is whining about privacy. Choke on it, perv!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 21, 2010, 06:39:01 pm
Heck yes!  

Assange is all about gaming the system in rogue fasion to achieve his aims.

He's now being played by people using the same tactics. Eat it, you little punk!

He has the audacity to complain about his privacy being violated. Funny as hell.



PC
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 21, 2010, 07:28:10 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Tue, 21 December 2010 23:39

Heck yes!  

Assange is all about gaming the system in rogue fasion to achieve his aims.

He's now being played by people using the same tactics. Eat it, you little punk!

He has the audacity to complain about his privacy being violated. Funny as hell.

Er...please explain "gaming the system" and while you're at it could you also tell us whose privacy he violated...

Are you in fact comfortable with governments doing everything they can to rig the system in order to put someone in jail for a crime everybody knows he didn't commit out of spite?  Are you really in favor of this type of 'justice'?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 21, 2010, 07:35:03 pm
Samc wrote on Tue, 21 December 2010 16:28

Paul Cavins wrote on Tue, 21 December 2010 23:39

Heck yes!  

Assange is all about gaming the system in rogue fasion to achieve his aims.

He's now being played by people using the same tactics. Eat it, you little punk!

He has the audacity to complain about his privacy being violated. Funny as hell.

Er...please explain "gaming the system" and while you're at it could you also tell us whose privacy he violated...

Are you in fact comfortable with governments doing everything they can to rig the system in order to put someone in jail for a crime everybody knows he didn't commit out of spite?  Are you really in favor of this type of 'justice'?



In addition, it really does matter what one's aims are.  Assange's aim seems to be to inform the people of the world about the things being done by governments & big business.  Those attempting to railroad him have the aim of trying to stop this spread of information.  I see a significant difference there.   As stated in the link I last posted, "When we study what's being revealed rather than get mislead into joining a lynch mob, hell-bent on stringing up those who would enlighten us, we'll do our duty as an informed electorate..."
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 21, 2010, 07:36:07 pm
Tomas Danko wrote on Tue, 21 December 2010 16:46


It's probably good time to start learning telepathy so that we won't get accused of rape in the future...

Then again, Sweden could change the law to something sensible and stop allowing their justice system to be manipulated....just saying.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 21, 2010, 08:12:18 pm
DarinK wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 00:35


"When we study what's being revealed rather than get mislead into joining a lynch mob, hell-bent on stringing up those who would enlighten us, we'll do our duty as an informed electorate..."

Intelligence, rational thinking and common sense are overrated concepts...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 21, 2010, 08:14:09 pm
Samc wrote on Tue, 21 December 2010 19:28


Are you in fact comfortable with governments doing everything they can to rig the system in order to put someone in jail for a crime everybody knows he didn't commit out of spite?  Are you really in favor of this type of 'justice'?



Yes! Totally! I love irony above all else!

Mostly, I just like watching people dig.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 21, 2010, 08:57:15 pm
"Gaming the system"--In saying that I mean breaking the "rules", or using all means necessary. He facilitated in violating the "privacy" of the State Department of the USA, among other entities. (Thanks to Mr. Manning).

"Rigging the system" is the game that Assange is all about. That's why I laugh at him for lamenting those tactics being used against him.

Do you get it? He is acting outside of the rules, so then those who act against him also act outside the rules.

I know you sympathize with his aims. Can you suspend your feelings about him to get the concept?

He has no expectation of fair play from his adversaries, as he does not believe in fair play.

GET IT?

Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 21, 2010, 09:13:37 pm
DarrinK-

I think in this world that one's form and aims do matter quite a bit.

I celebrate the democratization of information in this modern world, but I think that Assange abuses the situation.

We have to weigh the benefit of having the dealings of our governments broadcast for all to see verses respecting the secret nature of their work.

The US State Department, and many other entities need to have an expectation of secrecy in order to do business with governments all over the world.


To believe otherwise is CHILDISH and NAIVE.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 21, 2010, 11:43:12 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Tue, 21 December 2010 18:13

DarrinK-

I think in this world that one's form and aims do matter quite a bit.

I celebrate the democratization of information in this modern world, but I think that Assange abuses the situation.

We have to weigh the benefit of having the dealings of our governments broadcast for all to see verses respecting the secret nature of their work.

The US State Department, and many other entities need to have an expectation of secrecy in order to do business with governments all over the world.


To believe otherwise is CHILDISH and NAIVE.



