Instead of prosecuting WikiLeaks, they should be prosecuting those who supplied the information to them. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand, but all I've heard on the radio is that the WikiLeaks guy should be prosecuted.
(I haven't read any of this thread before I replied)
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Instead of prosecuting WikiLeaks, they should be prosecuting those who supplied the information to them. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand, but all I've heard on the radio is that the WikiLeaks guy should be prosecuted.
(I haven't read any of this thread before I replied)
see this is the problem....blame the whistleblowers, not those committing the offensive acts, not those strongarming other governments or imposing their world view onto the rest of the world, or arming saudi aradia, etc.....business as usual in the united states...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Instead of prosecuting WikiLeaks, they should be prosecuting those who supplied the information to them. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand, but all I've heard on the radio is that the WikiLeaks guy should be prosecuted.
(I haven't read any of this thread before I replied)
I bet they will but we wont hear about it until after they nail this guy to the bords. imo
Instead of prosecuting WikiLeaks, they should be prosecuting those who supplied the information to them. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand, but all I've heard on the radio is that the WikiLeaks guy should be prosecuted.
(I haven't read any of this thread before I replied)
see this is the problem....blame the whistleblowers, not those committing the offensive acts, not those strongarming other governments or imposing their world view onto the rest of the world, or arming saudi aradia, etc.....business as usual in the united states...
exactly gimme
why are people so ignorant to this?
The whole world will be different soon... - EV
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
Instead of prosecuting WikiLeaks, they should be prosecuting those who supplied the information to them. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand, but all I've heard on the radio is that the WikiLeaks guy should be prosecuted.
(I haven't read any of this thread before I replied)
see this is the problem....blame the whistleblowers, not those committing the offensive acts, not those strongarming other governments or imposing their world view onto the rest of the world, or arming saudi aradia, etc.....business as usual in the united states...
exactly gimme
why are people so ignorant to this?
because generally people do not think critically and do not understand the true nature of cause and effect.
for example...
a person reports their factory employer for dumping toxic waste in a landfill...
the person who blows the whistle goes to jail while nothing serious happens to that factory...maybe a fine, but allowed to stay in business..
happens every day in this country....punish those trying to do the right thing, while letting the true criminals walk freely among the rest of us...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
surely the accusations about Assanges private life are completely irrelevant to the war crimes. if the allegations are true then that's a seperate issue and he should be dealt with accordingly.
seems like some are losing sight of the big picture. are those people actually defending the government's use of war for profit and power, or do they just really hate the fact that Assange is spitting out what anyone paying attention probably already knows?
Truth I know it's a little off the beatin path but I work in a factory for a very large corp. and believe me whistle blowers don't get fired and the fines could put most small to medium business's in the ground
for good, there is a law I believe called the whistle blowers law...off all things that protects employees
very well.
Truth I know it's a little off the beatin path but I work in a factory for a very large corp. and believe me whistle blowers don't get fired and the fines could put most small to medium business's in the ground
for good, there is a law I believe called the whistle blowers law...off all things that protects employees
very well.
Godfather.
if the business is polluting and breaking laws then it deserves to be broken by fines. just my position on the right vs wrong of that example...
there have been countless whistleblowers punished for blowing the whistle on people committing crimes. i just used the factory as an example, a la "silkwood"..
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
and these accusations are very questionable when they were not pursued when they first allegedly occurred...rather they were opened again when wikileaks leaked the iraq war leaks...timing is VERY suspicious to me..and these sexual assault charges should be separate from whatever they charge him with for leaking this information.
they are just trying to find something to stick to him so they can punish him...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Truth I know it's a little off the beatin path but I work in a factory for a very large corp. and believe me whistle blowers don't get fired and the fines could put most small to medium business's in the ground
for good, there is a law I believe called the whistle blowers law...off all things that protects employees
very well.
