Wikileaks and Julian Assange

[ScottBot]

Treason, no, he's not a US citizen or an immigrant here. Espionage, quite possibly.

Actually, the espionage was conducted by that Bradley fellah who stole the documents in the first place.

 

[Sketcher]

Actually, the espionage was conducted by that Bradley fellah who stole the documents in the first place.

I don't doubt that Bradley committed espionage AND treason. While Assange cannot be considered to have committed treason, he was a partner in espionage. Heck, his threat to release secret factories and whatnot that are critical to national defense to everybody, including terrorists, sounds a lot like blackmail to me as well.

 

[Chris81]

The current charges against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is sexual assault in which he had "consensual sex where the condom broke". I never knew that was a crime. They must be desperate to silence this guy.

 

[ScottBot]

I don't doubt that Bradley committed espionage AND treason. While Assange cannot be considered to have committed treason, he was a partner in espionage. Heck, his threat to release secret factories and whatnot that are critical to national defense to everybody, including terrorists, sounds a lot like blackmail to me as well.

No doubt that what assange is doing is international governmental blackmail. I think the timing of it is not coincidental with the FCCs stated intention of implementing "Net Neutrality" and the Congresses introduction of the Cyber Security Act of 2009 (S.773). If Wikileaks is threatened, a growing host of "hackivists" threaten to deploy Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks against them. They have already done this to Mastercard, Visa, Sarah Palin, the attorney for the women filing sex crimes charges in Sweden. They are working on PayPal and have threatened Twitter and FoxNews. So, the leaks will continue. Then there is the "poison pill" that was developed in the event that Assange was kidnapped or killed. Meanwhile, the government is now claiming that it NEEDS net Neutrality and Cyber Security to protect american interests. Assange is no saint of freedom of expression. He is an avowed anarchist communist. His supporters are all "social democrats" (the new term for people who believe in Marxism but don't like the baggage of the term).

The Progressives have built a trap. Either let Assange continue leaking all this secret stuff, or, give the federal government the power to control all of the media (you know, to protect us). They are on both sides of this issue and they are trying to squeeze the middle.

 

[brindisi]

The current charges against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is sexual assault in which he had "consensual sex where the condom broke". I never knew that was a crime. They must be desperate to silence this guy.

Apparently Sweden has a "surprise sex" law. Who knew?

Interpol Warrant for “Sex Crimes” Against Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange – alleged incident is based on Swedish legal obscurity “sex by surprise”, not rape [Globalresearch.ca / Washington's Blog] « Sweet & Sour So

 

[ScottBot]

The current charges against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is sexual assault in which he had "consensual sex where the condom broke". I never knew that was a crime. They must be desperate to silence this guy.

Its Sweden, where apparently if you are having sex with someone and the condom breaks but you continue to have sex, they can charge you with a sex crime if the other partner felt "uncomfortable" continuing sex without an intact condom. Go figure.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Assange is no saint of freedom of expression. He is an avowed anarchist communist. His supporters are all "social democrats" (the new term for people who believe in Marxism but don't like the baggage of the term).

Social democracy as a concept is well over a century old and was formed in explicit opposition to Marxism.

The Progressives have built a trap. Either let Assange continue leaking all this secret stuff, or, give the federal government the power to control all of the media (you know, to protect us). They are on both sides of this issue and they are trying to squeeze the middle.

How could "the Progressives" possibly be on both sides of this issue?

 

[Sketcher]

No doubt that what assange is doing is international governmental blackmail. I think the timing of it is not coincidental with the FCCs stated intention of implementing "Net Neutrality" and the Congresses introduction of the Cyber Security Act of 2009 (S.773). If Wikileaks is threatened, a growing host of "hackivists" threaten to deploy Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks against them. They have already done this to Mastercard, Visa, Sarah Palin, the attorney for the women filing sex crimes charges in Sweden. They are working on PayPal and have threatened Twitter and FoxNews. So, the leaks will continue. Then there is the "poison pill" that was developed in the event that Assange was kidnapped or killed. Meanwhile, the government is now claiming that it NEEDS net Neutrality and Cyber Security to protect american interests. Assange is no saint of freedom of expression. He is an avowed anarchist communist. His supporters are all "social democrats" (the new term for people who believe in Marxism but don't like the baggage of the term).

The Progressives have built a trap. Either let Assange continue leaking all this secret stuff, or, give the federal government the power to control all of the media (you know, to protect us). They are on both sides of this issue and they are trying to squeeze the middle.

