Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by Xcathdra
Assagne and Wikileaks is not whistleblowers. They are media and the whistleblower is the guy who already is in jail. Wrongfully I might add. There is
no charges and never will be. If they could press charges they would've done so already long ago.
Lets clear this up. A whistleblower is someone who release information in an effort to stop wrong doing by a coverup. We all agree on that point.
US Federal Law prohibits the possession and release of classified information to those who are not authorized to have it. The source who turned over
the documents is military, which means he does not
fall under normal whistleblower statutes. Becase the information was classified, he is
required to make his disclosure to Congress, not the media.
Also, whistleblowers report activity they think is ilegal, a policy violation etc. Since this military guy transfered classified information, over
400k pages worth, the intent of being a whistelblower is out the _ The military source did not read all 400k + documents, and had no idea what
they contained, which means he had no intention of being a whistelblower.
Mr. Assange knew the documents he was receiving were illegally obtained, and without due regard for the information contained, wrecklessly released
the documents. Its irrelevant if he is a foreign national, as he broke US law and can be charged and extradited back to the US.
As far as media goes, you need to look up what constitutes and is accepted as a media organization before making that claim. The Federal Government,
specifically the DOJ, moves at the speed of smell when it comes to investigating a conspiracy (and im not referring to the alien type conspiracy, but
the more than 2 people involved conspiracy).
@ Torre -
This is no different than the British national, who from his house in England, breached pentagon computers. Charges were filed, and international
arrest warrant was issued, British authorities arrested him on the warrant, he was allowed to appeal the extradition and lost his argument. He is now
going through the US criminal courts.
Based on your argument you could stand at the US Mexican border and shoot someone on the Mexican side, and nothing could be done to you since you were
not in mexico at the time. As with the leak argument, its not going to work that way. You still violated Mexican Law, in addition to US law.
I have not written my own story about Assange. I am using the infomation that he released, in addition to the interviews he has given where he openly
talks about what was obtained, what country it was obtained from, and why he is doing what he is doing.
Taliban hunt Wikileaks outed Afghan
Taliban Murders Afghan Elder, Thanks
Wikileaks for Revealing "Spies"
Taliban Seeks Vengeance in Wake of WikiLeaks
Late last week, just four days after the documents were published, death threats began arriving at the homes of key tribal elders in southern
Afghanistan. And over the weekend one tribal elder, Khalifa Abdullah, who the Taliban believed had been in close contact with the Americans, was taken
from his home in Monar village, in Kandahar province’s embattled Arghandab district, and executed by insurgent gunmen.
The violence may just be beginning. According to Agha Lali, the deputy head of Kandahar’s provincial council, threatening letters have been
delivered to 70 elders in Panjwaii district.
Taliban deals harshly with those it suspects of working against it: the ruthless guerrillas have assassinated scores, if not hundreds, of tribal
elders and Afghans of all ages for their alleged cooperation with the coalition. In one particularly gruesome case a few months ago, according to the
intelligence officer, the Taliban discovered that a group of recent high-school graduates in Ghazni province had been feeding information to the
Americans. The youths were arrested, and around 10 of them were hanged. The Taliban is also shutting down cell-phone networks after dark in an effort
to prevent villagers from alerting coalition forces to the insurgents’ locations.
To those who argue Manning was a valid whistleblower:
Adrian Lamo Sets the Record Straight on Why He Turned in U.S. Military Specialist
What prompted the initial release of classified documents?
Lamo, who currently works as a journalist and security expert, says that the situation was anything but ordinary. He states, "People confess
federal crimes to me every day and I don't turn them in. But those cases didn't have this kind of national security risk."
He says that Manning's initial leaks might have been justified. He says, "Certainly, releasing the gun cam footage would have been something I would
have done in his place."
Where did it end up going from there? Mr. Manning was in the process of being discharged from the military -
This discharge was in no way related to his leaking activities, but Lamo did not wish to divulge the reason, out of respect for Manning's
Where did the wheels come of the wagon for using a whistleblower statute in an attempt to justify actions?
He says that Manning basically was "disillusioned with the system, had internet access, and saw a solution that was far easier" than pursuing
channels within the government.
Lamo says the point where Manning crossed the line was when he leaked the diplomatic cables. According to Lamo, "He described them as not
particularly damning, but he just wanted to release it regardless. He talked about creating chaos in the U.S. foreign policy."
As much as Lamo says he hates the abuse and overuse of the word "nation security", he says that the leak constituted a real threat. He points out
that the diplomatic cable contained conversations that would likely be taken out of context, much like what would happen if your full email record
was leaked and all your friends, family, and coworkers found out what you were really saying about them. Lamo states, "On a scale of nations [the
creation of] a hostile environment can cost lives."
Lamo says he has repeatedly likened Manning's activities to "a kid playing with a rifle, shooting shells in the air", commenting "sooner or later
someone is going to get hurt"
The release of 400k plus documents without knowing what they contain is not whistleblowing. Releasing information because someone is upset with a
system that was drumming him out of the military is not whistleblowing.
Purposely releasing this type of information with no other intent but to cause problems is criminal.
Taking that information (wikileaks) and releasing this information knowing full well the persons [manning] mindset
and his reason for passing the files on, is criminal.
Manning and Assange should be held accountible for their stupidity. The Pentagon wanted Assange to go through the documents to redact names. Mr.
Assanges response was if the Pentagon paid for it and supplied the staff, he would comply.
Both of these peple are cowards. Mr. Assange will get his choice of a Swedish Jail, and American Prison, or, if he follows through on his threat to
relase classified Russian information, a Russian cemetary.
As far as the Swedish charges go, why do you say they are a joke? To dismiss this ladies accusations out of hand are innapropriate at best. She made a
claim, and has followed through with that claim. The least she deserves is an investigation into the allegations to determine truth / no truth to the
To dismiss it out of hand by going paranoid and linking it to the US is ridiculous, even more so since it occured in Sweden, the lady filed a
complaint in Sweden, the legal system of Sweden took action.
Quit combing the seperate situations to make an argument as it holds no water and screams of desperation at any cost to justify this guys actions.
edit on 22-11-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)