Godfather.
if the business is polluting and breaking laws then it deserves to be broken by fines. just my position on the right vs wrong of that example...
there have been countless whistleblowers punished for blowing the whistle on people committing crimes. i just used the factory as an example, a la "silkwood"..
this mostly occurs in the FAA, the pentagon, and other government agencies, or in the intelligence/foreign policy realm, or in the medical community. here is page one from a google search of "punished whistleblowers" there are countless links there...
Instead of prosecuting WikiLeaks, they should be prosecuting those who supplied the information to them. I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand, but all I've heard on the radio is that the WikiLeaks guy should be prosecuted.
(I haven't read any of this thread before I replied)
see this is the problem....blame the whistleblowers, not those committing the offensive acts, not those strongarming other governments or imposing their world view onto the rest of the world, or arming saudi aradia, etc.....business as usual in the united states...
That's the thing that's the most ridiculous about this whole situation - the discussion seems to be "What should we do about Julian Assange?" instead of "What should we do about a State Department that has been spying on diplomats?"
And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
That's the thing that's the most ridiculous about this whole situation - the discussion seems to be "What should we do about Julian Assange?" instead of "What should we do about a State Department that has been spying on diplomats?"
we will do the easy answer of course, not change our diplomats or hold them accountable for their actions, rather scapegoat assange for making this public knowlwdge while attempting to force change and improve things...
the anticipated reaction is there would be public outrage for what our government has done, but instead everyone is outraged at him for all of the wrong reasons...
i guess more people agree with the "don't snitch" mantra than i thought....
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
LONDON – The lawyer for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange charged Wednesday that his client is being persecuted by Swedish authorities whose accusations of sex crimes have prompted an Interpol alert for his arrest.
Swedish officials say they issued the international alert because the 39-year-old Australian has not made himself available for a meeting with prosecutors. Assange's lawyer, Mark Stephens, said that Swedish officials have turned down repeated offers to speak to Assange.
Assange's secret-spilling group has leaked a series of confidential U.S. intelligence and diplomatic reports this year, including the disclosure earlier this week of hundreds of classified State Department cables. U.S. officials have reacted with outrage, with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton accusing WikiLeaks of acting illegally and promising "aggressive steps to hold responsible those who stole this information."
Clinton said she discussed the leak with her colleagues at a security summit in Kazakhstan and the revelations will not hurt American diplomacy. The leaks include unflattering descriptions of some foreign leaders and requests for U.S. diplomats to gather personal information on others. They have revealed Western concerns that Islamist militants might get access to Pakistan's nuclear material and American skepticism that Islamabad will sever ties to Taliban factions fighting in Afghanistan. They also showed U.S. doubts over the abilities of Pakistan's weak, unpopular civilian government
"I have certainly raised the issue of the leaks in order to assure our colleagues that it will not in any way interfere with American diplomacy or our commitment to continuing important work that is ongoing," Clinton said. "I have not any had any concerns expressed about whether any nation will not continue to work with and discuss matters of importance to us both going forward."
Several officials at the summit echoed her comments.
Assange is wanted on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. The exact nature of the allegations aren't completely clear because formal charges have not been filed.
The former computer hacker's exact whereabouts remain unknown, although he has conducted online interviews with some media organizations.
Assange told Time magazine that Clinton should resign "if it can be shown that she was responsible for ordering U.S. diplomatic figures to engage in espionage in the United Nations" in violation of international agreements.
The White House said his statements "are both ridiculous and absurd" and U.S. diplomats do not engage in spying.
Assange's lawyer, Stephens, who also represents The Associated Press, said his London law firm was investigating whether the Swedish case was linked to U.S. promises to prosecute those behind the leaks.
Stephens complained that Assange has yet to receive formal notice of the allegations he faces — which he described as a legal requirement under European law.
The lawyer was scathing in his condemnation of Sweden's Director of Public Prosecution Marianne Ny, saying he'd never come across a prosecutor who has "such casual disregard" for her obligations.
