WSC Logo

rss

Sign up for the WSC Weekly Howl

A small portion of despair and enlightenment delivered to your inbox every Friday

 

First name
Surname
Email

newissue medrec 316

gplus50

wsc writers comp

chairman 170x140



Welcome, Guest
So, wikileaks, then
(1 viewing) (1) Guest

TOPIC: So, wikileaks, then

  • Reed John
  • Settle down, Beavis.
  • Posts: 13294
posted 09-12-2010 22:55
posted 09-12-2010 23:34
Dead link, Reed.
posted 10-12-2010 00:14
Max, thanks for the clarification. I don't have an opinion either way on whether Assange is or isn't guilty of rape because I haven't seen all the evidence. I agree that he's innocent until proven guilty, but I also think that his accusers should be given the same respect and be assumed to be telling the truth until proven otherwise. I know that the outcome of those two stances is conflicting (it is logically impossible for both Assange to be innocent and his accusers to be telling the truth), which is why courts exist to try and determine the truth of any potentially criminal situation where two accounts differ. However, I also agree with Max that any trial should be watched very carefully to make sure it is fair and not being influenced by separate agendas relating to Wikileaks.
  • ad hoc
  • Erdely Tripper
  • Posts: 7653
posted 10-12-2010 10:13
Excellent speeches from surprising sources: Ron Paul on wikileaks
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywoInPNXZJk
  • Hofzinser
  • An intellectually stunted metro-left sick puppy
  • Posts: 5302
posted 10-12-2010 11:20
Excellent speech indeed, but not that surprising, I'd say. From what I understand of him, Ron Paul's a guy I'd expect to agree with on most issues not related to economics or the welfare state, and I'd particularly expect to agree with him on issues surrounding freedom of speech.
posted 10-12-2010 11:30
Ron Paul's been made head of the Fed oversight committee. I'm not sure if this is a total disaster or a stroke of genius. On the one hand, you want a critic on an oversight panel. On the other, Ron Paul's views on monetary policy are barking mad and there's a pretty strong movement in the US to bring the Fed under direct political control, which would be a complete clusterfuck, especially given the government's clear lack of interest in dealing with the deficit in any serious manner.
posted 10-12-2010 11:41
Typically astute.
posted 10-12-2010 11:49
Surprising in as much as the guy is a Republican, but not surprising if you know Ron Paul. I wonder what speech little Rand would write about it.

Politics is this country is nothing but surreal these days. What do you call an organization that publishes a litany of your incompetence, which you incompetently failed to protect from disclosure? Terrorists! What do you call non-Americans who expose your own betrayal of your laws and core principles? Traitors!
posted 10-12-2010 13:34
Ron Paul's nutty on all sorts of stuff, but can be very good. He's like the chaplain in If.... You want to get him out of the drawer to say his piece, but then put him back in before he says something less palatable to you.
  • ad hoc
  • Erdely Tripper
  • Posts: 7653
posted 12-12-2010 08:31
My favourite wikileak so far: Kim Jong Il tried to get USA to set up Eric Clapton concert

In other news, Assange is occupying the same cell in which Oscar Wilde once resided.

And who needs wikileaks anyway - released tapes show that Nobel Peace Prize winner Henry Kissinger (roughly)said that he didn't care if the USSR started gassing Jews, and his boss Nixon was also a raving anti-semite.
Last Edit: 12-12-2010 08:35:57 by ad hoc.
  • MsD
  • Forum Sweetheart and Friend of the Stars
  • Posts: 5155
posted 12-12-2010 11:44
ad hoc wrote:

In other news, Assange is occupying the same cell in which Oscar Wilde once resided.

.... but did he enter the same passage?

* mimes getting coat *
posted 12-12-2010 15:12
Surprised there was no mention of the Vatican immunity following the Murphy Report's release, it just goes to prove that culpability goes to the very heart of the Church. There were calls at the time for the expulsion of the Papal Nuncio, which would have been pushing the nuclear button in Church-State relation, but all parties were too cowed to take even the slightest action.
Last Edit: 12-12-2010 15:17:16 by Diable Rouge.
posted 12-12-2010 15:53
why not expel the papal nuncio? It's not like he has any business being here.

I think that we knew about this anyway. Diarmuid martin said about as much.
Last Edit: 12-12-2010 15:54:33 by The Awesome Berbaslug!!!.
posted 14-12-2010 14:21
Michael Moore sent me this morning
Why I'm Posting Bail Money for Julian Assange (A statement from Michael Moore)

Tuesday, December 14th, 2010

Friends,

Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from me stating that I have put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail.

Furthermore, I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars.

We were taken to war in Iraq on a lie. Hundreds of thousands are now dead. Just imagine if the men who planned this war crime back in 2002 had had a WikiLeaks to deal with. They might not have been able to pull it off. The only reason they thought they could get away with it was because they had a guaranteed cloak of secrecy. That guarantee has now been ripped from them, and I hope they are never able to operate in secret again.

So why is WikiLeaks, after performing such an important public service, under such vicious attack? Because they have outed and embarrassed those who have covered up the truth. The assault on them has been over the top:

**Sen. Joe Lieberman says WikiLeaks "has violated the Espionage Act."

**The New Yorker's George Packer calls Assange "super-secretive, thin-skinned, [and] megalomaniacal."

**Sarah Palin claims he's "an anti-American operative with blood on his hands" whom we should pursue "with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders."

**Democrat Bob Beckel (Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign manager) said about Assange on Fox: "A dead man can't leak stuff ... there's only one way to do it: illegally shoot the son of a bitch."

