wikileaks

[Dickensman]

They are trying to bring this man down for repeating the truth?

Is this witch-hunt justified?

[Chick]

No and neither is the extradition to Sweden. American senators saying he should be executed, we need more whistleblowers?.

[Dickensman]

Quite right Chick.

If it wasn't for people like him we wouldn't know a fraction of what goes on in the real world of politics.

[Loz]

He's a smart guy. From what I've read, the info on Wikileaks has been sifted through to remove any stuff that may endanger life or be too 'dangerous to know' and the US knows this. A few months ago, he released a heavily encrypted file called 'insurance'. No one knows what is in it, but he has let it be known that a key will be forthcoming if anything 'happens' to Assange.

[Santerme]

Nonsense, this chap is a dangerous nut job.

He needs like any potential criminal to face justice in Sweden should he be guilty.

[HAL9000]

I suspect Assange has no idea how corrupt, rapacious and unrelenting government prosecutors are - otherwise he would not have left himself vulnerable to the seizure of his assets and person.

He will probably be destroyed unless he abandons his principles and relents - the authorities will not let him win this fight.

[Dickensman]

Nonsense, this chap is a dangerous nut job. wrote Santerme.

He cannot be such a nutter if he is clever enough to get where he has.

He is only repeating the dubious stuff from our wonderfully honest and straight as a dye politicians.

How does that make him a nutter?

[Santerme]

It makes him dangerous and as we are seeing the Govts of the world are closing in and closing him down.

Plus he is a suspect in a rape case

So hero worship might prove a little premature.

And having worked in Govt service for twenty three years I know the value of maintaining confidentiality on issues.

[Dickensman]

None of what you have stated thus far convinces me he is a 'dangerous nut job' as you put it Santerme.

[Loz]

Santerme Wrote:

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

>

> Plus he is a suspect in a rape case

A case that has already been dropped once, but picked up again because of political pressure. A case that Assange has tried to meet Swedish prosecutors in regards to and they have refused. The Swedish police and the UK police both apparently know exactly where Assange is - he is not on the run or in hiding from the law. The Swedes have made a lot of noise but, until today, have refused to actually issue the necessary paperwork or arrest warrant. This 'case' has a unpleasant whiff to it.

I expected a whole lot better from the Swedes. Their liberalism seems to have been easily bought.

> And having worked in Govt service for twenty three years I know the value of maintaining confidentiality on issues.

Anyone who has seen 'Yes, Minister' would know who exactly benefits from a lot of that 'value'. I've worked with a number of government departments over the years and a lot of the secrecy is habitual and unnecessary. Yes, there is a lot that needs/must to be kept secret, but there is a lot of arse-covering too.

Note to the Americans: if something is so important that it needs to be kept classified, don't give 3 million people routine access to it. This is the problem with making everything secret - what is actually sensitive gets mixed up with all the dross and no one has control over it all.

[Dickensman]

He needs like any potential criminal to face justice in Sweden should he be guilty.

It seems to me Santerme you have made up your mind already by calling him a dangerous nut job who should be closed down.

It is always a pleasure to listen to someone who has an open mind on such unimportant matters as reporting facts.

[HAL9000]

As far as I have been able to establish, the allegations of sexual impropriety surfaced after Assange was identified as being in possession of the said classified documents.

I think it is reasonable to consider whether Assange was honey trapped by female agents provocateurs as a pre-emptive counter-measure against publication? The timing is highly suspicious, in my view.

Someone in his position falling for such ruse must surely be too na?ve and ill-prepared to assume such a r?le?

[Loz]

The latest in American government stupidness: The White House has told federal employees and contractors that they're not allowed to read classified federal documents posted to WikiLeaks unless they have the proper security clearance.

Quick! Shut the stable door...!

[Dickensman]

:))

You made me laugh loz!

[Dickensman]

And having worked in Govt service for twenty three years I know the value of maintaining confidentiality on issues. wrote Santerme.

Have you any thoughts that some of what might be released may inveigle some one close to you Santerme?

He needs like any potential criminal to face justice in Sweden should he be guilty. wrote Santerme.

No value laden statements there then! I thought you had to be proven guilty before the tag of criminal was laid on anyone.

[silverfox]

The question is in this Internet age is whether tell all is somehow empowering, liberating or downright stupidity. There are reasons why some things should be kept secret.

As any one with half a brain knows it is only a matter of time before Israel, on behalf of the West, has to, repeat has to, bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. nothing to my knowledge that wikileaks has released contradicts this - if anything the revelations that most of the middle east agrees with this only justifies the forthcoming military action.

most of what wikileaks has released is quite innocent.However, certain things should be kept secret. If wikileaks and divulged that D-Day was going to be on Normandy or the Allies had produced the atom bomb we would all agree that that was irresponsible.