"Given that Sweden is a civilized country, I am reluctantly forced to conclude that this is a persecution and not a prosecution," Stephens wrote in an e-mail.
Stephens has previously said that the allegations were made after Assange had consensual sex with two women who turned on him after becoming aware of each other's relationships. Swedish prosecutors have disagreed about whether to label the most serious charge as rape.
Sweden's Supreme Court was reviewing Assange's appeal of the order to detain him. Court official Kerstin Norman, who is handling the case, said a decision is expected late Wednesday or Thursday.
Prosecutor Marianne Ny said that a European arrest warrant had been issued for Assange, but said that "for secrecy reasons, she cannot give more information concerning this matter at the moment."
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
WikiLeaks website pulled by Amazon after US political pressure
Site hosting leaked US embassy cables is ousted from American servers as senator calls for boycott of WikiLeaks by companies
The US struck its first blow against WikiLeaks after Amazon.com pulled the plug on hosting the whistleblowing website in reaction to heavy political pressure.
The company announced it was cutting WikiLeaks off yesterday only 24 hours after being contacted by the staff of Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate's committee on homeland security.
WikiLeaks expressed disappointment with Amazon, and insisted it was a breach of freedom of speech as enshrined in the US constitution's first amendment. The organisation, in a message sent via Twitter, said if Amazon was "so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books."
While freedom of speech is a sensitive issue in the US, scope for a full-blown row is limited, given that Democrats and Republicans will largely applaud Amazon's move. Lieberman, though an independent, is a former Republican who switched to the Democrats last year.
The question is whether he was acting on his own or pressed to do so by the Obama administration, and how much pressure was applied to Amazon.
Although there are echoes of the censorship row between Google and China earlier this year, constitutional lawyers insisted it was not a first amendment issue because Amazon is a private company, free to make its own decisions.
The WikiLeaks main website and a sub-site devoted to the diplomatic documents were unavailable from the US and Europe yesterday, as Amazon servers refused to acknowledge requests for data. WikiLeaks switched to a host in Sweden.
Lieberman said: "[Amazon's] decision to cut off WikiLeaks now is the right decision and should set the standard for other companies WikiLeaks is using to distribute its illegally seized material. I call on any other company or organisation that is hosting WikiLeaks to immediately terminate its relationship with them."
The department of homeland security confirmed Amazon's move, referring journalists to Lieberman's statement.
Kevin Bankston, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which supports internet freedom, said it was not a violation of the first amendment but was nevertheless disappointing. "This certainly implicates first amendment rights to the extent that web hosts may, based on direct or informal pressure, limit the materials the American public has a first amendment right to access," Bankston told the website Talking Points Memo.
The development came amid angry and polarised political opinion in America over WikiLeaks, with some conservatives calling for the organisation's founder, Julian Assange, to be executed as a spy.
The fury building up among rightwingers in the US, ranging from the potential Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee to conservative blogsites such as Red State, contrasted with a measured response from the Obama administration. The White House, the state department and the Pentagon continued to denounce the leaks, describing them as "despicable". But senior administration officials, with a sense of weary resignation, also called on people to put the leaks into context and insisted they had not done serious damage to US relations.
The White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, shrugged aside as "ridiculous" a call by Assange, interviewed by Time magazine, via Skype from an undisclosed location, for the resignation of the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, over an order to spy on the United Nations. "I'm not entirely sure why we care about the opinion of one guy with one website," Gibbs said. "Our foreign policy and the interests of this country are far stronger than his one website."
John Kerry, the Democratic head of the Senate foreign relations committee, on Sunday denounced the leaks but he sounded more sanguine at an event in Washington on Tuesday night. He said there was a "silver lining" in that it was now clear where everyone stood on Iran. "Things that I have heard from the mouths of King Abdullah [of Saudi Arabia] and Hosni Mubarak [Egyptian president] and others are now quite public," Kerry said. He went on to say there was a "consensus on Iran".
