I'm not for the outing of spies or putting journalist in danger. Maybe if the mainstream media did a better job of reporting things and were actually in the job of gaining access to information that was relevant and reporting that, there wouldn't be a need to wikileaks.
I read somewhere that Wikileaks refused to give a copy of the documents to CNN as they wouldn't sign a confidentiality agreement...
Who said irony is dead?
Yeah, that was fucking priceless.
Actually, there is no United States federal privilege for the press, so, although one can promise not to reveal sources, one is making a promise that one has no ability to keep. If called before a federal court in a state with no press shield and granted immunity, a reporter would have to reveal the source or would be breaking the law. Such an agreement to never reveal a source would therefore be an agreement to break the law, would be invalid, and unenforceable. So the real irony is any U.S. reporter giving the assurance.
BUT - wont this lead to much tighter restrictions and encryption on these types of communiques in teh future? thereby damaging free flow of information, future acces to similar information, and general openness? Contrary to what Wikileaks claims they want to achieve?
None of this stuff is really surprising anyway - embasy folk talking shit about a guy like Berlusconi behind perceived closed doors, saudis and iranians knee deep in pro terrorist activity, the US intelligence community keeping tabs on everybody, its all kind of a given, isnt it?
Anyway, I support the leak - it forces the US government to deal with the blunt realities of the current day and age, as opposed to sticking their head in the sand and keeping their fingers crossed -
much the same as filesharing vs. record and movie companies - theyre just going tp have to deal with this, and reinvent themselves, no matter how much they dislike it.
The future is here, "all your base are belong to us" - deal.
I suspect this leak also has a lot to do with the US going after Assange, and his apparently huge ego, This, in part, is his way of retaliating. Its a david and goliath story - innurnets guys vs the US government.
BUT - Wont this lead to much tighter restrictions and encryption on these types of communiques in teh future? thereby damaging free flow of information, future acces to similar information, and general openess?
you mean be used as justification for 'homeland security' measures... you can bet on it
None of this stuff is really surprising anyway - embasy folk talking shit about a guy like Berlusconi behind perceived closed doors, saudis and iranians knee deep in pro terroist activity, its all kind of a given, isnt it?
not really, thus prompting the tinfoil headwear brigade to begin pontificating on their multi-layered counter-counter-counter intelligence false flag theorum.
One thing that is strange... no harsh words directed at Israel.
Nothing mentioning the flotilla debacle a few months back, or the ongoing settlement drama, nor the Israeli elections...
Should it surprise me that the necessary art of statecraft is lost on the internet generation, who willingly puts its underwear size, current state of arousal, and present physical location online for the world to see? No, I suppose that it does not.
Please research the terms "back channels" and "Cuban missile crisis." If the reading is longer than two full internet pages and the terms are multisyllablic, please stick with it.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
luck said:
Should it surprise me that the necessary art of statecraft is lost on the internet generation, who willingly puts its underwear size, current state of arousal, and present physical location online for the world to see? No, I suppose that it does not.
Please research the terms "back channels" and "Cuban missile crisis." If the reading is longer than two full internet pages and the terms are multisyllablic, please stick with it.
You lost me at "statecraft". Can I get a pictoral summary of what you are trying to sell?
Should it surprise me that the necessary art of statecraft is lost on the internet generation, who willingly puts its underwear size, current state of arousal, and present physical location online for the world to see? No, I suppose that it does not.
Please research the terms "back channels" and "Cuban missile crisis." If the reading is longer than two full internet pages and the terms are multisyllablic, please stick with it.
Should it surprise me that the tools and methods of the internet generation are lost on the statecraft artists who willingly put their innermost thoughts, current state of affairs, and assets' physical location online for all their 2 million bestest friends to see? No, i suppose that it does not.
Please reseach the terms Social networking, web 2.0 and cloud computing. Etc...
One thing that is strange... no harsh words directed at Israel.
Tho, oddly enough more words by other middle eastern countries wanting to use the US to bomb Iran...
I'm starting to feel like the government should not worry what so ever about these leaks. Since if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide.
But then again, this shit is chess, not checkers...
U.S. using its embassies around the world as part of a global spy network to not only spy on enemies citizens and dignitaries, but their allies as well.
