Vote For Julian!

He will mysteriously be killed by a prison inmate while awaiting trial.

Hey! - I also leak in secret. But you didn't hear Me say that.

i think they have doctors for that

+^d

p.s.
My support for WikiLeaks is a more direct philosophical/ideological one ( more related to Seneca ),....but I appreciate your more ,....uhm,...."pragmatic" elaboration.

Mil gracias, hombre.

What media? Everything I've seen coming from the main media so far is turning this guy into a demon, from the New York Times to MSBC. So, what the hell are you talking about?

Dude, Assange is leaking his wares directly to the London Guardian, NY Times and a host of other major news outlets.

Time Magazine is promoting him a potential person of the year. Look up Julian Assange in YouTube and you will get countless appearances on all kinds of media outlets

The mainstream media loves him and it's the politicians who are feigning that Assange is a dangerous terrorist, a rapist or whatever.

Historically, whistleblowers aren't media darlings as the media's first order of business is to be the mouthpiece of the government. Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds was one of the whisteblowers who were almost completely ignored by the mainstream media.

Hitler was Time's person of the year in 39 - "person of the year" only means the person Time's consider to have the most influence in the world, disregarding if it's for good or evil.

Here's an article in the NY Times equating Assange to Ahmadinejad.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/opinion/05freeman.html?_r=1&scp=8&sq=w...

All the media outlets that were working with Assange are getting out of the way and letting all the shit land on him.

Even Obermann was speaking against him for Christ's sakes! You must be talking about Russian Today or some other extremist liberal channel that goes beyond MSNBC.

yet when it suites a comfortable narrative, you cite wikileaks?
how does that work?
he is credible on tuesdays but not mondays?

you would understand if you fancied tin foil hats

You must not have read that article. That opinion piece wasn't equating Assange to Ahmadinejad, but rather saying that because of Wikileaks, Iran would somehow have political leverage as a consequence.

Here is the context to seemed to have missed:

"While some hard-line analysts and pundits are relieved to find the Arabs “on our side” and feel that this disclosure will help us form a stronger alliance against Tehran, it’s more likely that the leaks will simply raise Iran’s prestige by adding to the persistent overestimation of its influence and abilities.

Mr. Assange’s grand accomplishment will be nothing more than to make it far harder for American diplomats to get candid answers from their Gulf Arab and Israeli counterparts."

I don't believe this to be the case, but that is the opinion of Chas Freeman, formerly chosen to be on Obama's security staff, who has much more experience in this field than I have.

Hitler was a media darling too; the US media used him as a means to an ends, just like they are using Assange.

Assange has been hyped relentlessly, even more so than Obama Barack and Sarah Palin IMO.

I'm just saying that you don't get on every major news television outlet and get reported on by every major newspaper for no reason.

I believe the reason for all the media hype is that Assange, like Daniel Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers) have hard evidence detailing what's been going on. Like Ellsberg, the release of information was done out of the governments control. Sibel Edmond had the goods on the Bush thugs, but never publicly released the all information for unfettered examination. If she had, she would have been treated the same as Assange and Ellsberg.

Governments are always terrified of the truth getting out.The main reason, IMO is because it reveals the power elite for what they really are, hypocrites, robbers and murderers. If revealing this kind of information is a crime, it's only because the unwashed masses will begin to expect them to begin to act the same way they expect us to act, i.e. morally and honestly.

The unvarnished truth that is, amigo.

Yepper. Most of this stuff is HARDLY "secret",....it just wasn't THROWN IN THE FACE of the powers that be. F the powers that be. All of em !

Simple. he claims to want a free press. he is not helping that transpire with his leaks. with a free press also comes responsibility. he shows none. he uses stolen material and refuses to back up its veracity. he sought a shortcut to get his name and brand out there into the media world for his own profit and ego. the information he passes on, true or false, is consistantly one sided with an obvious anti-american bent to it. he claims he is for total transparancy on all levels yet refuses to answer criminal charges brought against him. he claims he wants to improve the system and yet he acts in only anti-establishment ways, refusing to submit himself to that same system. Had he saud 'i want to be the guy that brings all the shitty things i feel the US mostly and other places occasionally do in secret to light by any means necessary regardless of repercussions to anyone' then fine i would say yeah he is trying to be that guy. but he claims to want to better the world, and specifically the press, and with the power of the press comes a responsibility to the public which real media outles for the most part at least pay lip service to, and he clearly does not.

So, you expect him to play by the rules of the system he's attempting to change?