But others, particularly rightwingers, are seeking retribution, with Assange as the prime target. Legal experts in the US were divided over whether the US could successfully prosecute Assange under the 1917 espionage act. Sceptics said the US protections for journalists would make such a prosecution difficult and also cited pragmatic issues, such as the difficulty of extraditing Assange, an Australian.
Huckabee, who was among the contenders for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and is likely to stand again in 2012, told the Politico website: "Whoever in our government leaked that information is guilty of treason, and I think anything less than execution is too kind a penalty."
His later comments suggest he had in mind Bradley Manning, the US private in Iraq who is suspected of leaking the information and is under arrest in Virginia, rather than Assange.
Typical of attacks on Assange is a blog by lexington_concord on Red State, a popular rightwing site, in which the writers says Assange is a spy.
"Under the traditional rules of engagement he is thus subject to summary execution and my preferred course of action would [be] for Assange to find a small calibre round in the back of his head."
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
they are trying to destroy his credibility and his website's credibility and make him an insignificant figure. he is being demonized here in the states, people are calling for him to be tried for treason and gop presidential candidates are calling for the death penalty for the soldier that might have been responsible for the leaks. presidential candidates calling for the death penalty. how messed up is that???
and companies like amazon are threatened when senators start pressuring them to take some action...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Very messed up gimme.... Also, all of a sudden, there is an international arrest warrant for sex crimes? Allegations in August which have been dismissed within 24 hours. How convenient 'new informatio' (though no one will say what new info) surfaces now.
Though a lot of these leaks are 'gossipy', a number of them are certainly eye-opening. Latest one about the UK allowing the US to stock banned cluster bombs on UK territory when they signed the treaty? Shocking.
"Authorities seek WikiLeaks founder; website moves
By MATT APUZZO , 12.02.10, 03:02 AM EST
WASHINGTON -- Freelance computer hackers have helped the U.S. government chase WikiLeaks from an American commercial computer network. That stopped the leak of embarrassing diplomatic documents - at least for part of a day. But the website returned within hours, this time publishing from a fortified bunker in Sweden.
A real-life pursuit of the site's founder mirrors the virtual chase. Julian Assange is wanted in Sweden on rape charges.
BuzzWikiLeaks said Amazon.com ( AMZN - news - people ) prevented it from using the U.S. company's computers to distribute embarrassing State Department communications and other documents.
Undeterred, Assange has moved back to servers owned by its previous Swedish host and continued releasing confidential government documents."
so why are the republicans calling for execution of the leaker for treason, when cheney, and libby committed treason by outing a covert cia operative for political reasons???
That is really what I don't understand. I mean why is everyone worried about the wikileaks dude when the real criminal is the person or people, who had secret clearance, and by extension were sworn to secrecy who actually leaked these documents.
And like the above quoted posted said if the dude who published this information is to be considered some sort of terrorist or enemy of the state, why isn't Robert Novak considered the exact same thing?
I'm guessing the embarrassment that this leak caused will be reason enough for execution as far as the governments involved are concerned,people have been wacked for much less.
I have a thought, what do you think these guys intentions really were and what did they think would happen if they got caught ? will they die as American hero's or go to prison for the rest of their lives ? and will this leak change anything other than how good the government hides their secrets.
in my opinion they should have been a little smarter in the way they did this...now look at em,both with a bullseye on their foreheads and for what ?
as big and powerful as our government is does anybody really think that they can get away with something like this and not get caught ?
I'm guessing the embarrassment that this leak caused will be reason enough for execution as far as the governments involved are concerned,people have been wacked for much less.
I have a thought, what do you think these guys intentions really were and what did they think would happen if they got caught ? will they die as American hero's or go to prison for the rest of their lives ? and will this leak change anything other than how good the government hides their secrets.
in my opinion they should have been a little smarter in the way they did this...now look at em,both with a bullseye on their foreheads and for what ?
as big and powerful as our government is does anybody really think that they can get away with something like this and not get caught ?