Thanks for the name-calling, Paul.  And SHOUTED, no less.    
As I stated above, I think the governments in question already know all the stuff released, in general if not always in specific detail. If they all work the same way, which I gather you believe, then there are no real surprises there.
 What the governments are angry about is that this information is being released to us little people.  If the electorate is to make proper decisions, then we need to know the truth.  
Or we can just trust that those in authority know best & have our best interests at heart, but that really would be childish & naive, & ignorant, to boot.
Or we can give up hope of improving things.  I've mostly given up, myself, but it is a bit enjoyable watching the rats scramble to hide what they've done, or misdirect the focus to the messenger instead of the messages.
 Based on all the scrambling and anger, I have to conclude that they actually think that this information getting out to the rabble could jeopardize the current governments' power.  I hope so.  
But based on how the U.S. media & corporations are so clearly & completely under the power of government, as proven by the response to Wikileaks, I doubt anything will change.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 21, 2010, 11:55:17 pm
Just for the heck of it, here's some of what we've learned thanks to Wikileaks:
 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40773855/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in _security/
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/21/wikileaks-cab le-bbc-persian-jamming
 http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/syria-blames-i  srael-for-top-general-s-assassination-wikileaks-cable-reveal s-1.331782
 http://www.sify.com/sports/us-suspected-allen-stanford-s-pon  zi-schemes-long-before-ecb-deal-wikileaks-news-news-kmvnkgfh ijg.html
 http://thecitizen.co.tz/component/content/article/37-tanzani  a-top-news-story/6516-wikileaks-spills-dar-beans-hoseah-reac ts.html
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/20/wikileaks-cables -bulgarian-nuclear-project
 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/south-asia/China-pa  ying-Nepal-to-nab-Tibetan-refugees-WikiLeaks/articleshow/712 8132.cms

That's just a sampling of articles from the last day or two.  Not all are critical of the U.S. or the West.  That last one points out some of the b.s. that China is continuing to pull regarding Tibetan refugees.

For a better sampling day-by-day, check here:   http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-embass y-cables-key-points  
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tomas Danko on December 22, 2010, 06:34:20 am
Samc wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 00:28

Paul Cavins wrote on Tue, 21 December 2010 23:39

Heck yes!  

Assange is all about gaming the system in rogue fasion to achieve his aims.

He's now being played by people using the same tactics. Eat it, you little punk!

He has the audacity to complain about his privacy being violated. Funny as hell.

Er...please explain "gaming the system" and while you're at it could you also tell us whose privacy he violated...

Are you in fact comfortable with governments doing everything they can to rig the system in order to put someone in jail for a crime everybody knows he didn't commit out of spite?  Are you really in favor of this type of 'justice'?

The issue here is that Julian Assange and his lawyers never got any of the information from the prosecutor, but the same material got leaked from the legal and/or police department to the press.

The reason he never got the information, is that still to this day he has not yet been prosecuted. You can not execute an EAW without this, and in every other country you have to prosecute in order for things to proceed. Except, that is, for in Sweden.

The Geneva convention state that an accused must be read the accusations in his/her own language, and as soon as possible. This still did not happen for several months, in violation of this convention. Meanwhile, the press kept leaking information Julian Assange or his lawyers never got from the prosecutor.

The UK judge accepted the EAW because in their world there surely must exist a prosecution by now, so they were fooled by the Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny since she never said one didn't exist but also never said that it did exist.

Regardless of what Julian Assange has done or not done, this whole debacle shows a disgusting abuse of the legal system here in Sweden. I'd be pissed as well should I ever get a similar treatment.

FWIW, Wikileaks already did leak their own secret documents a long time ago. I don't think they'd hesitate leaking all legal documents from this case, should it prove to be of interest to the world. Then again, I don't think it's of much interest considering the big picture.


There is a lot more to it regarding the Swedish legal system doing shockingly wrong things with this case (and other similar cases, by the way), but I won't bore you any more at the moment.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Paul Cavins on December 22, 2010, 10:16:52 am
DarrinK-

First of all, I'm sorry that I shouted. That was not necessary.

I'm with you in general about how we the people need to know what is going on in our governments. I just don't think that military and foreign service secrets need to be known.

PC
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 22, 2010, 03:16:12 pm
Paul Cavins wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 01:57

"Gaming the system"--In saying that I mean breaking the "rules", or using all means necessary. He facilitated in violating the "privacy" of the State Department of the USA, among other entities. (Thanks to Mr. Manning).