I wonder what you think about this:

http://www.crimethinc.com/texts/harbinger/definition.php

again, he is not claiming he wants to change the rules of journalism, so no. he is claiming to want to make a free more transparent and therefor safer world, and his actions do nothing to further his claimed goal.

The leaks on US military operations and diplomacy has not put anyone's life at risk. There have been plenty of allegations, but not one record of a linked event. Wikileaks has released more classified documents in 4 years than the press of the entire world, in all of history. WikiLeaks does not release material until they have verified each line of the received documents. You are simply speaking out of the fear you have for Julian Assange's motives, but have yet to make substantial argument. Your comments are subjective opinions that are being pressed as if we should just agree without question. Certainly, Julian Assange has been thrusted into the spotlight for the largest leaks of classified information, what else could you expect? Do you seriously believe everyone should just assume that is all he was seeking to achieve? Have you looked into the Julian Assange's history? I just want to know how you could come to such conclusions.

no actually it has. by disclosing private plans diplomaticac agendas and personal feelings officials shared, lives are at risk due to retribution. should iraq or even some lone terrorist decide that since he read on wikileaks that saudi told the US to bomb iraq, he in turn is going to strike at saudi, then lives are at risk. should more military be needed to bolster security because tensions are running higher in korea due to things releases in wikileaks, then these soldiers are at greater risk. should the current wikileak report on various US and UK important locations for national security be used by some group or person for nefarious purposes then yes lives are at risk. these are all factors that responsible journalists take into consideration that wikileaks has ignored.

sadly its not changing anything, and the plague, a nuclear attack, or trees turning into gold would also change the US. in my opinion not for the better. Change for changes sake is not always good, and add in that his actions havent changed anything in any positive way yet, i pretty much stick to my assertions.

cmon now you know that doesnt mean that. thats just silly. and as i said even if it were all true, that doesnt change a single thing i have said, nor make the inf magically not stolen, or suddenly not putting lives at risk, or automatically not irresponsible.

I don't personally care about Julian Assange or his personal life. I do like that War Crimes might be prosecuted and that people will get their day in court for crimes against humanity. I don't like the idea that the US actively obstructs justice and protects the the Bush 6 from being charged before the Spanish courts.. I don't like the idea that the US security insanity has burst the boundaries of anything the east Germans ever dreamed of.

WikiLeaks is saviour, and Julian Assange is just the spokesman. If he leaves it won't die and it won't be forgotten.

what war crimes has wikileaks exposed? please point me in that direction because in reading through them all i must have missed that. I also hope that in general, war crimes not occur, and should they occur they are investigated and prosecuted. But wikileaks as far as i know hasnt revealed any yet that i have seen to be honest, so please let me know where and when it is that they do.

As fo the US obstructing justice, I too am against that and hope when it goes on, as I am sad to say I am sure it does, it is rooted out responsibly and investigated fully and then punishment and changes are made. But again, wikileaks really hasn't shown a whole lot of that either.And here's an interesting fact about me: I hope that ANYONE or nation that tries to obstruct justice receives the same treatment. julien has not made it very clear that he shares that sentiment, judging by his actions so far.

That is actually a rather down the rabbi- hole argument. The US tortures prisoners who may or may not be guilty of any particular crime (and after the fact several at least proved to be innocent and not to have deserved such treatment), murders reporters from the air in what used to be considered disproportional force and a blatant war crime when the Germans or the Japanese did similar things. And now you blame the messenger who by pointing these things out supposedly endangers the safety of those soldiers on the ground.

The people who want to shoot and kill the soldiers (and possibly me) are already convinced that the the US has tortured and pillaged, (I really wish they were wrong.)

The only thing that WikiLeaks adds to the equation is that perhaps jurisprudence might come back into style, suspects charged and tried and the guilty punished.

The rest of the world used to trust the US to stick to rules and punish its own when they got out of hand.

No more, and that is why something like WikiLeaks has become necessary.

What is your solution, if we can't even get Jason Lu in front of a judge?????

Again, wikileaks did not reveal any of the things you state. You are taking alleged events out of context and then saying that wikileaks revealed these events to the world, if i am reading you correctly. If so, that is untrue. This argument isn't about US or any other countrys policies, wrongdoings, or popular support. Its about calling this guy and wikileaks a good thing when he and they have done nothing to justify that to date, as i have repeatedly shown in the prior posts, and noone has really shown otherwise.

again, the event you mention of torturing prisoners, killing reporters etc may or may not have happened. i think they may have, but regardless, wikileaks didnt break that intel, or offer proof that it happened, so your argument is fallacious.