Godfather.
the point is no government should get away with what our government is doing. he wants to target russia and china as well. and his next release is gonna blow the lid off of the lending and financial crisis. i think it is a good thing. the legal authorities have to stay within their legal rights to charge and convict both of these guys. if they overstep their authority the whole world is going to know about it. there is so much light on thes guys right now that no government can afford to not give them due process.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
I'm guessing the embarrassment that this leak caused will be reason enough for execution as far as the governments involved are concerned,people have been wacked for much less.
I have a thought, what do you think these guys intentions really were and what did they think would happen if they got caught ? will they die as American hero's or go to prison for the rest of their lives ? and will this leak change anything other than how good the government hides their secrets.
in my opinion they should have been a little smarter in the way they did this...now look at em,both with a bullseye on their foreheads and for what ?
as big and powerful as our government is does anybody really think that they can get away with something like this and not get caught ?
Godfather.
I think their intentions were to expose injustice and immoral behavior by YOUR elected officials. Ironic to see the vilification, by the American press, government, and many of it’s people, of an Aussie playing the role of American patriot. I’m sure they knew full well the consequences of their actions. If you’re smart enough to figure it out, they probably are too. What would have been a 'smarter' way to go about leaking these docs?
They SHOULD die American heroes, but because of the public's tendency to never look past their fucking tv screen, and because of people who are more likely to support Crime in the name of nationalism, than to support "crime" in the name JUSTICE, they will likely go to prison. But they can do so with their heads held high… If there is ANY justice in this world, they will be exonerated by time, and remembered as champions of the people in the historical record.
There are FAR too many acquiescent sheep in this world, who lose the courage to do what is right when threatened. A man of principle cannot turn a blind eye to much of the information contained in these leaks….doing so is a form of complicity. Seems Assange understands this, even if others do not.
There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. (Gandhi)
Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. (MLK)
I'm guessing the embarrassment that this leak caused will be reason enough for execution as far as the governments involved are concerned,people have been wacked for much less.
I have a thought, what do you think these guys intentions really were and what did they think would happen if they got caught ? will they die as American hero's or go to prison for the rest of their lives ? and will this leak change anything other than how good the government hides their secrets.
in my opinion they should have been a little smarter in the way they did this...now look at em,both with a bullseye on their foreheads and for what ?
as big and powerful as our government is does anybody really think that they can get away with something like this and not get caught ?
Godfather.
I think their intentions were to expose injustice and immoral behavior by YOUR elected officials. Ironic to see the vilification, by the American press, government, and many of it’s people, of an Aussie playing the role of American patriot. I’m sure they knew full well the consequences of their actions. If you’re smart enough to figure it out, they probably are too. What would have been a 'smarter' way to go about leaking these docs?
They SHOULD die American heroes, but because of the public's tendency to never look past their fucking tv screen, and because of people who are more likely to support Crime in the name of nationalism, than to support "crime" in the name JUSTICE, they will likely go to prison. But they can do so with their heads held high… If there is ANY justice in this world, they will be exonerated by time, and remembered as champions of the people in the historical record.
There are FAR too many acquiescent sheep in this world, who lose the courage to do what is right when threatened. A man of principle cannot turn a blind eye to much of the information contained in these leaks….doing so is a form of complicity. Seems Assange understands this, even if others do not.
There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. (Gandhi)
Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. (MLK)
when these men go to prison or death row I'll bet they wish they were a little smarter in the way they leaked this stuff, I've never seen anybody go to prison with their head held high, as popular as these two are there will be people waiting for them when they go in...at that point will it all matter to them ?
I'm just saying a little planning may have helped them out a little.
Assange has done something quite historical in that he has managed to anger every world leader with the exception of Hugo Chavez. However, I think the biggest risk to his life expectancy is his threat of having enough information potential to destroy a major bank.
