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.

 

BREAKING: Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to be charged with espionage in US

page: 5
53
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:14 AM
link   
I think the gravity of the situation has been lost, Julian Assange is facing espionage and treason charges, if he is convicted he will not receive 6 months in jail; he will most likely be executed like Sadam Hussein. The facts do not matter, they never have, its only to the will of the writers that our fates go, to the men who have decided how this will go down.

If he is released I know he is a freud and I will spend the rest of his time convincing people of that fact, if he is executed I will know he was for real and I will loose him in the mind like the thousands and millions before him.

Stop wasting time on this lost cause, whatever side wikileaks is on, you can take the side of the light; whatever they did that was wrong, you can do it right. I doubt that you will because you have not done it yet, its hard for people to change. So I must hope in those who have not had the chance to do something yet, for they have not been changed by you.




posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Blazer
 


You need to learn the law then if you think providing assistance to a person in order to steal classified military documents does not make the behavior criminal.

Thats like driving a bank robber to the bank and waiting in he car while he does his thing inside. You are jsut as guilty as the guy who robbed the bank, because you participated in the crime.

I hope the espionage charges come, I hope they stick, and I hope this deusche goes to jail for a long time. He and manning can share a cell, the 2 are meant for each other.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Blazer
 


You need to learn the law then if you think providing assistance to a person in order to steal classified military documents does not make the behavior criminal.

Thats like driving a bank robber to the bank and waiting in he car while he does his thing inside. You are jsut as guilty as the guy who robbed the bank, because you participated in the crime.

I hope the espionage charges come, I hope they stick, and I hope this deusche goes to jail for a long time. He and manning can share a cell, the 2 are meant for each other.


So are you going to charge all the others involved in espionage also??
The UN data collecting, the Israeli faked Aussie/UK passports?
The list could go on and on...

But I guess no, it's just Julian..



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Blazer
 


The details were not invented. I used the words I did because some media outlets are reporting the technical assitance comment and the encrpyton software comment, and some are not. Adrian Lamo went on record saying that is what happened. I know you guys are so desperate to back assange that you have no trouble ripping Lamo down, which is an awesome lesson for you guys in hypocrisy, but I digress.

Its awesome how you guys defend Assange because people are being mean to him, arguing Assange should be able to speak his mind and print what he wants, while at the very same time ripping people down who dont agree with Assange, and going so far to atack business who can choose whom they do business with.

So lets see, anyone who disagrees with assange is part of the coverup, works for "tptb", are running secret agendas and are on a smear campaign because obviously Julian Assange walks on water with you guys.

Defend Assange at all costs, while attacking his detractors..

Yup.. nothing hypocritical there.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


and manning and they are still investigating who else might be involved. But yeah, god forbid you let the justice system have a chance to work. Or are you going to argue now that the entire judical system of every country is corrupt and takes orders from some shadow government. Well, all courts I mean except for those countries who are sympathetic to Assanges cause, in which case you guys will cheer them on as being truely democratic and independant.

You are looking at this through rose tinted glasses, and in the process, you are missing some very key information. Its one thing to assume Assange is innocent, since he is until proven guilty. Its entirely different when the view becomes blind due to paranoia and conspiracy theories.

I am not sure how you can claim Assange is innocent, while stating the US is guilty, when neither argument for either side has seen the inside of a courtroom. To answer your other comment yes, I think oither are involved in this issue, and I think if the investigation turns up evidence that is credible and verifiable then others involved should be charged.

You guys are so far ahead of yourselves its not even funny. Assange is in jail due to sweden, not the US. Have you guys thought about the possibility that he could be cleared / found not guilty in Sweden, and alsohere in the States. If he is extradited it will be in Federal Court and he will ahve full acess to the system, inclduing the option of a jury trial.

Why not wait and see what comes down the pipeline before you guys have an aneurism defending a person in the waht if game.

