Julian Assange arrested at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Manning tried to get Assange to help him crack a co-workers SIPRNet computer password. Apparently Manning shoulder-surfed a co-worker and got a partial password from them. He then enlisted Assange to crack it for him. Probably had the length and the first couple of characters. As far as I know Assagne was unsuccessful in cracking the password, hence being charged with Conspiracy, and not the actual act.

a reply to: purplemer

Good point.
I amend my last sentence to:
"Most people today who claim to be journalists do not present facts or know what facts are. All they know how to do is make things up, spread propaganda and what their masters tell them to say... and editorialize. "

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: CriticalStinker


From my understanding, Manning had the access, and Assange tried to help Manning cover his tracks. That's a journalist protecting their source. That's no different than a journalist telling someone to use a secure drop box, an airgapped computer, ect.

They are saying it goes deeper than that as in they mentored Manning in how to gain more access than what he was privileged to. Manning was pretty low rank, so I don't think he had the access needed for what he did. The bottom line is secret information was stolen and anyone in that chain of events is guilty of that crime.

Yes the US is alleging conspiracy to hack. Which means they will try to prove Assange asssisted, instructed, helped the theft of the material. Which technically is a crime and that's the law so Assange will have to show he didn't help to get off basically and just received the material, max 5 year so not it's super bad.

Which is different to publishing classified material, which NYT WaPo etc have all done and not been prosecuted for.

a reply to: JimTSpock

Which technically is a crime and that's the law so Assange will have to show he didn't help to get off basically and just received the material, max 5 year so not it's super bad.

Unless they have documented proof of conversations and computer logs, it will fall to the testimony of Manning who is currently in solitary for not complying with orders to speak to a grand jury on this very subject.

Manning's original testimony is that he acted alone to get the information... If Manning caves to pressure and testifies now that Assange did help, Assange's lawyer will have it thrown out as it contradicts the original testimony therefor making Manning an unreliable witness.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yes I said that. A defence will be required form assange I'd imagine.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I believe your assessment is correct.
Manning's testimony will be key, but will be no more key than julian's.
All this for what essentially becomes a he said she said?
Really?
Or was this something filed and never to be acted upon, similar to the indictment of the russians that became a discovery nightmare for Mueller?
Do they really want to put Assange on the stand to testify under oath?

Or perhaps that is EXACTLY what "they" want to do?

originally posted by: JimTSpock
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yes I said that. A defence will be required form assange I'd imagine.

Whoops, I looked back and I snipped your quote wrong and misrepresented what you said... I apologize, that's not my style (intentionally), and I made a mistake.

You were right in your assessment, so I edited out my first bit and elaborated on your post.

a reply to: shooterbrody

You raise good questions, and as I've said before I'm treading with as much skepticism for any angle as I can. I'm trying to be as logical as possible, and in the end we're all speculating.

That being said there is many possibilities.

My main concern is this is going to be buried and forgotten. Glenn Greenwald said that Julian could wait in prison in the UK for up to a year while the extradition hearings go on.... Plenty of time for people to take their eye off the ball. If you haven't read Glenn's article, I posted it on the page prior to this, it's a great read.

originally posted by: purplemer

You are in principle defending a state controlled media. Be very careful what you wish for.

Well no I'm not... Not everything is deep state, not everything is whistle blower information about bad actors... Are you saying that if they get their hands on anything in anyways its all good? There is a good amount of information that Manning did not have the access required for with what was released, easy to figure that out, so if Wikileaks was involved in Manning gaining access past what he was privily too is where this will most likely go.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

Is it so much different than MSM using anonymous sources that time and time again prove to be utter BS?, on top of that they interject it with opinion... Wait, no, it's mostly opinion with a couple of quotes from the BS artists.

I see MSM and Wikileaks as extreme opposites and both are not good.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

My main concern is this is going to be buried and forgotten. Glenn Greenwald said that Julian could wait in prison in the UK for up to a year while the extradition hearings go on..