Comments
f.o.g
Godfather.
(I haven't read any of this thread before I replied)
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
poisoned to it's rotten core and too fucked up to care anymore.
I bet they will but we wont hear about it until after they nail this guy to the bords. imo
Godfather.
exactly gimme
why are people so ignorant to this?
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
for example...
a person reports their factory employer for dumping toxic waste in a landfill...
the person who blows the whistle goes to jail while nothing serious happens to that factory...maybe a fine, but allowed to stay in business..
happens every day in this country....punish those trying to do the right thing, while letting the true criminals walk freely among the rest of us...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
seems like some are losing sight of the big picture. are those people actually defending the government's use of war for profit and power, or do they just really hate the fact that Assange is spitting out what anyone paying attention probably already knows?
for good, there is a law I believe called the whistle blowers law...off all things that protects employees
very well.
Godfather.
there have been countless whistleblowers punished for blowing the whistle on people committing crimes. i just used the factory as an example, a la "silkwood"..
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
they are just trying to find something to stick to him so they can punish him...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=pu ... =&gs_rfai=
definitely some interesting things there...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
That's the thing that's the most ridiculous about this whole situation - the discussion seems to be "What should we do about Julian Assange?" instead of "What should we do about a State Department that has been spying on diplomats?"
the anticipated reaction is there would be public outrage for what our government has done, but instead everyone is outraged at him for all of the wrong reasons...
i guess more people agree with the "don't snitch" mantra than i thought....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Lawyer: Assange is being persecuted in Sweden
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101201/ap_ ... /wikileaks
LONDON – The lawyer for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange charged Wednesday that his client is being persecuted by Swedish authorities whose accusations of sex crimes have prompted an Interpol alert for his arrest.
Swedish officials say they issued the international alert because the 39-year-old Australian has not made himself available for a meeting with prosecutors. Assange's lawyer, Mark Stephens, said that Swedish officials have turned down repeated offers to speak to Assange.
Assange's secret-spilling group has leaked a series of confidential U.S. intelligence and diplomatic reports this year, including the disclosure earlier this week of hundreds of classified State Department cables. U.S. officials have reacted with outrage, with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton accusing WikiLeaks of acting illegally and promising "aggressive steps to hold responsible those who stole this information."
Clinton said she discussed the leak with her colleagues at a security summit in Kazakhstan and the revelations will not hurt American diplomacy. The leaks include unflattering descriptions of some foreign leaders and requests for U.S. diplomats to gather personal information on others. They have revealed Western concerns that Islamist militants might get access to Pakistan's nuclear material and American skepticism that Islamabad will sever ties to Taliban factions fighting in Afghanistan. They also showed U.S. doubts over the abilities of Pakistan's weak, unpopular civilian government
"I have certainly raised the issue of the leaks in order to assure our colleagues that it will not in any way interfere with American diplomacy or our commitment to continuing important work that is ongoing," Clinton said. "I have not any had any concerns expressed about whether any nation will not continue to work with and discuss matters of importance to us both going forward."
Several officials at the summit echoed her comments.
Assange is wanted on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. The exact nature of the allegations aren't completely clear because formal charges have not been filed.
The former computer hacker's exact whereabouts remain unknown, although he has conducted online interviews with some media organizations.
Assange told Time magazine that Clinton should resign "if it can be shown that she was responsible for ordering U.S. diplomatic figures to engage in espionage in the United Nations" in violation of international agreements.
The White House said his statements "are both ridiculous and absurd" and U.S. diplomats do not engage in spying.
Assange's lawyer, Stephens, who also represents The Associated Press, said his London law firm was investigating whether the Swedish case was linked to U.S. promises to prosecute those behind the leaks.
Stephens complained that Assange has yet to receive formal notice of the allegations he faces — which he described as a legal requirement under European law.
