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.
Personally, I think they should've released the lending and financial crisis documents first as many more Americans would have paid more attention to that since the direct effects of it are still being felt by them. Perhaps that would have won more popular opinion of the people and made it even more difficult for the US Government to convince people that this is "illegal".
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.
Personally, I think they should've released the lending and financial crisis documents first as many more Americans would have paid more attention to that since the direct effects of it are still being felt by them. Perhaps that would have won more popular opinion of the people and made it even more difficult for the US Government to convince people that this is "illegal".
I have to wonder what the reaction would be if the documents were in regards to actions undertaken by the Russian or Pakistani governments. If the documents showed that the Pakistani government was asking its diplomats to spy on the UN and foreign dignitaries, and collect biometric and financial data on them, would the average Joe be focusing on Julian Assange, or would they be saying Pakistan's actions amounted to a precursor to an act of war?
And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
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.
You honestly can't think of anyone who's gone to prison for something they believe in? I'm talking about a clear conscience, and a firm belief that they've done the right thing... not being happily shackled and giddy as they're led out of court....
I'm sure if Assange is willing to stand for what he believes in for this long, he will not waver in the face of consequence. As for the planning....he's still free, is he not? Again...how could he have done this any differently? maybe the order he released the docs could have helped his cause, as stated above....however...I don't think so. If the next batch of docs DOES negatively impact a major bank....odds are it will have a serious negative affect on the stock market...which, in turn, gives the government and media another reason to demonize him (and we know how well the public filters this kinda shit).
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.
You honestly can't think of anyone who's gone to prison for something they believe in? I'm talking about a clear conscience, and a firm belief that they've done the right thing... not being happily shackled and giddy as they're led out of court....
I'm sure if Assange is willing to stand for what he believes in for this long, he will not waver in the face of consequence. As for the planning....he's still free, is he not? Again...how could he have done this any differently? maybe the order he released the docs could have helped his cause, as stated above....however...I don't think so. If the next batch of docs DOES negatively impact a major bank....odds are it will have a serious negative affect on the stock market...which, in turn, gives the government and media another reason to demonize him (and we know how well the public filters this kinda shit).
reguardless of his consequences or how he feels about his actions this could be the tool that helps to put things straight in our government,well maybe at least a few things anyway and the banking thing could make the enron scam look like a traffic ticket, that would put many banking corporations or even the IRS in a spin...and man would I love to see that.
There's a few things that I really don't get about this whole situation and makes it look suspicious. Part of me wants to accept this for what it is, someone releasing private government information and putting this man and people's lives in jeopardy.
But a little part of me laughs at this situation like its just another fear mongering (sp?) scheme that it is getting so much attention on purpose.
I can't help but ask myself:
Why is this getting so much publicity? I feel like it contradicts itself in that these articles are classified in that they were not meant for the public eye to view. But then CNN has Wikileaks blasted all over its website headlines basically inviting people to view what is released, how to view the articles, and what to be afraid of.
So its like waving a cookie in front of a child and then beating the shit out of the child when he takes and eats it.
Next, why can't this site be shut down? If youtube can shut down videos for copyright infrigement, can't the government close down this site so that it doesn't get more out of hand than it already is? Is it freedom of speech? Scared to be ashamed of what was released and look weak?
It's like they want us to view and be scared of this
I have to wonder what the reaction would be if the documents were in regards to actions undertaken by the Russian or Pakistani governments. If the documents showed that the Pakistani government was asking its diplomats to spy on the UN and foreign dignitaries, and collect biometric and financial data on them, would the average Joe be focusing on Julian Assange, or would they be saying Pakistan's actions amounted to a precursor to an act of war?
I would be more surprised if Pakistan could pull it off, even though I'm sure they try. And it would be foolish to think that a country like Russia doesn't engage in the exact same behavior as the U.S. You don't get that powerful playing hacky sack.
Maybe I've read one too many Tom Clancy novels, but all G20 nations have giant intelligence agencies that spy. If we have files on John Lennon, we had better have dossiers on UN members.
oh and btw I have known many guys that have gone to prison and not one of them felt good in anyway about going in especially after being in for a only a little while.
There's a few things that I really don't get about this whole situation and makes it look suspicious. Part of me wants to accept this for what it is, someone releasing private government information and putting this man and people's lives in jeopardy.
But a little part of me laughs at this situation like its just another fear mongering (sp?) scheme that it is getting so much attention on purpose.