"Rigging the system" is the game that Assange is all about. That's why I laugh at him for lamenting those tactics being used against him.

Do you get it? He is acting outside of the rules, so then those who act against him also act outside the rules.

I know you sympathize with his aims. Can you suspend your feelings about him to get the concept?

He has no expectation of fair play from his adversaries, as he does not believe in fair play.

GET IT?

The one thing I get is that the US and several other governments (with all the resources available to them) have not been able to even charge this man with a single crime or infraction!  Any vaguely intelligent and rational person would come to the reasonable and logical conclusion that this is so because he has not committed a crime or infraction, and yet, here you are declaring him guilty of committing several crimes and breaking all kinds of rules...."He facilitated in violating the "privacy" of the State Department of the USA, among other entities"...This is incredible!!!

Declaring that anyone should not expect fair play from the governments of progressive, democratic countries is ridiculous, the law and constitution of every progressive country that I know, specifically forbid the government from acting outside the law... I am really amazed that someone would not immediately see the danger in allowing the government to behave in this manner.  
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 22, 2010, 03:24:02 pm
Tomas Danko wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 11:34



Regardless of what Julian Assange has done or not done, this whole debacle shows a disgusting abuse of the legal system here in Sweden. I'd be pissed as well should I ever get a similar treatment.

Thanks for the info, the thing that I really find amazing is that more people are not concerned about this abuse and rigging of the legal system, not just in Sweden but in other countries also.  I consider this to be a truly dangerous precedent which will come back to bite us in the ass one day soon... Truly amazing.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 22, 2010, 08:29:22 pm
Samc wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 15:16

Paul Cavins wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 01:57

"Gaming the system"--In saying that I mean breaking the "rules", or using all means necessary. He facilitated in violating the "privacy" of the State Department of the USA, among other entities. (Thanks to Mr. Manning).

"Rigging the system" is the game that Assange is all about. That's why I laugh at him for lamenting those tactics being used against him.

Do you get it? He is acting outside of the rules, so then those who act against him also act outside the rules.

I know you sympathize with his aims. Can you suspend your feelings about him to get the concept?

He has no expectation of fair play from his adversaries, as he does not believe in fair play.

GET IT?

The one thing I get is that the US and several other governments (with all the resources available to them) have not been able to even charge this man with a single crime or infraction!  Any vaguely intelligent and rational person would come to the reasonable and logical conclusion that this is so because he has not committed a crime or infraction, and yet, here you are declaring him guilty of committing several crimes and breaking all kinds of rules...."He facilitated in violating the "privacy" of the State Department of the USA, among other entities"...This is incredible!!!

Declaring that anyone should not expect fair play from the governments of progressive, democratic countries is ridiculous, the law and constitution of every progressive country that I know, specifically forbid the government from acting outside the law... I am really amazed that someone would not immediately see the danger in allowing the government to behave in this manner.  

Now hold on there..... Did he or did he not obtain private communications between government personnel and distribute them worldwide? Can I hack your email, or read my wife's diary then?
People scream for privacy yet want an all access pass too.

Which is it?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: bblackwood on December 22, 2010, 08:34:29 pm
Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 19:29


Now hold on there..... Did he or did he not obtain private communications between government personnel and distribute them worldwide? Can I hack your email, or read my wife's diary then?
People scream for privacy yet want an all access pass too.

Which is it?

Specifically, what laws did Assange break? Did he hack the data or simply post it?

Big difference, according to the SCOTUS...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 22, 2010, 08:40:13 pm
How did he get it?

If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it?
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 22, 2010, 09:27:26 pm
Gio wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 01:40

How did he get it?

If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it?

Apples and oranges man, I'm sure the state department used a lot of resources to go over this with a fine tooth comb and have yet to charge him with a crime.

I will ask the question again; What crime did he commit?  You have to answer this question first before you lock him up and throw away the key.

Why in the world are you not pissed about the less than stellar behavior of the government, I personally find that to be very dangerous.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 22, 2010, 09:45:15 pm
He didn't have to actually break a law for me to want his ass kicked, did he?

I am a hater. So be it.

He isn't the only thing that deserves a beating. He's a punk though!
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 22, 2010, 09:48:41 pm
Gio wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 01:29



People scream for privacy yet want an all access pass too.

Which is it?