**Republican Mary Matalin says "he's a psychopath, a sociopath ... He's a terrorist."

**Rep. Peter A. King calls WikiLeaks a "terrorist organization."

And indeed they are! They exist to terrorize the liars and warmongers who have brought ruin to our nation and to others. Perhaps the next war won't be so easy because the tables have been turned -- and now it's Big Brother who's being watched ... by us!

WikiLeaks deserves our thanks for shining a huge spotlight on all this. But some in the corporate-owned press have dismissed the importance of WikiLeaks ("they've released little that's new!") or have painted them as simple anarchists ("WikiLeaks just releases everything without any editorial control!"). WikiLeaks exists, in part, because the mainstream media has failed to live up to its responsibility. The corporate owners have decimated newsrooms, making it impossible for good journalists to do their job. There's no time or money anymore for investigative journalism. Simply put, investors don't want those stories exposed. They like their secrets kept ... as secrets.

I ask you to imagine how much different our world would be if WikiLeaks had existed 10 years ago. Take a look at this photo. That's Mr. Bush about to be handed a "secret" document on August 6th, 2001. Its heading read: "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US." And on those pages it said the FBI had discovered "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings." Mr. Bush decided to ignore it and went fishing for the next four weeks.

But if that document had been leaked, how would you or I have reacted? What would Congress or the FAA have done? Was there not a greater chance that someone, somewhere would have done something if all of us knew about bin Laden's impending attack using hijacked planes?

But back then only a few people had access to that document. Because the secret was kept, a flight school instructor in San Diego who noticed that two Saudi students took no interest in takeoffs or landings, did nothing. Had he read about the bin Laden threat in the paper, might he have called the FBI? (Please read this essay by former FBI Agent Coleen Rowley, Time's 2002 co-Person of the Year, about her belief that had WikiLeaks been around in 2001, 9/11 might have been prevented.)

Or what if the public in 2003 had been able to read "secret" memos from Dick Cheney as he pressured the CIA to give him the "facts" he wanted in order to build his false case for war? If a WikiLeaks had revealed at that time that there were, in fact, no weapons of mass destruction, do you think that the war would have been launched -- or rather, wouldn't there have been calls for Cheney's arrest?

Openness, transparency -- these are among the few weapons the citizenry has to protect itself from the powerful and the corrupt. What if within days of August 4th, 1964 -- after the Pentagon had made up the lie that our ship was attacked by the North Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin -- there had been a WikiLeaks to tell the American people that the whole thing was made up? I guess 58,000 of our soldiers (and 2 million Vietnamese) might be alive today.

Instead, secrets killed them.

For those of you who think it's wrong to support Julian Assange because of the sexual assault allegations he's being held for, all I ask is that you not be naive about how the government works when it decides to go after its prey. Please -- never, ever believe the "official story." And regardless of Assange's guilt or innocence (see the strange nature of the allegations here), this man has the right to have bail posted and to defend himself. I have joined with filmmakers Ken Loach and John Pilger and writer Jemima Khan in putting up the bail money -- and we hope the judge will accept this and grant his release today.

Might WikiLeaks cause some unintended harm to diplomatic negotiations and U.S. interests around the world? Perhaps. But that's the price you pay when you and your government take us into a war based on a lie. Your punishment for misbehaving is that someone has to turn on all the lights in the room so that we can see what you're up to. You simply can't be trusted. So every cable, every email you write is now fair game. Sorry, but you brought this upon yourself. No one can hide from the truth now. No one can plot the next Big Lie if they know that they might be exposed.

And that is the best thing that WikiLeaks has done. WikiLeaks, God bless them, will save lives as a result of their actions. And any of you who join me in supporting them are committing a true act of patriotism. Period.

I stand today in absentia with Julian Assange in London and I ask the judge to grant him his release. I am willing to guarantee his return to court with the bail money I have wired to said court. I will not allow this injustice to continue unchallenged.

Yours,
Michael Moore
posted 14-12-2010 15:36
Assange has been bailed, with conditions (including a 10pm curfew).
posted 14-12-2010 15:52
And now the Swedes have appealed, so he will be in jail at least until later today.
posted 14-12-2010 17:31
Or they will appeal within 48 hours, or something.
  • Reed John
  • Settle down, Beavis.
  • Posts: 13294
posted 14-12-2010 17:47
Here's that link I tried before.

bit.ly/hJjaTF

Good points that have probably already been made.
posted 15-12-2010 14:07
Wikileaks staff break away, found new site. Basic critique of Assange is that he is a) too anti-American and b) too style-obsessed. In both cases, this threatens wikileak's values as a politically neutral space for whistleblowers of all sorts (also, an interesting point about how Assange in the last year in effect turned wikileaks into a middle-man between would-be leakers and a handful of major national newspapers, including the graun).

Also, Julian Assange's dating profile on OK Cupid has been uncovered, to the delight of many. Grist for the Berbaslug mill.
posted 15-12-2010 14:33
Michael Moore said:

But back then only a few people had access to that document. Because the secret was kept, a flight school instructor in San Diego who noticed that two Saudi students took no interest in takeoffs or landings, did nothing. Had he read about the bin Laden threat in the paper, might he have called the FBI?


I’ve just read Simon Sebag-Montefiore’s “Young Stalin” and he makes the point that the Tsarist secret police were taking a keen interest in the new technology of flight just in case some revolutionary decided to try and fly a ‘plane into a building.

Carry on.
Time to create page: 0.28 seconds

 

© When Saturday Comes Limited 2013 | Contact | Privacy & cookies | Sitemap | Managed hosting by Latitude