I can't help but ask myself:
Why is this getting so much publicity? I feel like it contradicts itself in that these articles are classified in that they were not meant for the public eye to view. But then CNN has Wikileaks blasted all over its website headlines basically inviting people to view what is released, how to view the articles, and what to be afraid of.
So its like waving a cookie in front of a child and then beating the shit out of the child when he takes and eats it.
Next, why can't this site be shut down? If youtube can shut down videos for copyright infrigement, can't the government close down this site so that it doesn't get more out of hand than it already is? Is it freedom of speech? Scared to be ashamed of what was released and look weak?
It's like they want us to view and be scared of this
Ben
XLNT question, how much don't we know ? ....I smell conspiracy all over this one.
oh and btw I have known many guys that have gone to prison and not one of them felt good in anyway about going in especially after being in for a only a little while.
Godfather.
:roll:...dude…..you’re not understanding me… petty thieves and thugs shouldn’t feel good about ‘going in’; they don’t count as righteous political prisoners…which, based solely on my cursory knowledge of the wikileaks situation, Assange will be if he is imprisoned. I’m thinking people like the Cuban Five, Mordechai Vanunu, Leonard Peltier, Mandela, Gandhi etc…I would guess they were able to go to prison comfortable in the knowledge that they maintained a moral high ground. Also, as I said, I'm not talking about 'feeling good' about it...just feeling at peace with the action that landed them there.
I have to agree somewhat with RoadTripper tho…there is something fishy about all of this. You can’t look at any story like this without questioning who is benefitting from the situation. There is WAY too much political capital on the table here for there to NOT be some serious maneuvering going on behind the scenes. The only thing that gives this an air of legitimacy is the way Assange is being railroaded by the media. road tripper – wikileaks is based out of country, the US has no jurisdiction to shut it down….and what you’re suggesting is internet censorship…perhaps THAT is the hidden agenda here. A justification for US powerbrokers to control internet content, with public support.
I have to wonder what the reaction would be if the documents were in regards to actions undertaken by the Russian or Pakistani governments. If the documents showed that the Pakistani government was asking its diplomats to spy on the UN and foreign dignitaries, and collect biometric and financial data on them, would the average Joe be focusing on Julian Assange, or would they be saying Pakistan's actions amounted to a precursor to an act of war?
I would be more surprised if Pakistan could pull it off, even though I'm sure they try. And it would be foolish to think that a country like Russia doesn't engage in the exact same behavior as the U.S. You don't get that powerful playing hacky sack.
Maybe I've read one too many Tom Clancy novels, but all G20 nations have giant intelligence agencies that spy. If we have files on John Lennon, we had better have dossiers on UN members.
Which brings up another point - if everyone is really spying on everyone else, then what is the big deal? This is merely confirmation of something they probably assumed. For all the insults hurled at foreign leaders in the documents, I'm sure those same people said MUCH worse things about Bush.
My only issue would be whether or not this would hurt diplomatic relations because people will now be worried that their communications could be made public. That being said, as some conservatives are fond of saying whenever the discussion turns to the criminal justice system, if you're playing fast and loose with the rules then you deserve everything that's coming to you.
And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
The only thing that gives this an air of legitimacy is the way Assange is being railroaded by the media. road tripper – wikileaks is based out of country, the US has no jurisdiction to shut it down….and what you’re suggesting is internet censorship…perhaps THAT is the hidden agenda here. A justification for US powerbrokers to control internet content, with public support.
^^^^^
DING DING DING DING!!!!
folks we have a winner!
you put this much more eloquently than i would have,. it is going to be the same way as when the patriot act was passed, the people willingly consenting to a loss of their freedom...
giving up freedom for a false sense of security...it is shameful...
i weep for my country and the ignorant ones who inhabit it sometimes...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
oh and btw I have known many guys that have gone to prison and not one of them felt good in anyway about going in especially after being in for a only a little while.
Godfather.
:roll:...dude…..you’re not understanding me… petty thieves and thugs shouldn’t feel good about ‘going in’; they don’t count as righteous political prisoners…which, based solely on my cursory knowledge of the wikileaks situation, Assange will be if he is imprisoned. I’m thinking people like the Cuban Five, Mordechai Vanunu, Leonard Peltier, Mandela, Gandhi etc…I would guess they were able to go to prison comfortable in the knowledge that they maintained a moral high ground. Also, as I said, I'm not talking about 'feeling good' about it...just feeling at peace with the action that landed them there.