Do you seriously not understand the difference between the personal privacy of a private citizen and what's happening here?

The propaganda machine must really be working...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: bblackwood on December 22, 2010, 10:43:26 pm
Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 19:40

How did he get it?

If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it?

What if you give me a picture of the car you stole? What am I guilty of then?

C'mon, man up - what law has Assange broken?

Personally, I think he's a douche, but that's not illegal in and of itself where I'm from...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Gio on December 22, 2010, 11:03:51 pm
bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:43

Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 19:40

How did he get it?

If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it?

What if you give me a picture of the car you stole? What am I guilty of then?

Now we're treading the same waters piracy advocates swim in.

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:43

 C'mon, man up - what law has Assange broken?

Personally, I think he's a douche, but that's not illegal in and of itself where I'm from...

Well, if he was a US citizen, treason comes to mind, but I guess because he's an international "journalist" it's OK.

If we're going to "out" people, then do it across the board, private citizens included. The possible interpretation of this is where I see danger.

Maybe I'm a douche too....
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: bblackwood on December 22, 2010, 11:40:50 pm
Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:03

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:43

Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 19:40

How did he get it?

If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it?

What if you give me a picture of the car you stole? What am I guilty of then?

Now we're treading the same waters piracy advocates swim in.


bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:43

 C'mon, man up - what law has Assange broken?

Personally, I think he's a douche, but that's not illegal in and of itself where I'm from...

Well, if he was a US citizen, treason comes to mind, but I guess because he's an international "journalist" it's OK.

If we're going to "out" people, then do it across the board, private citizens included. The possible interpretation of this is where I see danger.

Maybe I'm a douche too....

Look, it's simple - if he's guilty of a crime, tell me what it is. Equating his actions with piracy is a stretch at best, so tell me, specifically, what he did that broke the law.

Keep in mind the SCOTUS rulings regarding this exact sort of thing...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Samc on December 23, 2010, 12:03:48 am
bblackwood wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 04:40



Look, it's simple - if he's guilty of a crime, tell me what it is. Equating his actions with piracy is a stretch at best, so tell me, specifically, what he did that broke the law.

Keep in mind the SCOTUS rulings regarding this exact sort of thing...

It's very simple for me, had he broken the law he would have been charged a long time ago, I have no doubt that several lawyers went over this with a fine tooth comb...
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: jonathan jetter on December 23, 2010, 01:11:20 am
i agree with Sam and Brad.  Mr.  Assange has been on everyone's radar for quite some time now.  if there was an easy way to lock him up, i'm sure the DOJ would have taken action by now.

it may not be the type of journalism that you're used to, but it is journalism.  it is the release of information to the public, and honestly with far less opinionated bias than most other media sources.  

also....to echo what Sam said.  we absolutely have the right, and the duty, to insist that nations obey their own laws.  we have just been force-fed so much propaganda for so long that it no longer angers the common person when the politicians or the super-wealthy elite reinvent laws to suit their own whims.

last but not least...i want to reiterate that, even if the Espionage Act was applicable (i don't think it is, but i'm not a lawyer), the overwhelming majority of paragraphs in its text specifically state that it is only operative in times of war.  and the politicians have for many decades now been reaping the benefits of never making formal declarations of war.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: bblackwood on December 23, 2010, 07:33:16 am
Worth reading for those not familiar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_St ates
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Hallams on December 23, 2010, 02:43:15 pm
bblackwood wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 23:33

Worth reading for those not familiar:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_St ates


Just thought i would Post this from the above link:

New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court per curiam decision. The ruling made it possible for the New York Times and Washington Post newspapers to publish the then-classified Pentagon Papers without risk of government censure.

President Richard Nixon had claimed executive authority to force the Times to suspend publication of classified information in its possession. The question before the court was whether the constitutional freedom of the press, guaranteed by the First Amendment, was subordinate to a claimed need of the executive branch of government to maintain the secrecy of information. The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did protect the right of the New York Times' to print the materials.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 24, 2010, 06:31:24 am
WTF?

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2374683,00.asp
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: MDM, on December 24, 2010, 08:11:24 am
The government has a right to restrict 'sharing' of information if it causes a danger to the state's population or army, primarily during a War.

this is why we are living in a constant pseudo-war with terrorist 'threats' looming around the corner.

take the war away and you can report on almost any government activity..

now, if you have substantially large and corrupt entities within the government, who are committing all sorts of acts of treason, fraud etc. then it's logical that a huge amount of resources will be spent on keeping the war alive and kicking... and restricting free press.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: bblackwood on December 24, 2010, 11:44:18 am
MDM, wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 07:11

The government has a right to restrict 'sharing' of information if it causes a danger to the state's population or army, primarily during a War.