Oh come on now, our ally with a "special relationship" won't hold an extradition request for a year now will they?
Especially when that extradition request may lead to bad days for the 5 eyes?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Well no I'm not... Not everything is deep state, not everything is whistle blower information about bad actors... Are you saying that if they get their hands on anything in anyways its all good? There is a good amount of information that Manning did not have the access required for with what was released, easy to figure that out, so if Wikileaks was involved in Manning gaining access past what he was privily too is where this will most likely go.

No I am not saying that everything that is released is good. WL spent much time removing names etc to make sure to minimise the damage.

Worldwide intelligence service runs the media. It is sanitised propganda with and yes you are clearly defending it.

Allow people access to the correct information and they will be able to make informed choices. WL allowed the camera to turned inwards. They have won many awards for this and played a role in regime change in both Egypt and Tunisia.

The camera is being turned inwards and the deep state does not like it. Do you not think government should be accountable to people. Do you not think journalists should print the truth. You live in a world where you are lied to by your politicians and your media. WL changed that and you dont like it because they said something bad about someone you like.

Answer this if you could

When did a people suffer from too much free speech.

a reply to: Xtrozero

see MSM and Wikileaks as extreme opposites and both are not good.

Dude or Dudete thats a crock of bull. You either want the truth or dont. A hlaf truth is a lis

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: CriticalStinker

My main concern is this is going to be buried and forgotten. Glenn Greenwald said that Julian could wait in prison in the UK for up to a year while the extradition hearings go on..

Oh come on now, our ally with a "special relationship" won't hold an extradition request for a year now will they?
Especially when that extradition request may lead to bad days for the 5 eyes?

While I hope you're right, I'm far too jaded to be optimistic about any of this.

once he serves his time in a London jail for bail-jumping — will be kept in a British prison for the full year or longer that it takes for the U.S. extradition request, which Assange will certainly contest, to wind its way through the British courts.

The Intercept You may be right, Glenn is years past from his heyday of being a lawyer... Maybe he's gotten soft.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

Is it so much different than MSM using anonymous sources that time and time again prove to be utter BS?, on top of that they interject it with opinion... Wait, no, it's mostly opinion with a couple of quotes from the BS artists.

I see MSM and Wikileaks as extreme opposites and both are not good.

The closest I can get to agreeing with you is saying I wouldn't mind someone to follow Wikileaks example and rise to the occasion to do better.

I don't see much bad that's come from Wikileaks though.... They've opened eyes to countless misdeeds that otherwise wouldn't have been exposed.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

So should we go after Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill for releasing the Snowden story?

Were they involved in gathering the information or did Snowden just provide it to them. As example, if they went to Snowden and asked him to gather for them then yes they are part of the crime. If Snowden came to them with the information then they are not part of the crime.

originally posted by: purplemer

Is this just American secret information or do you think all countries should not be allowed to publish classified information from another country.

Allowed or not allowed is not the right words. Are you breaking the law in that country or not? If an American spy steals information from Russia do you think Russia would not prosecute the spy if caught?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I believe your assessment is correct.
Manning's testimony will be key, but will be no more key than julian's.

The other key is if Manning was able to gain access to areas that he would need help to do then the list is very short on who would have helped him...

originally posted by: purplemer

Dude or Dudete thats a crock of bull. You either want the truth or dont. A hlaf truth is a lis

Do you feel all facts no matter what should be available for you to download at your will? That is the extreme side I see Wikileaks as MSM is about 5% facts based on option dressed up as facts.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Do you feel all facts no matter what should be available for you to download at your will? That is the extreme side I see Wikileaks as MSM is about 5% facts based on option dressed up as facts.

I think Goverment should be based more on truth than lies. That is the opposite to what we have. WL created a tool to allow that to be challenged.

Money and power it is controlled by an elect few and their organisations. Information is no different. We are blindly walking down the road to a digital corporate dictorship.

Please dont defend giving away your freedoms. Our ancestors struggled to gain. Thats what in essence you are doing.

Freedom is something that needs to be fought for from generation to generation. Dont take it for granted. It is being taken away from you.

and remember

The Truth has no agenda.