I have to agree somewhat with RoadTripper tho…there is something fishy about all of this. You can’t look at any story like this without questioning who is benefitting from the situation. There is WAY too much political capital on the table here for there to NOT be some serious maneuvering going on behind the scenes. The only thing that gives this an air of legitimacy is the way Assange is being railroaded by the media. road tripper – wikileaks is based out of country, the US has no jurisdiction to shut it down….and what you’re suggesting is internet censorship…perhaps THAT is the hidden agenda here. A justification for US powerbrokers to control internet content, with public support.
thought you might find this interesting, a little different that what we're talking about but still interesting.
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."
Clinton said she discussed the leak with her colleagues at a security summit in Kazakhstan and the revelations will not hurt American diplomacy.
.............
Ok, if the leaks are no big deal and Assange is irrelevant, then WHY GO AFTER HIM. These documents prove that
a) Saudi Arabia has been and continues to supply and support the so-called terrorist fractions in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan and other places.
b) Saudi Arabia was involved in the 9/11 attacks as the majority of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi.
c) The Royal family of Saudi Arabia sold out Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Gaza, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan and others in order to protect them from Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden and Iran who knew the Royal family was involved.
If Clinton’s plan is to let the infighting take care of the problem, then she is right, the revelations will not hurt American diplomacy – because the Bottomline -
Right now the Saudi’s are in the hot seat and even those new F-22s can’t protect them from the enemies from within. These documents prove that the Royal family sold out the entire Islamic region simply to protect their own assets and Western lifestyle. Greed is such a whore and we all know what happens to Islamic whores.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Again... I ask...
Why is it worse to report these things... than the actual things, themselves?
Would I be the one that should be imprisoned if I heard details about a rape... and reported the rape? Shouldn't the rapist get... at the very least... some sort of trouble?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Again... I ask...
Why is it worse to report these things... than the actual things, themselves?
Would I be the one that should be imprisoned if I heard details about a rape... and reported the rape? Shouldn't the rapist get... at the very least... some sort of trouble?
I just hope the financial records on the banking industry are released!That type of stuff has the potential to create some serious Kaos! Hopefully nothing happens to this guy! He's receiving tons of threats, but I'm pretty sure he's also being offered some serious hush money!
Again... I ask...
Why is it worse to report these things... than the actual things, themselves?
Would I be the one that should be imprisoned if I heard details about a rape... and reported the rape? Shouldn't the rapist get... at the very least... some sort of trouble?
I don't get it either. Is it the spin machine of corporate run media? Making it all about Julian instead of what actually is important? Dick Cheney could've released this info and I would say "good for you .....Dick". I don't care who does it.
At one time in US history. This was called good reporting and was written in history books that caused change for the better. Now we don't even talk about the conent.
I hate the media with a passion. They fail us at every turn.
Again... I ask...
Why is it worse to report these things... than the actual things, themselves?
Would I be the one that should be imprisoned if I heard details about a rape... and reported the rape? Shouldn't the rapist get... at the very least... some sort of trouble?
I don't get it either. Is it the spin machine of corporate run media? Making it all about Julian instead of what actually is important? Dick Cheney could've released this info and I would say "good for you .....Dick". I don't care who does it.
At one time in US history. This was called good reporting and was written in history books that caused change for the better. Now we don't even talk about the conent.
I hate the media with a passion. They fail us at every turn.
and our country has a "free press"....with the constant failures of the media it is almost as if we are "press free"...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
I don't get it either. Is it the spin machine of corporate run media? Making it all about Julian instead of what actually is important? Dick Cheney could've released this info and I would say "good for you .....Dick". I don't care who does it.
At one time in US history. This was called good reporting and was written in history books that caused change for the better. Now we don't even talk about the conent.
I hate the media with a passion. They fail us at every turn.
and our country has a "free press"....with the constant failures of the media it is almost as if we are "press free"...
...
The Press used to be known as the 'Fourth Branch of Government' when newsroom editors weren't so interested the business of making money. The Press was the thing that dig around and exposed the crap that the Congress, Courts and White House were doing to us... instead of for us.
Journalism in America is dead... newspapers are dead. Our media doesn't have foriegn bureaus anymore. We rely on the wire services for that. And outlets such as FOX News are a joke. They are not the watchdogs of the people... they are the lap dog for the Republican Party.
...
It is really sad when in order to find out what is going on in America... we need to go to the BBC or CBC. all American 'news' rooms report are snesationalist stories that will fulfill the 5 minute attention of the collectively A.D.D. American viewer.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I don't get it either. Is it the spin machine of corporate run media? Making it all about Julian instead of what actually is important? Dick Cheney could've released this info and I would say "good for you .....Dick". I don't care who does it.