Hi I sort of assume that you had been following the wikileaks discussion for more than the last few weeks. "Collateral Murder" http://www.collateralmurder.com/ was released about four months ago and is the video and audio associated with the shooting of two Reuters photographers, and several other civilians. I would love to continue the discussion but I think our time zones are a bit different.

When I say war crime, I mean these guy were carrying cameras, The audio claims that the cameras look like Uzis and therefore the command is given to fire. That kind of engagement rules are war crimes plane and simple. There is no way that you can blame the "fog of war" in this case.

It used to be that deadly force was only supposed to be used when there was a clear and present danger, i.e. someone is going to be shot whether you do anything or not.

This wasn't the case at all. WikiLeaks did publish this, and the US hasn't done anything except say this is business as usual and WikiLeaks are the bad guys.

If you want to go point to point sure we can start trading footnotes and references, but I had assumed you were up on your reading.

One last point though yes reading the cables is boring for the most part, but WikiLeaks doesn't claim to put things in context they publish and let the journalists do the rest.

My reference to the war crimes is the cable refering to the Obama administration pressuring Spain to drop the prosecution of the Bush six. The cable was published on Dec 5th and Mother Jones wrote an article about it. It took me a day to get past Jester's DDOS so I could confirm it myself. the cable was dated April 17th 2009. In case you want to risk your freedom and read the governments own words on this.
I think it is valuable to know that the USG did itself think that this is what it was doing in pressuring Spain, and was happy with the results.

again, what is your solution?

wikileaks is a not-for-profit organization, they heavily depend on donations

yeah and?

my solution to what? the way that governments worldwide are controlled by multinational corps, banks and the like and doing misdeeds and actively keeping their citizens in the dark while creating an illusion of freedom? well i would say that more people need to stand up and say no where it occurs, to act, to put themselves on the line not jeopardize others to playout some hidden bias or agenda. example: i feel that the lack of gay rights in america is appaling. i feel that people who want to get married should have the ceremonies themselves, and act as married couples. not in churches, because church ceromonies are their own purview, and if a gay member of the any church wants to change its chutchs doctrines, there are ways to try and do that. but since marriage in the US is seen as a business arrangement of sorts, treat it as such, and enter into one with whomever you want. if the hospital doesnt let you visit your spouse due to anti gay marriage policies, insist. if the police come, continue to insist. put yourself on the line, as rosa parks did, and others who risked it all for their rights. if your insurance company wont pay your spouses bills, tell the hospital to fight it out with them. if they sue you, again, fight back, use the system. you very well may lose a lot and fail. but if everyone who believes this is a just cause does so, then the tides will change, as ghandi, rosa parks desmund tutu and others have done and shown.

wikileaks does not do this. they use stolen intel and unverified sources to one sidedly attack the US and its so called alliances all with in order to get one mans message across and get him and his company a spot in the media world without having to earn it or use it responsibly.

as for the bush six/obama pressure on spain, that wasnt a state secret, nor was it a war crime. it was the government taking a position. you and i may not agree with that position as should be our right, but it wasnt a massive secret just something that wasn't 'sexy' enough to garner huge attention in waht passes for the media these days. all wikileaks did is put something into a slightly larger spotlight in this case that is honestly a matter of opinion, obama has his and we have ours. or is it a secret that governments pressure others to do the things or not do the things they think they should or shouldnt do? sure if your argument is the bush six should be investigated and tried if all allegations are true, i agree, and i think our government should allow all to get a fair hearing and not squash it. but is the wikileak report that this happened news? no. is it earth shattering in anyway?no does it improve the world at all?no what would do all those things is if people of the world in that case said ' we demand an investigation to be fairly held and if wrongdoing occured, those responsible should be punished.

you claim that Julian is just pushing his "brand" Wikileaks just for fame and fortune is ridiculous. You must know the consequences of releasing classified documents and yet if someone is willing to take the risk of facing big governments, that just cannot be just for fame. What is the use of fame if it cannot be enjoyed. If Assange wanted fame we wouldn't have seen these documents and the world would not even know what is happening inside the government.

Ah, when you feel you are a target you ignore everyone else in the line of fire. WikiLeaks has been around since 2006 and The US is merely an incidental target. Browse some of the older stuff about the crown prince of Thailand, Barnes and Noble store management, Kenya... You are not special... NO it is just your turn and you deserve it.
:P

I consider torture a war crime, that was the basis for the Spanish indictment. Pressuring them to drop it might be considered in milder terms but the war crime is still on the table :P

Get it out into the open and discuss. In one you are right, wikileaks should drop out of the discussion and content should be considered. But that is exactly what the USG doesn't want which is why they pay Mr. Jester to silence them.