You guys really need to wake up and look at the entire picture, and not just what you want to see because it supports your argument. You guys demand justice, yet refuse to allow it.
edit on 11-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


There is zero proof of Wikileaks aiding Manning..

Those companies actually DID chose to do business with Wiki..
And BTW, it's usually under contract, so unless that contract is breached then yes, those companies are at fault.

And Julian is being held without bail when all the warrant states is he is wanted for questioning over an offence that carries a maximum penalty of a $750 fine..

Argue the facts........



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:04 AM
link   
the only thing that will happen if he is found guilty, is wikileaks will go underground with no head to represent it, which actually should have been done in the first place.

although i do feel sorry for assange, he should have been smarter than the powers that be, and fully understood the dynamics of what would take place by allowing himself to be a focal point.

as proven by our founding fathers, you can only win by fighting with guerrilla tactics when taking on a super power. if they cant find you, they cant kill you. osama binladen 101



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Adrian Lamo has gone on record and spoke about his conversations manning had with him, including the technical assitance part. You dont get to jsut ignore it because you dont like the source and are so amped to defend assange.

So while you say their is no proof of assitance, I say there is proof of assitance. What needs to be determined is what manner it occured, who provided it etc etc.

There is no contract to breech with assange or wikileaks in terms of banking and finances. They can choose who they do business with, and decided they wanted nothing to do with assange. That decision is theres and no one elses, whether you agree with it or not.

As far as your comment about no bail, again you need to learn how the law works, including extradition and the different types of warrants available. He was arrested by the Brits on a Swedish warrant. The judge reviewed the charges and found sufficient cause for holding him on the warrants. They asked for bail and the judge denied it because assange is considered a flight risk who has access to money and means to leave a country. Also, look up the differene between a fine, and bail. Its irrelevant if the convicton of the crime is 750 dollars (although its going to be a lot higher with possible jail time, but since you refuse to acknowledge charges were reinstated....).

The "650" you claim is only if he is found guilty in Sweden. The bail amount is explained above. there is a difference, so look them up please.

This is accepted legal practice, and if you did some more time researching and less time trying to make an argument based on half the info, we would not need to have this many back and forths. Your support for Assange is blurring your vison in this case, and you are missing information in the argument.
edit on 11-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Wikileaks has set a precedent for transparency.

The support for the principles they have set ( or reset ) for journalists to be sourcing the truth is overwhelming. Our leading Journalist Here - Australia, when giving his acceptance speech for journalist of the year , reminded his younger colleagues of this)

It seems to me that it is only the US that is calling him a spy, a terrorist. The US must have a lot to hide.

Our Current Prime minister in Australia has criticized Assange, while our ex Prime Minister who was outed by the current one ( stabbed in the back by all reports) has defended Julian's, actions even though he himself has been exposed in some cables.

Every single person i talk to in Australia believes that this is a game changer for the governments and big corporations of this world.

They need to except that this will become the norm and if you want to tell lies, you will be exposed.

Truth and Integrity will be the new black



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by SkurkNilsen
I am guilty of hosting a wikileaks mirror and rewieving the same documents, and I am not alone.

ahhhh yes
so I was correct when I mentioned
the server in Calais.
lol


Hehe, yeah.... If Calais is north of the 68th paralell



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:20 AM
link   
All I can say is "pff" to this. If they don't want to have stuff exposed, they shouldn't do stuff that they're ashamed of. Diplomats are idiots and really perform no function worthy of their status. There is no reason we need to deal with other human beings in these ways. Nasty, nefarious, underhanded, meddling, manipulative, lying scum is what they are.