The lawyer was scathing in his condemnation of Sweden's Director of Public Prosecution Marianne Ny, saying he'd never come across a prosecutor who has "such casual disregard" for her obligations.
"Given that Sweden is a civilized country, I am reluctantly forced to conclude that this is a persecution and not a prosecution," Stephens wrote in an e-mail.
Stephens has previously said that the allegations were made after Assange had consensual sex with two women who turned on him after becoming aware of each other's relationships. Swedish prosecutors have disagreed about whether to label the most serious charge as rape.
Sweden's Supreme Court was reviewing Assange's appeal of the order to detain him. Court official Kerstin Norman, who is handling the case, said a decision is expected late Wednesday or Thursday.
Prosecutor Marianne Ny said that a European arrest warrant had been issued for Assange, but said that "for secrecy reasons, she cannot give more information concerning this matter at the moment."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
WikiLeaks website pulled by Amazon after US political pressure
Site hosting leaked US embassy cables is ousted from American servers as senator calls for boycott of WikiLeaks by companies
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/de ... ers-amazon
The US struck its first blow against WikiLeaks after Amazon.com pulled the plug on hosting the whistleblowing website in reaction to heavy political pressure.
The company announced it was cutting WikiLeaks off yesterday only 24 hours after being contacted by the staff of Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate's committee on homeland security.
WikiLeaks expressed disappointment with Amazon, and insisted it was a breach of freedom of speech as enshrined in the US constitution's first amendment. The organisation, in a message sent via Twitter, said if Amazon was "so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books."
While freedom of speech is a sensitive issue in the US, scope for a full-blown row is limited, given that Democrats and Republicans will largely applaud Amazon's move. Lieberman, though an independent, is a former Republican who switched to the Democrats last year.
The question is whether he was acting on his own or pressed to do so by the Obama administration, and how much pressure was applied to Amazon.
Although there are echoes of the censorship row between Google and China earlier this year, constitutional lawyers insisted it was not a first amendment issue because Amazon is a private company, free to make its own decisions.
The WikiLeaks main website and a sub-site devoted to the diplomatic documents were unavailable from the US and Europe yesterday, as Amazon servers refused to acknowledge requests for data. WikiLeaks switched to a host in Sweden.
Lieberman said: "[Amazon's] decision to cut off WikiLeaks now is the right decision and should set the standard for other companies WikiLeaks is using to distribute its illegally seized material. I call on any other company or organisation that is hosting WikiLeaks to immediately terminate its relationship with them."
The department of homeland security confirmed Amazon's move, referring journalists to Lieberman's statement.
Kevin Bankston, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which supports internet freedom, said it was not a violation of the first amendment but was nevertheless disappointing. "This certainly implicates first amendment rights to the extent that web hosts may, based on direct or informal pressure, limit the materials the American public has a first amendment right to access," Bankston told the website Talking Points Memo.
The development came amid angry and polarised political opinion in America over WikiLeaks, with some conservatives calling for the organisation's founder, Julian Assange, to be executed as a spy.
The fury building up among rightwingers in the US, ranging from the potential Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee to conservative blogsites such as Red State, contrasted with a measured response from the Obama administration. The White House, the state department and the Pentagon continued to denounce the leaks, describing them as "despicable". But senior administration officials, with a sense of weary resignation, also called on people to put the leaks into context and insisted they had not done serious damage to US relations.
The White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, shrugged aside as "ridiculous" a call by Assange, interviewed by Time magazine, via Skype from an undisclosed location, for the resignation of the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, over an order to spy on the United Nations. "I'm not entirely sure why we care about the opinion of one guy with one website," Gibbs said. "Our foreign policy and the interests of this country are far stronger than his one website."