If Julian Assange and his content is irrelavent then why not ignore them?????

rosa parks risked her life and health for her cause. jackie robinson too, as well as ghandi and many others. they didnt seek interviews on larry king or try to charge fees to speak at events. they didnt hire media consultants. and more importantly they didnt put any one else's life at risk to fight for their beliefs. wikileaks has done all of this. as i have said before if you want to call yourself a journalist, then you must recognize that is a public service, a service for the public. a responsibility for public safety goes hand in hand with that, and true journalists have worked for years to learn and earn the right to call themselves that. he bought some stolem intel, hacked some more himself, and published it on a blog for all intents an purposes. the rest, the death threats, the alleged government plots are smoke and mirrors to cover it all up. i would bet that lady gaga got more credible death threats today alone than julian did this week. does that make her a freedom fighter?

i consider it a war crime as well, and yes many people should be screaming for investigation into this as possible. but that doesnt relate to wikileaks. they had something on that sure, but all the rest? the many things released that could cost lives? had julian posted a story about that specific case, i would say preach on. and i probably wouldnt have heard about it, and he knows that as well, that is why he releases all the other stuff, in my opinion irresponsibly. end does not justify the means, and in this case i am not even convinced that his self proclaimed ends are true, and his real motivations at all altruistic.

yeah he has at times put other stuff out, and if i indicated he has never, i apologize. but i think its fairly obvious he has a bias and a slant here, and there is a HUGE differance in releasing info that barnes and noble is treating employees poorly or illegally and putting lives in harms way by publishing documents detailing locations the US and UK consider important for communications, triage, health services and more in the case of attack. that is simple sensationalism, is reckless, and irresponsible in the least

Rosa Parks, yes, Ghandi, yes, Jackie Robinson I am not so sure about, He was courageous yes, but his risk was about on the level of Lena Horne.

Putting your life on the line betting that horses don't like to break their own legs is a different level risk. Though perhaps you are right and we can put Xe on the same level as the KKK and then that puts Julian and Jackie almost on the same level... But I am stil not sure, Jackie Robinson never got Washington on his case. and that might have been because he fell in love with a nice black girl hmm. Na, I don't think the comparison is quite a match up...

I am pretty sure that the password for the history file is a big reason that the Ninja/Xe/Blackwater guys haven't renditioned/killed Julian yet. The last ten years have been like a comic book. This WikiLeaks thing could have been an edition of the Watchmen without much modification at all.

Julian has put his life on the line, and perhaps he enjoys the game, I don't know.

I don't want to live in a comic book any more. When will the adults take over again?

nah .

lol

Soldiers are soldiers.

Once you sign up, you give your life to the keeping of bitter, absurd and rude wages of war & those who use violence to solve problems.

The use of military might and enforcement of national borders is always absurd. It will always require great amounts of dishonesty and a general lack of respect for people and cultures outside of one's own.

I found this comment by ArrivalofGodot quite relevant:

"If the mainstream media had done its job during the Bush years, WikiLeaks wouldn't be necessary. If our media had been more than fawning lackeys for the President's agenda, none of this would matter. "

Daniel Ellsberg used to be the "most dangerous man on earth."

Ditto. +^d

http://Current.com

Simon Rushtee shared that same experience a long while back because
he was marked for Murder by Muslim extremists. He got divorced from his
wife, but he's still very much alive. Time will tell. Maybe the next time you
insult & disparage Current.com and all our contributing members despite
the variety of worthy Journalistic articles posted here noone ever sees any
where else..., you might remember this: Please distinguish exactly who the
" we " is from the " snivelers ", will you ? You shouldn't identify yourself
with us if that's how sour you are. I've survived 3 Attempted Murders, and
a car bombing. You'd have had a heart attack of you'd had to survive all
I had to. Watch who you call a sniveler, bud. You shouldn't get carried away
with yourself.

Salman Rushdie had a fatwa issued in retaliation for the book "Satanic Verses" by muslim clerics that found the book to be blasphemous. It is not the same as Julian Assange's situation. Julian has pissed off heads of state and is now going after banks and insurance companies. Coincidentally, rape charges against him suddenly surface in Switzerland. I fear for his safety and hope that this does not turn out badly for him. Unfortunately, angering this kind of well financed power is a dangerous game.