And in all this, you don't need Net Neutrality to put a stop to it. If we can manufacture the virus that is continuing to sabotage Iran's nuclear program as we speak (I suspect it's us) then I'm sure we can hack Wikileaks and some of these associated hackers in a particularly nasty way. My bet is our countercyberterrorism unit is busting its butt as we speak.

 

[ScottBot]

And in all this, you don't need Net Neutrality to put a stop to it. If we can manufacture the virus that is continuing to sabotage Iran's nuclear program as we speak (I suspect it's us) then I'm sure we can hack Wikileaks and some of these associated hackers in a particularly nasty way. My bet is our countercyberterrorism unit is busting its butt as we speak.

I am pretty sure that Stuxnet was an Israeli product.

 

[ScottBot]

Social democracy as a concept is well over a century old and was formed in explicit opposition to Marxism.

How could "the Progressives" possibly be on both sides of this issue?

Social democrats oppose Marxism....but want to implement Marxist ideas. Interesting.

Assange is a progressive and is funded by progressives on one side.
Progressive in the federal government are driving Net Neutrality and CyberSecurity

 

[Douger]

Julian Assange is a free market proponent.

 

[yantski]

Social democrats oppose Marxism....but want to implement Marxist ideas. Interesting.

I'm not a proponent of any specific political "doctrine", but I encourage people who balk at socialism to remember our Lord Jesus' words in Matthew 25:35-40. Social Justice is the premise of all socialist movements - corruption (SIN) is the cause for their demise not the system itself. I am drawn to Jesus for His love of the downtrodden and am called to follow Him in loving, caring for, and protecting those who cannot manage this life alone. Standing against tyranny is one way to show solidarity.

Assange, for all the things he MAY be is at least taking a stand against the evil corruption in the governments and corporations of the world.

I heard a quote from him today: "Capable, generous men don't create victims, they nurture victims." Does this not echo the sentiment of our Lord?

The wages of sin is death and if these people are not willing to pay the price for their actions then they should not be in office.

I only hope people will wake up to the truth and not hide from it's ugly face. The truth will set us free!

Blessings!

 

[Hans Talhoffer]

I believe the electric chair is the usual punishment for treason of this magnitude.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

I believe the electric chair is the usual punishment for treason of this magnitude.

The only person who could possibly be charged with treason in this whole affair is Bradley Manning, being a US citizen, and it's very questionable if his crime even amounts to that.

 

[Hans Talhoffer]

The only person who could possibly be charged with treason in this whole affair is Bradley Manning, being a US citizen, and it's very questionable if his crime even amounts to that.

Isn't supplying state secrets to a foreign power pretty much the text book example of treason? Think Rosenberg.

Or are you one of those who believe America has no right to prosecute terrorists who aren't American citizens?

 

[Anonymous man]

I see it has already been pointed out that Assange cannot be tried for treason in the US as it is not his own nation.

I don't see why WikiLeaks should be anything but praised by conservatives and liberals alike. It uncovers corruption and deceit by leaders, which is bad. For the corrupt and deceitful. It's interesting how some would attack freedom and basic democratic ideals crucial to the existence of a free nation by trying to attack those who points at rather serious problems. Why not try to address the problems revealed and put the ones responsible at trial, or at the very least kick their sorry corrupt hind-sides out of government.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Isn't supplying state secrets to a foreign power pretty much the text book example of treason? Think Rosenberg.

That's espionage, not treason. Manning didn't steal missile blueprints and gave them to Iran, he illegally acquired classified documents with the intent to publish them in the US, among other countries.

Or are you one of those who believe America has no right to prosecute terrorists who aren't American citizens?

Terrorists? Who is talking about terrorists all of a sudden? In any case, you don't have the right to prosecute non-US citizens for treason, no.

 

[Anonymous man]

Isn't supplying state secrets to a foreign power pretty much the text book example of treason? Think Rosenberg.

Or are you one of those who believe America has no right to prosecute terrorists who aren't American citizens?

Well, he hasn't revealed it to a specific foreign power, but to the world. And isn't that good when said information reveals highly immoral actions by the leadership? They SHOULD be held accountable for their actions, right? The leadership I mean... And what's more, they are not above the law, are they? The leadership I mean.

 

[David Brider]

I believe the electric chair is the usual punishment for treason of this magnitude.

What treason?

David.

 

[Hans Talhoffer]

That's espionage, not treason. Manning didn't steal missile blueprints and gave them to Iran, he illegally acquired classified documents with the intent to publish them in the US, among other countries.

where is the content of the material mentioned as a mitigating factor in the secrets act?

Terrorists? Who is talking about terrorists all of a sudden? In any case, you don't have the right to prosecute non-US citizens for treason, no.

So you're happy to watch traitors simply renounce their citizenship and get off scot free, is that it?