John Kerry, the Democratic head of the Senate foreign relations committee, on Sunday denounced the leaks but he sounded more sanguine at an event in Washington on Tuesday night. He said there was a "silver lining" in that it was now clear where everyone stood on Iran. "Things that I have heard from the mouths of King Abdullah [of Saudi Arabia] and Hosni Mubarak [Egyptian president] and others are now quite public," Kerry said. He went on to say there was a "consensus on Iran".
But others, particularly rightwingers, are seeking retribution, with Assange as the prime target. Legal experts in the US were divided over whether the US could successfully prosecute Assange under the 1917 espionage act. Sceptics said the US protections for journalists would make such a prosecution difficult and also cited pragmatic issues, such as the difficulty of extraditing Assange, an Australian.
Huckabee, who was among the contenders for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and is likely to stand again in 2012, told the Politico website: "Whoever in our government leaked that information is guilty of treason, and I think anything less than execution is too kind a penalty."
His later comments suggest he had in mind Bradley Manning, the US private in Iraq who is suspected of leaking the information and is under arrest in Virginia, rather than Assange.
Typical of attacks on Assange is a blog by lexington_concord on Red State, a popular rightwing site, in which the writers says Assange is a spy.
"Under the traditional rules of engagement he is thus subject to summary execution and my preferred course of action would [be] for Assange to find a small calibre round in the back of his head."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
and companies like amazon are threatened when senators start pressuring them to take some action...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Though a lot of these leaks are 'gossipy', a number of them are certainly eye-opening. Latest one about the UK allowing the US to stock banned cluster bombs on UK territory when they signed the treaty? Shocking.
"Authorities seek WikiLeaks founder; website moves
By MATT APUZZO , 12.02.10, 03:02 AM EST
WASHINGTON -- Freelance computer hackers have helped the U.S. government chase WikiLeaks from an American commercial computer network. That stopped the leak of embarrassing diplomatic documents - at least for part of a day. But the website returned within hours, this time publishing from a fortified bunker in Sweden.
A real-life pursuit of the site's founder mirrors the virtual chase. Julian Assange is wanted in Sweden on rape charges.
BuzzWikiLeaks said Amazon.com ( AMZN - news - people ) prevented it from using the U.S. company's computers to distribute embarrassing State Department communications and other documents.
Undeterred, Assange has moved back to servers owned by its previous Swedish host and continued releasing confidential government documents."
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/12/ ... 76417.html
That is really what I don't understand. I mean why is everyone worried about the wikileaks dude when the real criminal is the person or people, who had secret clearance, and by extension were sworn to secrecy who actually leaked these documents.
And like the above quoted posted said if the dude who published this information is to be considered some sort of terrorist or enemy of the state, why isn't Robert Novak considered the exact same thing?
I have a thought, what do you think these guys intentions really were and what did they think would happen if they got caught ? will they die as American hero's or go to prison for the rest of their lives ? and will this leak change anything other than how good the government hides their secrets.
in my opinion they should have been a little smarter in the way they did this...now look at em,both with a bullseye on their foreheads and for what ?
as big and powerful as our government is does anybody really think that they can get away with something like this and not get caught ?
Godfather.
Godfather.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Godfather.
They SHOULD die American heroes, but because of the public's tendency to never look past their fucking tv screen, and because of people who are more likely to support Crime in the name of nationalism, than to support "crime" in the name JUSTICE, they will likely go to prison. But they can do so with their heads held high… If there is ANY justice in this world, they will be exonerated by time, and remembered as champions of the people in the historical record.
There are FAR too many acquiescent sheep in this world, who lose the courage to do what is right when threatened. A man of principle cannot turn a blind eye to much of the information contained in these leaks….doing so is a form of complicity. Seems Assange understands this, even if others do not.
There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. (Gandhi)
Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. (MLK)
when these men go to prison or death row I'll bet they wish they were a little smarter in the way they leaked this stuff, I've never seen anybody go to prison with their head held high, as popular as these two are there will be people waiting for them when they go in...at that point will it all matter to them ?
I'm just saying a little planning may have helped them out a little.
Godfather.