I wonder if there are people in the State Department who don't care for the new direction this administration has taken.
I wonder if they thought this would be a good way to get the administration to start using the stick more than the carrot. Or a way to put the brakes on increased transparency.
In regards to Assage, or whatever the wikileaks guy name is; I never heard a word about him good or bad, until he started embarrassing the US in recent months. Now I hear all kinds of bad stuff including him being a rapist. Why the sudden, negative, high profile?
Should it surprise me that the necessary art of statecraft is lost on the internet generation, who willingly puts its underwear size, current state of arousal, and present physical location online for the world to see? No, I suppose that it does not.
Please research the terms "back channels" and "Cuban missile crisis." If the reading is longer than two full internet pages and the terms are multisyllablic, please stick with it.
You lost me at "statecraft". Can I get a pictoral summary of what you are trying to sell?
I had anticipated that the terms "underwear" and "arousal" would have been pictoral enough, but in case ADD and Ritalin have crushed imagination altogether, I had attempted another method. Sadly, the image of an extended middle finger has proven too exhausting for my 33.6 k modem.
Seeing as how I do not have enough esoteric NOLA-speak in my vocabulary (post-Bogage), I feel that we might be at an impasse.
Corporate accountability is a great thing. Busting trusts is okay with me, as long as it's not haphazard. I'd sign off on this in general. In practice, however, The big guys will just employ even less transparency and more attorneys and insurance agents. All the while, the little guys manning teller windows will all be out of jobs. Problem companies meeting a grisly fate might be a welcome turn of events, but at what price victory?
In regards to Assage, or whatever the wikileaks guy name is; I never heard a word about him good or bad, until he started embarrassing the US in recent months. Now I hear all kinds of bad stuff including him being a rapist. Why the sudden, negative, high profile?
[/img]
yep you answered your own question. smear campaign. the rape allegations were thrown out of court, utterly without basis. again everyone was aware of those allegations monthes ago, he made it clear in the press people were trying to smear him.
if you read his blog, you can get the impression of a smart guy with somewhat confusing thought process.
Actually, there is no United States federal privilege for the press, so, although one can promise not to reveal sources, one is making a promise that one has no ability to keep. If called before a federal court in a state with no press shield and granted immunity, a reporter would have to reveal the source or would be breaking the law. Such an agreement to never reveal a source would therefore be an agreement to break the law, would be invalid, and unenforceable. So the real irony is
next wikileaks target - "a major american bank will find itself turned inside out", according to an interview in Forbes magazine. hmmm i'm all for accountability. but is wrecking the US economy even more a very smart idea? no.
the rape allegations were thrown out of court, utterly without basis.
Wrong.
"On 18 November, Stockholm District Court approved a request to detain Assange for questioning on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion.[91] Director of Public Prosecutions Marianne Ny, who had reopened the investigation in September, said she had requested the warrant because, "so far, we have not been able to meet with him to accomplish the interrogation."[91][92] Assange's British legal counsel Mark Stephens disputed this saying "we were willing to meet at the Swedish embassy or Scotland Yard or via video link" and that "all of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate".[93][94] On 20 November an international arrest warrant was issued via Interpol by Sweden's National Criminal Police force. In addition an EU arrest warrant was issued through the Schengen Information System. "We made sure that all the police forces in the world would see it", a spokesman for the National Criminal Police said."
He'll be in prison or pushing up daisies within a year.
really? He has been on many TV talk shows...if the feds wanted to get him they have had many opportunities and if anyone wanted to take him out, they too have had many opportunites.
the rape allegations were thrown out of court, utterly without basis.
Wrong.
"On 18 November, Stockholm District Court approved a request to detain Assange for questioning on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion.[91] Director of Public Prosecutions Marianne Ny, who had reopened the investigation in September, said she had requested the warrant because, "so far, we have not been able to meet with him to accomplish the interrogation."[91][92] Assange's British legal counsel Mark Stephens disputed this saying "we were willing to meet at the Swedish embassy or Scotland Yard or via video link" and that "all of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate".[93][94] On 20 November an international arrest warrant was issued via Interpol by Sweden's National Criminal Police force. In addition an EU arrest warrant was issued through the Schengen Information System. "We made sure that all the police forces in the world would see it", a spokesman for the National Criminal Police said."