It's a cold world because we allow "diplomacy" to continue its existence. How many of you go around talking to people and then writing the most unflattering report imaginable while feeling oh-so-clever? Would that ever enter your mind? It certainly wouldn't mine. No normal being cozies up to another just to analyze their weaknesses and exploit them for their sole good. People who do this are known as sociopaths. We don't encourage that behavior in polite society. See if you approve of any of these behavioral traits and see which apply to diplomatic behavior:


1. Sociopaths are very charming.
2. Sociopaths can be extremely manipulative and will try to con you whenever possible.
3. Sociopaths feel that they are entitled to everything.
4. Sociopaths will lie continuously to get what they want. They can even sometimes manipulate a lie detector.
5. Sociopaths have no remorse, shame or guilt.
6. Sociopaths will show love and happiness only when it serves their purpose. None of the feelings are genuine. 7. Sociopaths have no room for love in their life.
8. Sociopaths need to have excitement in their lives or live on the edge.
9. Sociopaths have lack of empathy hen their victims suffer pain that they have caused.
10. Sociopaths believe that they are all mightier than tho, there is no concern on how their behavior impacts others.
11. Sociopaths usually have a long history of juvenile delinquency as well as behavior problems.
12. Sociopaths will never take blame for anything they have done to anyone no matter if it is family or friend.
13. Sociopaths have many sexual partners and tend to act out many sexual acts.
14. Sociopaths rarely stay in one place for a long time (home/work).
15. Sociopaths will change themselves if they know it will keep them from being found out.


If you knew of someone who espoused even a third of these traits, I suspect you would steer clear of them as much as possible, wouldn't you? Yet this is diplomacy. It's what they aspire to.

Look at how much less room you have to move since the Bush era. Look at all the liberties you've had to give up in order for them to fulfill their agenda. Look again at that list and apply it to the measures they've taken in order to "make your world safe".

As for the matter of aiding and abetting mentioned by a poster above, that goes the same for the public aiding and abetting their government's immoral, amoral, unethical, sociopathic behavior. Condoning it, allowing it to continue, even just accepting it because "they know better than we do" makes YOU an accomplice to each and every crime they commit in your name. When the other boot drops, who is going to be in front of the firing squad? Them or you? You *are* them.

Maybe we could start dealing with people respectfully. Just a thought.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by 2theC
 


Uhm.. yeah the reason the US is calling him a spy / espionage is because its the US information that was released, which kinda makes it the US vs. Julian Assange and not the world vs julian assange.

Slight difference there.

I am curious what will happen when other countries have their information compromised and aired for the world to see. There are already offshoot wikileak sites springing up, so its only a matter of time.


edit on 11-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Honestly, everything you just posted is bull..
I can't even be bothered arguing with you..

You will just sprout more of the same...



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


and if the information that is damaging was released to a news paper or to a televison station...

are they spys?

who is the spy?

the whistle blower?

I thought he was a whistle blower, or was he a spy?

who is the spy?
edit on 11-12-2010 by 2theC because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by 2theC
 


Lol you guys keep wanting to split hairs. The media that has reported classified information was done on a narrow topic. Not hundreds of thousands of documents. The manner in which the information was collected is illegal. There is evidence that wikileaks may have assited in retrieving the classified information, moving them from media outlet to willing participants.

I am not making any of this stuff up, since its all being reported. The break down is occuring because you guys only want to see what you want to see. You ignore the other information, saying its a lie, progopganda, Lamo is full of BS etc etc.

I have provided links to all of the information I have posted. I could care less about your opinion on debating me, since it tells me you have no valid argument to refute the information posted.

Hook line and sinker... You guys would make the Reverend Jim Jones proud thats for sure.

Lets see how things progress in the courts.. I look forward to the next argument of how TPTB are having their strings pulled by a NWO intent on destroying the interwebz.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Honestly, everything you just posted is bull..
I can't even be bothered arguing with you..

You will just sprout more of the same...


Care check aisle 2... Can I get a care check on aisle 2 please.. I could care less dude. I have posted information including the links to that information. You are the one ignoring to paint your own picture based on your limited interpretaion of how the law works.

Your argument to defend Assange are not based in reality. You guys kling to media protection and pthe pentagon papers, but completely ignore the established criteria and the manner in which the Supreme Court ruled in those cases.