At one time in US history. This was called good reporting and was written in history books that caused change for the better. Now we don't even talk about the conent.
I hate the media with a passion. They fail us at every turn.
and our country has a "free press"....with the constant failures of the media it is almost as if we are "press free"...
...
The Press used to be known as the 'Fourth Branch of Government' when newsroom editors weren't so interested the business of making money. The Press was the thing that dig around and exposed the crap that the Congress, Courts and White House were doing to us... instead of for us.
Journalism in America is dead... newspapers are dead. Our media doesn't have foriegn bureaus anymore. We rely on the wire services for that. And outlets such as FOX News are a joke. They are not the watchdogs of the people... they are the lap dog for the Republican Party.
...
It is really sad when in order to find out what is going on in America... we need to go to the BBC or CBC. all American 'news' rooms report are snesationalist stories that will fulfill the 5 minute attention of the collectively A.D.D. American viewer.
well the fourth branch of government now caters to the corporations, so does that mean tht we are now a completely fascist country, or just 3/4 fascist?
people give me a hard time for posting things from the guardian, ninemsn and other international sources, but i post those because my media does not even report on most of those subjects.
as david cross said, "it is fucked up when i have to read other countries' newspapers to find out what is really going on in my country>"
"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
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
The Guardian, Thursday 2 December 2010
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. Previously a fully fledged Democrat, Lieberman won re-election to the Senate in 2006 as an independent; his status is that of an independent, albeit with continued close associations with the Democratic party's Senate contingent.
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."
• This article was amended on 2 December 2010. The original said: Joe Lieberman, though an independent, is a former Republican who switched to the Democrats last year. This has been corrected.
i am sure they will be back up. those guys at wikileaks have been able to stay a step ahead of those doing these cyber attacks. i am sure they have a contingency plan if the other servers are disabled.
i wonder why they attack the messenger while those guilty of the real crimes are allowed to walk freely and without fear of prosecution...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Damn! Hope this isn't an attack on their site! We need the bank industry info released!
The thought of a bank getting turned upside-down for their shenanigans sounds great, but who will end up suffering the most if one of the biggest financial institutions collapses? The banks are not the ones suffering for their greed throughout the 90's and aughts. I doubt they will be the ones that suffer if Assange's claims are true.
Comments
Personally, I think they should've released the lending and financial crisis documents first as many more Americans would have paid more attention to that since the direct effects of it are still being felt by them. Perhaps that would have won more popular opinion of the people and made it even more difficult for the US Government to convince people that this is "illegal".
:thumbup: I agree with that big time !!!!!
Godfather.
I'm sure if Assange is willing to stand for what he believes in for this long, he will not waver in the face of consequence. As for the planning....he's still free, is he not? Again...how could he have done this any differently? maybe the order he released the docs could have helped his cause, as stated above....however...I don't think so. If the next batch of docs DOES negatively impact a major bank....odds are it will have a serious negative affect on the stock market...which, in turn, gives the government and media another reason to demonize him (and we know how well the public filters this kinda shit).
reguardless of his consequences or how he feels about his actions this could be the tool that helps to put things straight in our government,well maybe at least a few things anyway and the banking thing could make the enron scam look like a traffic ticket, that would put many banking corporations or even the IRS in a spin...and man would I love to see that.
Godfather.
But a little part of me laughs at this situation like its just another fear mongering (sp?) scheme that it is getting so much attention on purpose.
I can't help but ask myself:
Why is this getting so much publicity? I feel like it contradicts itself in that these articles are classified in that they were not meant for the public eye to view. But then CNN has Wikileaks blasted all over its website headlines basically inviting people to view what is released, how to view the articles, and what to be afraid of.
So its like waving a cookie in front of a child and then beating the shit out of the child when he takes and eats it.
Next, why can't this site be shut down? If youtube can shut down videos for copyright infrigement, can't the government close down this site so that it doesn't get more out of hand than it already is? Is it freedom of speech? Scared to be ashamed of what was released and look weak?
It's like they want us to view and be scared of this
Ben
Maybe I've read one too many Tom Clancy novels, but all G20 nations have giant intelligence agencies that spy. If we have files on John Lennon, we had better have dossiers on UN members.
Godfather.
XLNT question, how much don't we know ? ....I smell conspiracy all over this one.
Godfather.
