I triple dare Assange to try that with Russia... if he really has any balls. We all know Obama wants wo slap him on the wrist with a feather duster. He never really showed he has the balls to do it to someone who would actually fight back.

Anyone remember Litvinenko? Assange wouldn't get off so easily.

Assange is close to being arrested in the UK . Scotland Yards is just making sure the paperwork is in order before they make their move.

No doubt he will contest any extradition attempt ,and best guess is that he stayed in the UK because the UK judges have been useful tools in lawfare in the past.

Quote:

---

(9) Hillary Clinton's State Department ordered diplomats to collect passwords, emails, and biometric data on U.N. and other foreign officials, almost certainly in violation of the Vienna Treaty of 1961.

---

Anyone who remembers her time as 1st Lady could've predicted this.
The unfortunate thing is that she didn't come close to doing similar opposition research in 2008. Perhaps we would've been rid of both her and Obama.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Anyone who remembers her time as 1st Lady could've predicted this.
The unfortunate thing is that she didn't come close to doing simular opposition research in 2008. Perhaps we would've been rid of both her and Obama.

---

Exactly... google Filegate and explain why she wasn't arrested for being in contempt of court. And the files DID turn up in the WH residence where access is tightly controlled at all times and highly restricted.

Wikileaks 2.0 ?


WikiLeaks

Evidently Assange is an arrogant prickly person and doesn't keep friends for long . Many of his past associates have broken from the Wiki leaky family and are setting up a competing site. They claim that Wikileaks is too concentrated on the US and are critical of his targeting democracies and ignoring non-democracies. Maybe they can open a site called jihadi-leaks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Evidently Assange is an arrogant prickly person and doesn't keep friends for long . Many of his past associates have broken from the Wiki leaky family and are setting up a competing site. They claim that Wikileaks is too concentrated on the US and are critical of his targetting democracies and ignoring non-democracies. Maybe they can open a site called jihadi-leaks.

---

So you're suggesting the jihadiis use modern communication techniques which we can tap into, I would have though that if they presented anything useful your own security services would have tapped them long a go, such as the whereabouts of OBL, and they would have been included in the leaks.

Tom we both know that if he does the same thing to the Russians he will suddenly disappear and I doubt, like the rest of us, he reads Chinese, so who else has anything interesting to read perhaps the memoirs of Kim Jong Ill.

Yes he has targeted the US but perhaps this is because they are the only game in town. Remember this leak has largely been the product of one source

Quote:

---

Remember this leak has largely been the product of one source

---

I'm not sure of that . There are a lot of malcontent dead enders hanging out in the US bureaucracy collecting paychecks and benefits for nothing .

I don't know why our Congress finds it so hard to balance the budget . A 10-15 % reduction across the board would do the trick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I'm not sure of that . There are alot of malcontent dead enders hanging out in the US bureaucracy collecting paychecks and benefits for nothing .

I don't know why our Congress finds it so hard to balance the budget . A 10-15 % reduction across the board would do the trick.

---

So, If I read you correctly, your government leaks like a sieve and your bureaucrats are lazy and on the take?

Do you know what it takes to balance the budget? The first step is to stop spending, that is right outside the present logic, the next is to receive a little
Cut in available funds via taxation and higher interest rates, also outside the present logic, then you have to stop importing and start exporting again.

Now I heard your President was brave enough to propose a salary freeze, sounds like step number one and you might think about stopping the remittances drain, That's a lot of money that isn't spent in the US.

There is more than one wikiworm in this rotten apple.
I don't believe Assange wants to languish in jail . So once picked up I'm sure he'll sing like a canary. Then his whole buisiness model will collapse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Then his whole buisiness model will collapse.

---

Hello again, tom:

Only to be picked up again by somebody else...

I have no doubt that he'll get busted - maybe rendered away to some dark CIA site.. But, that changes NOTHING about the rightness of his actions. Indeed, the purpose for a free press in our society, is to hold leadership to account. News organizations in democracies, exist solely to ferret out and publish information - most especially information that government would prefer to conceal. ARMING readers with KNOWLEDGE is what it's about, and journalists are motivated to pursue that end. That's not going to stop, nor should it.

We are better served by Assange... We KNOW things now, that we SHOULD know. Maybe, if he'd been around before the run up to the Iraq war, we might NOT have made that blunder... In my view, it's GOOD to know stuff. You think it's better to be ignorant... I don't know why.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Maybe, if he'd been around before the run up to the Iraq war, we might NOT have made that blunder...

---

Hello again, tom:

Yes, I have more to say...

The excuse we use for invading Iraq, is that EVERYBODY thought he had WMD's. Not one person in the whole wide world knew, so it's not our fault, right??

WRONG!