"The Swedish Prosecution Authority website said chief prosecutor Eva Finne had come to the decision that Julian Assange was not subject to arrest.
In a brief statement Eva Finne said: "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape."
The website said there would be no further immediate comment.
Earlier, Karin Rosander, communications head at Sweden's prosecutors' office, said there were two separate allegations against Mr Assange, one of rape and the other of molestation. She gave no details of the accusations. She said that as far as she knew they related to alleged incidents that took place in Sweden.
On Saturday she said the police investigation into the molestation charge continued.
Ms Rosander said: "The [chief prosecutor] will look into that later. She hasn't been able to do that, but that's not enough for being arrested. It's not a serious enough crime."
some sort of weirdness going on there for sure. here's assange's reply
He'll be in prison or pushing up daisies within a year.
really? He has been on many TV talk shows...if the feds wanted to get him they have had many opportunities and if anyone wanted to take him out, they too have had many opportunites.
In a statement he made yesterday he said he would be revealing facts about "corrupt and murderous leadership from Bahrain to Brazil".
The U.S. might put up with his shenanigans but not everyone will.
Not to mention there are others that can easily take his place.
Nothing to say the man doesn't have a back-up plan.
Right, this is the thing. Pandora's Box has been cracked into pieces. The only positive I can see is the secrets released are RELATIVELY benign and that the diplomatic community will put in safeguards to HELP prevent another such dump. Certainly the game has been changed and not for the better.
Comments
haha
Actually, there is no United States federal privilege for the press, so, although one can promise not to reveal sources, one is making a promise that one has no ability to keep. If called before a federal court in a state with no press shield and granted immunity, a reporter would have to reveal the source or would be breaking the law. Such an agreement to never reveal a source would therefore be an agreement to break the law, would be invalid, and unenforceable. So the real irony is any U.S. reporter giving the assurance.
None of this stuff is really surprising anyway - embasy folk talking shit about a guy like Berlusconi behind perceived closed doors, saudis and iranians knee deep in pro terrorist activity, the US intelligence community keeping tabs on everybody, its all kind of a given, isnt it?
Anyway, I support the leak - it forces the US government to deal with the blunt realities of the current day and age, as opposed to sticking their head in the sand and keeping their fingers crossed -
much the same as filesharing vs. record and movie companies - theyre just going tp have to deal with this, and reinvent themselves, no matter how much they dislike it.
The future is here, "all your base are belong to us" - deal.
I suspect this leak also has a lot to do with the US going after Assange, and his apparently huge ego, This, in part, is his way of retaliating. Its a david and goliath story - innurnets guys vs the US government.
2-0 to the innnurnet guys.
you mean be used as justification for 'homeland security' measures... you can bet on it
not really, thus prompting the tinfoil headwear brigade to begin pontificating on their multi-layered counter-counter-counter intelligence false flag theorum.
One thing that is strange... no harsh words directed at Israel.
Nothing mentioning the flotilla debacle a few months back, or the ongoing settlement drama, nor the Israeli elections...
BTW, just because it appears in a government memo doesn't mean it's true, and ambassadors are notoriously unreliable sources of info.
I don't know whether there are nukes in Holland or not, but taking all of these documents at face value is a fool's errand.
Please research the terms "back channels" and "Cuban missile crisis." If the reading is longer than two full internet pages and the terms are multisyllablic, please stick with it.
You lost me at "statecraft". Can I get a pictoral summary of what you are trying to sell?
Should it surprise me that the tools and methods of the internet generation are lost on the statecraft artists who willingly put their innermost thoughts, current state of affairs, and assets' physical location online for all their 2 million bestest friends to see? No, i suppose that it does not.
Please reseach the terms Social networking, web 2.0 and cloud computing. Etc...
Tho, oddly enough more words by other middle eastern countries wanting to use the US to bomb Iran...
I'm starting to feel like the government should not worry what so ever about these leaks. Since if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide.
But then again, this shit is chess, not checkers...
U.S. using its embassies around the world as part of a global spy network to not only spy on enemies citizens and dignitaries, but their allies as well.
