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: 6
53
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by 2theC
 


You guys I think are misunderstanding my arguments. I have absolutely no problem with the US government being taken to task and held responsible. What I take exception to is when a person release classified information that does jeopradize peoples lives just being dumped as an act of revenge, which Assange has admitted to.

As far as endangering lives, think about it this way. Information regarding say Chinas military is leaked. To the everyday person its intresting, but most likely not understandable to them unless they are veresed in that area. While the information seems innocuous enough, people fail to realize that there may only be 3 people in the Chinese military who had access to that information.

Thats an easy investigation for China to conduct, since executing 3 people and jsut training replacements would be easy for them.

Take the info on China and their supposed attitude towards N. Korea. Again seems innocuous enough, however N. Korea could perceive that as having no allies anymore, placing them into the position of an all or nothing last stand.

That is the examples about endangering lives, where intelligence gathering is comprmosied because released info reveals methods of operation and colelction.

The US spies on other countries, as they spy on us. If we cath it, they get charged and prosecuted. If they catch our spies, the exacty same thing occurs in the country they got caught in.

There is a right way and a wrong way to do this. The right way would of been to go through the documents and cherry picked the most damning reports, and present those. When you do a mass dump, you bury the important documents under a pile of mineutia.

What good will that do to prevent it form occuring again, when no one can find it?




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


Pleease, what a load of crap...
You don't deny the maximum $750 penalty and then go on a ridiculous rant....
There are NO other charges, in fact there isn't ANY charges...

You are truly a waste of time..
Don't bother answering me because I know it will be more of the same crap..



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2theC
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 propbalby label you as a sympathizer and maybe even a terrorist.

sorry, i will let you save your skin.


I see there is no bounds to ones level of ignorance when coupled with a mouth full of wise ass. Our spies have been caught in other countries, and have been charged and jailed, just as we do here in the States when we catch other countries spies.

I think Assange should be charged and the legal system should be allowed to work, regardless of outcome (innocent or guilty).

The fact people keep bringing up hillary and spies and charging them only reinforces your lack of knowledge in this area. Seriously, with all due respect, please read up on it and understand how it works, inclduing diplomatic immunity, espionage, conspiracy, etc etc.

It might help you understand the other side of the argument a bit better.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


ok. I am glad you have are ok with what is being done by Wikileaks, but, it seems not the way it was done.

but THEY did it, and good on them for doing it.

maybe next time ( and there will be one) the method will be better for you and have the impact you want.

But the that's the thing about truth you withhold some, you might as well not give it.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:17 AM
link   
I believe indiscriminate dumping may have done untold harm. There were things which it was useful for the public to know but ironically - some of the minor gossip may have done the most harm. In day to day diplomacy, you do need to be able to make confidential comments. The phrase is 'Throwing out the baby with the bathwater'.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Pleease, what a load of crap...
You don't deny the maximum $750 penalty and then go on a ridiculous rant....
There are NO other charges, in fact there isn't ANY charges...

You are truly a waste of time..
Don't bother answering me because I know it will be more of the same crap..


Uhm, now who is seeing what they want while ignoring facts?

Timeline: sexual allegations against Assange in Sweden


August 20th, 2010 - The Swedish Prosecutor's Office issues an arrest warrant for Julian Assange. Karin Rosander, the head of communications, says there are two separate allegations - one of rape and one of molestation.



August 21, 2010 - The arrest warrant is withdrawn. "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape," says one of Stockholm's chief prosecutors, Eva Finne.

Ms Rosander says the investigation into the molestation charge will continue but it is not a serious enough crime for an arrest warrant.

The lawyer for the two women, Claes Borgstrom, lodges an appeal to a special department in the public prosecutions office.



August 31, 2010 - Mr Assange is questioned by police for about an hour in Stockholm and formally told of the allegations against him, according to his lawyer (at the time), Leif Silbersky. The activist denies the charges.


This is what you are looking for:


September 1, 2010 - Director of Prosecutions Marianne Ny says she is reopening the rape investigation against Mr Assange. Ms Ny is also head of the department that oversees prosecution of sex crimes in particular.