I have to agree somewhat with RoadTripper tho…there is something fishy about all of this. You can’t look at any story like this without questioning who is benefitting from the situation. There is WAY too much political capital on the table here for there to NOT be some serious maneuvering going on behind the scenes. The only thing that gives this an air of legitimacy is the way Assange is being railroaded by the media. road tripper – wikileaks is based out of country, the US has no jurisdiction to shut it down….and what you’re suggesting is internet censorship…perhaps THAT is the hidden agenda here. A justification for US powerbrokers to control internet content, with public support.
Which brings up another point - if everyone is really spying on everyone else, then what is the big deal? This is merely confirmation of something they probably assumed. For all the insults hurled at foreign leaders in the documents, I'm sure those same people said MUCH worse things about Bush.
My only issue would be whether or not this would hurt diplomatic relations because people will now be worried that their communications could be made public. That being said, as some conservatives are fond of saying whenever the discussion turns to the criminal justice system, if you're playing fast and loose with the rules then you deserve everything that's coming to you.
DING DING DING DING!!!!
folks we have a winner!
you put this much more eloquently than i would have,. it is going to be the same way as when the patriot act was passed, the people willingly consenting to a loss of their freedom...
giving up freedom for a false sense of security...it is shameful...
i weep for my country and the ignorant ones who inhabit it sometimes...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
thought you might find this interesting, a little different that what we're talking about but still interesting.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/12/02/ne ... perts-say/
Godfather.
Clinton said she discussed the leak with her colleagues at a security summit in Kazakhstan and the revelations will not hurt American diplomacy.
.............
Ok, if the leaks are no big deal and Assange is irrelevant, then WHY GO AFTER HIM. These documents prove that
a) Saudi Arabia has been and continues to supply and support the so-called terrorist fractions in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan and other places.
b) Saudi Arabia was involved in the 9/11 attacks as the majority of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi.
c) The Royal family of Saudi Arabia sold out Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Gaza, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan and others in order to protect them from Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden and Iran who knew the Royal family was involved.
If Clinton’s plan is to let the infighting take care of the problem, then she is right, the revelations will not hurt American diplomacy – because the Bottomline -
Right now the Saudi’s are in the hot seat and even those new F-22s can’t protect them from the enemies from within. These documents prove that the Royal family sold out the entire Islamic region simply to protect their own assets and Western lifestyle. Greed is such a whore and we all know what happens to Islamic whores.
Why is it worse to report these things... than the actual things, themselves?
Would I be the one that should be imprisoned if I heard details about a rape... and reported the rape? Shouldn't the rapist get... at the very least... some sort of trouble?
Hail, Hail!!!
I just hope the financial records on the banking industry are released!That type of stuff has the potential to create some serious Kaos! Hopefully nothing happens to this guy! He's receiving tons of threats, but I'm pretty sure he's also being offered some serious hush money!
I don't get it either. Is it the spin machine of corporate run media? Making it all about Julian instead of what actually is important? Dick Cheney could've released this info and I would say "good for you .....Dick". I don't care who does it.
At one time in US history. This was called good reporting and was written in history books that caused change for the better. Now we don't even talk about the conent.
I hate the media with a passion. They fail us at every turn.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
The Press used to be known as the 'Fourth Branch of Government' when newsroom editors weren't so interested the business of making money. The Press was the thing that dig around and exposed the crap that the Congress, Courts and White House were doing to us... instead of for us.
Journalism in America is dead... newspapers are dead. Our media doesn't have foriegn bureaus anymore. We rely on the wire services for that. And outlets such as FOX News are a joke. They are not the watchdogs of the people... they are the lap dog for the Republican Party.
...
It is really sad when in order to find out what is going on in America... we need to go to the BBC or CBC. all American 'news' rooms report are snesationalist stories that will fulfill the 5 minute attention of the collectively A.D.D. American viewer.
Hail, Hail!!!
people give me a hard time for posting things from the guardian, ninemsn and other international sources, but i post those because my media does not even report on most of those subjects.
as david cross said, "it is fucked up when i have to read other countries' newspapers to find out what is really going on in my country>"
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
having actually been to this site and read some of these cables....the information ins't all that groundbreaking.
Oh no!!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/de ... ers-amazon
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
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
The Guardian, Thursday 2 December 2010
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. Previously a fully fledged Democrat, Lieberman won re-election to the Senate in 2006 as an independent; his status is that of an independent, albeit with continued close associations with the Democratic party's Senate contingent.
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."
• This article was amended on 2 December 2010. The original said: Joe Lieberman, though an independent, is a former Republican who switched to the Democrats last year. This has been corrected.
i wonder why they attack the messenger while those guilty of the real crimes are allowed to walk freely and without fear of prosecution...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)