Not in the US, not according to the SCOTUS.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 24, 2010, 03:08:54 pm
MDM, wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 08:11

if you have substantially large and corrupt entities within the government, who are committing all sorts of acts of treason, fraud etc. then it's logical that a huge amount of resources will be spent on keeping the war alive and kicking... and restricting free press.



Treason and fraud, perhaps, but the only kicking and screaming is in denial that we are in a war. Most of the press here is self-restricting and has been for years.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: DarinK on December 24, 2010, 03:20:01 pm
bblackwood wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 08:44

MDM, wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 07:11

The government has a right to restrict 'sharing' of information if it causes a danger to the state's population or army, primarily during a War.


Not in the US, not according to the SCOTUS.


And the U.S. has not been in a declared war for quite a while.  Legally, there's a huge  distinction between some vague "war on terror" and a real declaration of war.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: fiasco ( P.M.DuMont ) on December 25, 2010, 07:45:26 am
Bill_Urick wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 06:31

WTF?

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2374683,00.asp



The most suitable acronym of all government entities.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: mukul on December 25, 2010, 12:03:29 pm

I reproduce an excerpt from an Indian newspaper commentary that is relevant to this discussion:

...

Nothing, perhaps, has tested America’s reputation as an open society as much as the recent uproar over the WikiLeaks disclosures. To have the US Attorney General threatening to extradite and prosecute a foreign national for publishing classified information given to him by others, to watch American companies like Amazon, Visa, MasterCard and Paypal supinely cave in to government pressure and withhold financial and network services from WikiLeaks, to see Senator Joseph Lieberman threatening the New York Times with legal action for having behaved like a bad ‘citizen’ in publishing WikiLeaks’s revelations, to read about the original leaker, Pvt Bradley Manning, spending 23 hours a day in solitary confinement for months on end without having been convicted, is to watch a liberal democracy consume itself in public view. To look on as the country that made the Internet possible, that made digital information the connective tissue of the contemporary world, wages war against a website is to witness a great nation lose its sense of itself.

....

The article analyzes American dominance during the first decade of this century.  Read it here -

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/a-decadeimperial -decline/419487/

Season's Greetings and Happy New Year to all.

Mukul
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: MDM, on December 25, 2010, 08:32:00 pm
Ideally the secrets that the government could and IMO should keep (during a real war) would have to do with secret weapons, to avoid that the enemy gets them as well or before... or it would have to do with planned military attacks, so that the army is not in danger.

these kinds of things should obviously be kept out of newspapers.

but the problem here is the exploitation of this principle and the distortion of it's meaning.

when G.W.Bush was making laws to take away citizen's freedom he did it with the excuse that he was trying to protect citizens from terrorists, who are in effect the enemy..

but it's an enemy that is likely fabricated by the military anyway so it's not really a war of any kind anyway if that's true.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Bill_Urick on December 25, 2010, 09:04:15 pm
MDM, wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 20:32


I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy .. in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry and music.
John Adams (1735-1826) 2nd President, United States



Max, this is a lovely sentiment but the study of "politics and war" is unfortunately necessary if we are to have the liberty to study mathematics, philosophy, painting, poetry and music. Without a radical change in our species I fear this will be true for the foreseeable future.

Quote:


but it's an enemy that is likely fabricated by the military anyway so it's not really a war of any kind anyway if that's true.


I would be willing (not happy) to cite a number of recent events that might disprove the "fabricated by the military" theory. I will, however, wait until tomorrow since today is a day to celebrate a birth, not a day to catalog death.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Les Ismore on December 26, 2010, 02:09:10 pm
I must study war, so my children can study war, so my children's children can study war.






That is if any of them survive.
Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Fibes on December 26, 2010, 04:37:05 pm
Back in College all of Ass's friends chased everything that moved, he on the other hand doesn't limit himself. Next the reports he loved her from the top of her head to the




































tag on her toe.


My apologies to Emo Phillips AKA JJ Blair









Title: Re: Wickileaks-A Watershed Moment
Post by: Tidewater on December 27, 2010, 10:25:39 am
 Rolling Eyes


Twisted Evil