:bizzo:
I wonder if they thought this would be a good way to get the administration to start using the stick more than the carrot. Or a way to put the brakes on increased transparency.
In regards to Assage, or whatever the wikileaks guy name is; I never heard a word about him good or bad, until he started embarrassing the US in recent months. Now I hear all kinds of bad stuff including him being a rapist. Why the sudden, negative, high profile?
Dumbfucks.
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/wikileaks-julian-assange-wants-to-spill-your-corporate-secrets/
I had anticipated that the terms "underwear" and "arousal" would have been pictoral enough, but in case ADD and Ritalin have crushed imagination altogether, I had attempted another method. Sadly, the image of an extended middle finger has proven too exhausting for my 33.6 k modem.
Seeing as how I do not have enough esoteric NOLA-speak in my vocabulary (post-Bogage), I feel that we might be at an impasse.
Hold on. This might work:
To my knowledge, these leaked documents were Embassy Cable transactions and not e-mails.
Corporate accountability is a great thing. Busting trusts is okay with me, as long as it's not haphazard. I'd sign off on this in general. In practice, however, The big guys will just employ even less transparency and more attorneys and insurance agents. All the while, the little guys manning teller windows will all be out of jobs. Problem companies meeting a grisly fate might be a welcome turn of events, but at what price victory?
yep you answered your own question. smear campaign. the rape allegations were thrown out of court, utterly without basis. again everyone was aware of those allegations monthes ago, he made it clear in the press people were trying to smear him.
if you read his blog, you can get the impression of a smart guy with somewhat confusing thought process.
http://web.archive.org/web/20071020051936/http://iq.org/
Land of the fr....
Fucking LOL
That's an extraordinary rendition of events.
http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/
Wrong.
"On 18 November, Stockholm District Court approved a request to detain Assange for questioning on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion.[91] Director of Public Prosecutions Marianne Ny, who had reopened the investigation in September, said she had requested the warrant because, "so far, we have not been able to meet with him to accomplish the interrogation."[91][92] Assange's British legal counsel Mark Stephens disputed this saying "we were willing to meet at the Swedish embassy or Scotland Yard or via video link" and that "all of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate".[93][94] On 20 November an international arrest warrant was issued via Interpol by Sweden's National Criminal Police force. In addition an EU arrest warrant was issued through the Schengen Information System. "We made sure that all the police forces in the world would see it", a spokesman for the National Criminal Police said."
I'd love to take out some life insurance on him with me being the benefactor.
He'll be in prison or pushing up daisies within a year.
Not sure if they can kill his ego though.
really? He has been on many TV talk shows...if the feds wanted to get him they have had many opportunities and if anyone wanted to take him out, they too have had many opportunites.
Nothing to say the man doesn't have a back-up plan.
oh sorry, i didn't see that one. i thought the situation was still http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11049316 because at that time the chief prosecutor completely brushed it off >
"The Swedish Prosecution Authority website said chief prosecutor Eva Finne had come to the decision that Julian Assange was not subject to arrest.
In a brief statement Eva Finne said: "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape."
The website said there would be no further immediate comment.
Earlier, Karin Rosander, communications head at Sweden's prosecutors' office, said there were two separate allegations against Mr Assange, one of rape and the other of molestation. She gave no details of the accusations. She said that as far as she knew they related to alleged incidents that took place in Sweden.
On Saturday she said the police investigation into the molestation charge continued.
Ms Rosander said: "The [chief prosecutor] will look into that later. She hasn't been able to do that, but that's not enough for being arrested. It's not a serious enough crime."
some sort of weirdness going on there for sure. here's assange's reply
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/71698,people,news,julian-assange-hits-back-at-sweden-over-rape-case-arrest-warrant
In a statement he made yesterday he said he would be revealing facts about "corrupt and murderous leadership from Bahrain to Brazil".
The U.S. might put up with his shenanigans but not everyone will.
Right, this is the thing. Pandora's Box has been cracked into pieces. The only positive I can see is the secrets released are RELATIVELY benign and that the diplomatic community will put in safeguards to HELP prevent another such dump. Certainly the game has been changed and not for the better.