It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WikiLeaks shutdown calls spark censorship row

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


Ok please clarify which law he is breaking. So far the only crime they have against him is a false rape charge and that is it...
Fixed your typos there bud


Usually in the US, when the public seeks government information, we use the FOIA act or Freedom of Information Act. I am sure that some of you are familiar with it. Many UFO researchers may or may not use this when they want information from the US Government on UFO's, among other things. Among other users of that ACT, are domestic conspiracy theorists who may want information as well. So I am sure that several of you know what that is.

Under that act, you (US citizens) may request and be lawfully granted to US government files within exception.
Source
www.pueblo.gsa.gov...


The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) provides public access to all federal agency records except for those records (or portions of those records) that are protected from disclosure by any of nine exemptions or three exclusions (reasons for which an agency may withhold records from a requester). The exemptions cover:
1. classified national defense and foreign relations information,
2. internal agency rules and practices,
3. information that is prohibited from disclosure by another law,
4. trade secrets and other confidential business information,
5. inter-agency or intra-agency communications that are protected by legal privileges,
6. information involving matters of personal privacy,
7. certain information compiled for law enforcement purposes,
8. information relating to the supervision of financial institutions, and
9. geological information on wells.


Furthermore, the US Government classifies files and safeguards them permitting view and knowledge of those files on a "need to know" basis or through direct approval through administration, such as an employee deemed eligible and trained. Information can be found in articles pertinent to Executive Order 12958-Classified National Security Information or at the Official White house website here..

Source:
www.archives.gov...


Sec. 4.1. General Restrictions on Access.
(a) A person may have access to classified information provided that:
(1) a favorable determination of eligibility for access has been made by an agency head or the agency head's designee;
(2) the person has signed an approved nondisclosure agreement; and
(3) the person has a need-to-know the information.

(b) Every person who has met the standards for access to classified information in paragraph (a) of this section shall receive contemporaneous training on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be imposed on an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure.


Among some of the mentions for safe guarding information is classification and the release, both authorized or unauthorized also in section 4.1. b, c, and d of the of origination.


(b) Every person who has met the standards for access to classified information in paragraph (a) of this section shall receive contemporaneous training on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be imposed on an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure.

(c) Classified information shall remain under the control of the originating agency or its successor in function. An agency shall not disclose information originally classified by another agency without its authorization. An official or employee leaving agency service may not remove classified information from the agency's control.

(d) Classified information may not be removed from official premises without proper authorization.


So let me sum this up for you my friend.

The person and or persons who passed this Government information to wikileaks was/were indeed acting criminally.Wikileaks (from Julian Assange, to party with knowledge of those documents) were then also involved and a party to, those criminal activities when those files came under their possession, and then irresponsibly decided to make public that information. The information was neither declassified, nor deemed eligible, nor exchangeable, nor transmittable from one person to another legally for release to the public (let alone the world) through the consent of the United States Governing agencies which are in this case, the United States Foreign Service and the US Department of State.

edit on 4-12-2010 by Nephalim because: Man I love this edit button.





posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Does anyone know how to get a hold of these folks?




posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Does anyone know how to get a hold of these folks?




lol! No, they are anonymous.
Just expect them to show up when they are ready I guess. Oh wait they cant do that either.
edit on 4-12-2010 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Nephalim
 


My freind, again I ask you to clarify which law he is breaking.. All I am seeing in your reply is alot of hot air. He has broken no law and if you can find one you are doing better that the American Government because they havnt yet...

kx


edit on 5-12-2010 by purplemer because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 
I agree, that is why it was so strange when the "rape charge" appeared. Sounds like a set-up to me.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by jaynkeel
reply to post by purplemer
 


OK after rethinking your last question I think I let my own personal opinion cloud the discussion at hand. Is there an actual law concerning the spread of classified information by a non us citizen when that person wasn't the person who stole it? As I am not a lawyer and not up on every law there is I can't say for sure, but I do believe if there is a way that the government is working on it as we speak and we shall find out soon enough.
edit on 4-12-2010 by jaynkeel because: (no reason given)


My friend, you are correct. The government will find anything they can to arrest him on. Atm they seem to be having diffuclty. There seems to be a lot of name calling and hot air, but no action.
If he had broken the law i would have thought they would have arrested him by now. Evidently it is not so clear cutl
There have been many cases in the past when newpapers have published sensitve material, they have never been proscuted. So why now.
My guess is becuase Wikleaks is a grass roots organisation it is not a finacial giant and they have no control over it...

kx



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by purplemer
 
I agree, that is why it was so strange when the "rape charge" appeared. Sounds like a set-up to me.



There are not any real charges. Both women agreed to have sex with him.. In Sweeden it is illegal to name an alleged rapist untill they are sentenced. Something is deffo wrong there.. I smell a fish and a rotten one at that...

kx



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Nephalim
 


My freind, again I ask you to clarify which law he is breaking.. All I am seeing in your reply is alot of hot air. He has broken no law and if you can find one you are doing better that the American Government because they havnt yet...

kx


edit on 5-12-2010 by purplemer because: (no reason given)


Purple, there are no charges from the US at this point. The point of the information I provided to you in light of your question, was that it points to espionage, (which I might add does not require his citizenship) not treason or any other outlandish crime like broken rubbers during consensual sex.

Your mentions in other threads on his lack of American citizenship (with regard to treason) were thought of by prosecutors in the US and likely everyone else before you or I decided to mention/discuss it. I assure you, you are not ahead of anyone taking this case before a court of law (in any country) nor anyone else on ATS who actually reads past a headline.

Secondly, since Assange has taken the position of defending himself through the release of even more illegally obtained files, the case will simply continue to build, just like it would for anyone else.

edit on 6-12-2010 by Nephalim because: wording



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join