Of course it's not the same situation. I only mean't don't write him off yet.
I know of the Swedish rape charges. They've been discredited because
his accuser is an operative of the CIA. Now, if as time goes by, there is
some actual credibility to Swiss rape charges, then the balance may shift.
Until then the man is still presumed innocent until proven guilty honestly
in a court of law. I've been the victim of many Criminal Libels hell bent on
invading my right to Privacy to assasinate my character, induce Discrimination
and much, much worse. The resultant public corruption has been permitted by
official corruption. Noone needs to tell me how down & dirty & dangerous
life is. I've survived several Attempted Murders, a car bombing, and maiming.
But only the strong survive.

How is he getting people killed? That's moronic!
All that's changed is the explanation YOU hear for events and actions overseas. All the Afghans and Iraqis on the ground either already know the truth or couldn't give a flying F*ck. Nothing has changed for anyone in the world apart from the general public in the US, Australia, Britain, France etc because we now know what we were told by our politicians were lies!

Those in power hate that because they think it'll affect them when elections come around again.

But it wont because fools like you would rather believe in and only hear lies instead. The truth scares you.

He's a traitor?

So then you have no problem with our soldiers willfully killing civilians, or using "WMDs" that were outlawed by the Geneva convention (including, but not limited to, phosphorus bombs)?

It's our government that is the traitor. A traitor to peace... and a traitor to us... the citizens, who want peace and security just like people of other nations. His possible "endangering of lives" is a flimsy justification for allowing corporations to war profiteer without any repercussions. There is no excuse for what our government has done to the world, and it needs to stop.

You'd really rather be lied to, and continue to give all of your money to the banksters and politicians that are the ones MAKING THIS WORLD UNSAFE?

There's nothing "extremist" about wanting truth and peace... but your views seem extreme to me. I don't want to live my life in fear, war and poverty.

I'm pretty sure you can't be a traitor to a country you're not from.

Correction on the Swiss rape charges: It was something that I heard on the radio last night but there was an error in the reporting. He was seeking asylum in Switzerland and they confused the countries and events while reporting.

I'll second that motion.

I hope they kill him.

http://Current.com

A bit too temporarily insane. I flagged him for misusing this website as a
platform to restate Hate Speech. Hate Speach may be legal free expression
here in the USA, per se, but it's illegal on the Internet. And because it
advocates Murder 1, it's not only illegal, it borders on criminal (if it already
hasn't crossed that line ) We're not a hate crazed mob here on Current.com.
This is a social interactive website. Social as in friendly, or at least civil.
He has to act responsibly. Talk maybe cheap. But people often act on it.
And talk is conduct too. Noone should act as irresponsibly as that hoodlum
who publicly called for Julian Assange's Murder. Doesn't matter what his
job is or was, or who put him in it. Some speech is simply criminal conduct
when it motivates hate crimes like malicious premeditated Murder. Sorry to
comment to you with such gravity,Alexandrek. I'm a law student, and an
orderly person. Still, you're right nonetheless.

he may die one day, but his name will live on forever!!

Is it made from polar bear ? I hope so !

Bravo. Good contribution to the democratic discussion here. Thank you.

Of course he is a capeless superhero. Everytime he escapes the clutches
of the mob of shit who want to snuff his life, then remobilizes his efforts to
yet again make another Wikileak exposing the atrocities of the violent
criminal military industrial complex & their NWO elitist puppetmasters, he
exemplifies why many Journalists are wounded & killed in the line of their
duty to satisfy the public need to know. Peace is no empty pipedream.
The outcry in 1992 over the Attempted Murder of Rodney King in L.A.:
was " No Justice, no Peace " It took 2 Jewish immigrants who created D.C.
comics in 1932 to give Clark Kent the alterego of a Journalist. They knew
what happened in Nazi Germany to enable them to take over that country
culminating in World War 2. Burning books in public, ransacking Press
institutions to intimidate them. Intimidation of bona fide Journalists promotes evil

Important to remember that many sons & daughters were slaughtered as
cannon fodder in Iraq & Afghanistan to make Bush/Cheny Bilionaires in
the construction of the oil & gas pipelines under way now. Without people
like Julian we'd be mind controlled proles of their 1984 war wthout end.
Only in Owell's novel, the wars were faked. The horrors that transpire so
routinely now are real. It's the supposed moon landing in 1969 that was faked.

+10 . . EdJoy for man of the year

LOL, Woman of the year, but thanks Stoneyroad. ; )