I agree that when knowledge is used to keep the masses ignorant it should be exposed. I don't agree that Julian Lasange is some sort of liberating force. technology, and disgruntled employees has given him the means to tell tales but responsibility comes with this.

[HAL9000]

The disclosures so far are no more than diplomatic title-tattle: as if terrorists don't already know that undersea cables land on coastlines....

Wikileaks invited the US State Department to advise on the redaction and censorship of sensitive information within the classified documents - the State Department refused. Ergo, nothing therein is really sensitive - the objections are merely a matter of principle.

However, one cannot completely dismiss the possibility that the entire fiasco is a US intelligence maskirovka for disseminating opinions and views (or something else we haven't seen yet) that can't be published officially.

[Keef]

Silverfox is spot on.

[louisiana]

Loz Wrote:

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

> The latest in American government stupidness: The

> White House has told federal employees and

> contractors that they're not allowed to read

> classified federal documents posted to WikiLeaks

> unless they have the proper security clearance.

>

> Quick! Shut the stable door...!

Some US universities have also been notified that students must not look at or talk about the material online, or they won't get government jobs when they graduate.

[louisiana]

silverfox Wrote:

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

> The question is in this Internet age is whether

> tell all is somehow empowering, liberating or

> downright stupidity. There are reasons why some

> things should be kept secret.

>

I don't think this material had a 'secret' classification (?)

And it was available to some 3 million people worldwide long before Wikileaks got its hands on it. Is that they way you treat information you don't want people to know? If so, a bit dumb.

[SeanMacGabhann]

But these leaks have done nothing of the sort, and inventing what-if scenarios is silly

What they HAVE done is shine a light on the fact that not only do the public in the US and UK not want the Afghan wars, but the leaders themseleves have long thought them pointless. But they can't say that to their electorates. But they can waste all lives on boths sides and the billions of cash?

I think that's worth knowing. Well, I say knowing, many people already think this but it's nice to have it confirmed

[Santerme]

I love the idea that a country could be asked to redact its own docs illegally acquired

Govt depts are not Yes Minister parodies, at least not MOD

The Swedes need to show a firm case for the EAW to be executable

I am fairly certain no one here has access to that information

And I am not the only one who seem to have made up their mind

[expat]

Well the Swedish so called rape case is a bit weird. One of the women involved published a blog some years ago with

15 step to gain revenge on your ex. Also he does not deny the sex he used a condom and the woman in question is climing assult because the condon split. She claim he cut a hole in it.

[Santerme]

DICKENSMAN Wrote:

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

> And having worked in Govt service for twenty three

> years I know the value of maintaining

> confidentiality on issues. wrote Santerme.

>

>

> Have you any thoughts that some of what might be

> released may inveigle some one close to you

> Santerme?

>

>

>

> He needs like any potential criminal to face

> justice in Sweden should he be guilty. wrote

> Santerme.

>

> No value laden statements there then! I thought

> you had to be proven guilty before the tag of

> criminal was laid on anyone.

Which part of 'potential' and 'should he be' is saying he is guilty?

Just asking!

[louisiana]

Santerme Wrote:

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

>

>

> Plus he is a suspect in a rape case

The case does not appear to be 'rape', and the EAW does not mention the word rape.

It appears to revolve around a condom splitting, and this eventuality under Swedish law possibly contributing to a change in the balance of power during sex; with one of the prosecutors concerned being involved in pressing for proposed changes to Swedish law in this regard.

One of the two women got upset that Assange had had sex with another woman apart from her on that trip and so decided to press charges for 'sex by surprise'(and then withdrew them). Don't think that's an offence in the UK. And as some will already be aware, one of the women concerned is fairly 'ultra' on the feminism front (and has blogged about how you can get at men using the law). Assange was staying with her for several days. Yet she pressed no charges during that time, it appears; it appears she only pressed charges once she'd chatted to the other woman he had sex with in Sweden, and found out he'd had sex with her.

All very confused. This does not seem to be a cut and dried case, and there seem to be all kinds of things going on apart from any sex. (Interpersonal relations and jealousy, careerist prosecutor wanting to change the law, disagreements between different prosecutors in different towns, Swedish laws very different from our own, international politics etc.)

I'm not defending the guy. Just saying that propagating the 'rape' idea (which has a certain image in many minds including my own) seems somewhat misleading.

Ah, I was looking at the Interpol thingy, not the EAW. My bad.