You are ignoring the context of the cases, as well as the type of information that was released.

Here is a clue to help you out. The Government cannot stop the publishing of classified information based solely on the argument the release will embarass the US Government. Anything outside of that established protocol is fair game in the courts. In this case, while some files embarrass the US, others deal with military operations, intelligence gathering etc wetc, which will not be protected under the ruling.

Its entirely possible this will go to the USSC making new case law, so we will have to wait and see.

He has not even been charged with a crime yet, and you guys ar ready to lay down your lives for this tool. Is it to much to ask to be objective, rational and use common sense when looking at these types of situations? Or are you so drunk on the coolaid that you truely cannot see the trees from the middle of the forest.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Mate no, you ignore the questions and just sprout unsubstantiated theory..
Answer this one simple piece and I'll debate you all day, because at the moment it IS whats real..


And Julian is being held without bail when all the warrant states is he is wanted for questioning over an offense that carries a maximum penalty of a $750 fine..


Disprove that or move along..Simple..

edit: I'll add that as it was only for questioning, his lawyer and him offered to go to the Swedish embassy or do it over video and the offer was ignored..
edit on 11-12-2010 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


well mate, the details you talk about are details.

The intent of the US Government seems to be simply," shut up."

My intent is to see no lies regardless of them being "State Secrets" or what ever. however truth comes out it must be protected and the people releasing it as well. I think the vast majority of the world would like that too.

It's got nothing to do with espionage, its about keeping the status quo and if that makes you happy then so be it !

P.S
Is the US going to hand over all their spies to all the countries they have been spying on?



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Disprove that or move along..Simple..


edit: I'll add that as it was only for questioning, his lawyer and him offered to go to the Swedish embassy or do it over video and the offer was ignored..
edit on 11-12-2010 by backinblack because: (no reason given)


Disprove what? The fact you do not understand how law works in terms of a fine after conviction and bail amounts prior to court?

His bail has nothing to do with the the 750 dollar finr for conviction. Bail is established to allow people to get out of jail while charges are pending or the trial is in process.

A bail amount is set, and paid to the court to act as good faith that you will show up for your court date. Failing to show up after posting bond, means the bond is forfit. A warrant is issued for your arrrest, where instead of bail it becomes a capious warrant, meaning no bail period until you appear before a judge and explain your actions.

Since Britain is not the country charging Assange, the 750, in addition to what he is being accused of is irrelevant to Britain. They look at a few things. is the warrant valid on its face and is the prosecutor acting in good faith. In this case the second warrant issued was valid, and the first was rejected because of a clerical error.

Once that criteria is met, the person is jailed pending extradition. He can make a motion for bail, but it does not have to be granted. It becomes a bit more complicated when it involves international extradition. As an example look at Switzerland and the US when we wanted the child molester dude who fled in the 1970's.

Since Briatain has custody of this gy on a Swedish warrant, they decided no bond to preclude Assange from fleeing the country, and possibly heading to one where there is no extradition treaty. This is within the purview of the judge, whteher you agree with it or not.

Bail has nothing to do with the fine you keep referring to. Also, as I stated here, and in another thread where you threw a fit for proof on what I was saying, which was provided (and I have noticed you left the thread after loosing the argument and not being able to defend it anymore because you were wrong - hint - you need to provide a link to your source where you claimed Assange was charged because of a politician demanding it- Source provided, yet no answer by you) the rape charges were reinstated along with the molestation charges.

So the fine you keep going back to is out of date and has nothing to do with the argument anymore, since 2 of the charges are felonies. Again if you would quit ignoring the information you dont like and look at the whole picture, you might be a bit better off in the debate.
edit on 11-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I owe you an Apology.

I just realized you are in the USA

so you cant really argue against the charges if they get introduced. That would probably label you as a sympathizer and maybe even a terrorist.

sorry, i will let you save your skin.
edit on 11-12-2010 by 2theC because: spelling probably...possibly




top topics



 
53
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join