The information WAS available. Was it not? Our press simply FAILED at ferreting it out. They were too busy trumpeting the Iraq war themselves... Julian Assange is NOT that kind of reporter. He's the kind we NEED. I say again, if he'd been around during the run up to the Iraq war, we would NOT have made that mistake...

excon

Lol so every intel agency in the world was lying ;and every world leader was lying... even the ones that opposed the invasion ? And every single press agency was sitting on their thumbs ,not doing due dilligence and were instruments of a government run by a politician they despised ? Is that what you are trying to tell me ? And you are also saying that when Colin Powell went before the UN with his presentation that all the diplomats of the world colluded with him in what evidently was the biggest conspiracy ever ? That when the Clintoons were also warning the world about the threat of the Iraqi WMD program ,all the world was also colluding in this fraud ?

That little ole Jullian Assange collecting cherry picked raw data from misfits ,disgruntled ,disloyal nameless, faceless cogs in the bureaucracy would've done a better job than the collective work of the world wide press ?

Tell you what... when Jullian Assange obtains and publishes the transport manifests of all those trucks in the convoy that left Iraq for Syria before the war began then I'll be impressed with his body of work.
There are very few revelations in his leaks... All he has shown is that diplomats speak more candidly to people in their own agencies than they do in public. Duh .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

lol so every intel agency in the world was lying ;and every world leader was lying ....

---

Hello again, tom:

They SAID there were WMD's... In fact, there WEREN'T WMD's. That fact WAS available to the world, at the same time they were saying something else... They were either lying or mistaken. Draw your own conclusions. From MY perspective, it makes no difference.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

They SAID there were WMD's... In fact, there WEREN'T WMD's. That fact WAS available to the world, at the same time they were saying something else... They were either lying or mistaken. Draw your own conclusions. From MY perspective, it makes no difference.

excon

---

Ex you apparently have taken the same view as Bush, it made no differnce to him either. So, it doesn't matter what the truth is, we will just do what ever we like anyway. I think wikileaks has done something valuable, it has proven what we all know, our leaders aren't to be trusted. This presents us with a conundrum, if the Bushs, Clintons and Obamas of this world aren't to be trusted then anarchy is a better system than democracy since democracy produces politicians who aren't to be trusted.

Why does good government depend upon total transparency?Are all secret negotiations wrong? Has he considered the possibility that his actions will make the world a more dangerous place ? Where is the malfeasance in a normal diplomatic exchange,or a blunt honest assessment designed to provide backround at best in developing policy ?
Who is going to confide to an American diplomat or their staff now knowing whatever they say in confidence could end up on the web ?

Forget the effort of the last decade for information sharing between world intel agencies or even interdepartmental cooperation in the war against jihadistan. We are back to flying blind... already the State Dept is decoupling from the network set up to provide common information amongst people with the proper security clearance.

You may be comfortable with Jullian Assange being the sole arbiter of truth,vetting and releasing what he choses based on his world view... but I am not (oh you think he isn't witholding some documents from release ?) . He represents those who want to see the US destroyed . I consider him an enemy combatant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Why does good government depend upon total transparency?

---

Hello again, tom:

I don't know... Why does the moon rise? Information is GOOD. Ignorance is BAD. WE, as citizens, are better off knowing what our government is doing. You'd rather not know. I haven't a clue why... Maybe sticking your head into the sand is natural for you guys... It isn't for me.

excon

The answer is it doesn't depend on total transparency... There are things withheld from the public for a reason. You say you would not reveal what you know obtained with your security clearance ? Why not if you don't think there are things that revealed would harm our national security ? Why haven't you become another pfc Mattingly ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The answer is it doesn't depend on total transparency ...

---

Hello again, tom:

The words "total transparency" are yours. I believe in keeping secret THAT which will harm my nation... But, WHEN I've decided what's secret, I'd keep it OUT of the hands of people like PFC Mattingly... I WORK in the security field... Keeping the information OUT of his hands would have been EASY PEASY... But, they didn't guard their data.

excon

Quote:

---

I believe in keeping secret THAT which will harm my nation

---

.


I am all in favor of whistle blowing . What these guys did was not whistleblowing... it was an attempt at harming the country . Mixed in with the few things that you think was new is a multitude of things that are very harmful to legitimate diplomacy . The things you find revealing are for the most part old news. Anyone who can read through open source information could piece together the things that have made the headlines.

I'm not a big fan of what Daniel Ellsberg did . But at least in his case ,he leaked a vetted analysed policy paper . He didn't dump thousands of documents willy nilly that when read lack content .

Quote:

---

But, WHEN I've decided what's secret, I'd keep it OUT of the hands of people like PFC Mattingly... I WORK in the security field... Keeping the information OUT of his hands would have been EASY PEASY... But, they didn't guard their data.

---

"Americas Chickens coming home to roost " . What you just told me is that you favor less transparency... not the type of transparency that you have been applauding with these leaks .