"There is reason to believe that a crime has been committed," she says in a statement. "Considering information available at present, my judgement is that the classification of the crime is rape."

Ms Ny says the investigation into the molestation claim will also be extended. She tells AFP that overturning another prosecutor's decision was "not an ordinary (procedure), but not so out of the ordinary either."



Explanation of why Asange cannot be interviewed in England in person, and why it cannot be done over the phone.
Time Article

Why was his bail denied?
Assange held in jail on warrant


The 39-year-old Australian was refused bail after a British judge ruled that there was a danger he might flee the country because the judge felt he had weak links to the UK and access to large amounts of money and support through his activity with the whistleblowing website.

Senior District Judge Howard Riddle remanded Mr Assange in custody until December 14, when the extradition hearing will begin on whether the internet activist should be forced to return to Sweden to face the sex charges.


What is he charged with?

Mr Assange faces two counts of sexual molestation, one count of unlawful coercion and one count of rape involving two women in Sweden in August.


Some of the details regarding the charges.


In the most details yet released about the allegations, Ms Lindfield said that in the cases of both women the allegations related to him refusing to wear a condom during sex. He was also accused of having sex with one of the women by exploiting the fact that she was asleep, and another count said that he had held a woman's arms and forced open her legs so he could have sex with her.


The rest of the article delves into the conspiracy theories about Sweden being a puppet of the US. Now, what more information do you want so you can ignore that as well?

You should check up on Swedish law and the penalities related to each of the 4 charges, including rape.

I've answered you time and agin, while providing all the links, which you still have failed to do in the other thread where you make the accusation that a Politician forced the arrest of Assange, and still ahve not provided your source.

I will continue to challenge your posts, whether you want it or not, because imo you ttreat the truth as something that is interchangable depending on the argument you are trying to make.

I do not understand how you can make the argument there are no other charges, when its there, in black and white, along with other sources corroborating it. Are you that naieve and narrow minded that any possibility of you being incorrect would fritz out your neural circuitry?

He is charged, 4 counts with one being rape.

Please explain to everyone how you come to your conclusion and provide your sources to support your claim there are no rape / other charges pending against him.

I eagerly await your answer, assuming you have the capacity to admit you made a mistake.


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

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



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2theC
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


ok. I am glad you have are ok with what is being done by Wikileaks, but, it seems not the way it was done.

but THEY did it, and good on them for doing it.

maybe next time ( and there will be one) the method will be better for you and have the impact you want.

But the that's the thing about truth you withhold some, you might as well not give it.


My personal opinion is if you are going to act in the capacity as a whistle blower, then do that. Make your case based on the knowledge you have and why you feel its illegal activity. Make the case, and push for resolution so it does not occur again.

Burying illegal activities among mountains of documents that are irrelevant to the cause serve as a distraction, and in my opinion dishonors the people who were injured or killed in the mentioned whistle blowing reports.

The goal is to stop behavior... The dump not only hid the behavior, but allowed it to continue on longer because it is now hidden and has to be located.

The other issue, especially when dealing with US law, is fruit of the poisonous tree. What people fail to understand is if evidence is illegally obtained, it cannot be used in court (there are some exceptions but none that apply to this case). Why expose the information, and then some, when the outcome actually protects the people they wanted to be held accountible?

The entire manner in which wikileaks conducted this has been an absolutel fubar, from top to bottom - period.

They have systematically underminded their own stated goals, and did so in such a spectacular manner, the only thing they are accomplishing is the possibility of facing charges, a revamp of the US intelligence system, including who has access to what information now, a change in the manner controlled information is reported and stored now.

Its like the line out of Starwars between Darth Vader and Princess Leia, except in this case its:

The more you tighten your grip, Assange, the more information will slip through your fingers.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 03:10 AM
link   
Some newspapers reported that the 4th estate is now dead.
Read the ATS thread here:
abovetopsecret.com...

I wonder what will happen with those four major newspapers
that got all the 250.000+ cables, just like Wikileaks did.


edit on 11-12-2010 by abaddon6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 

See, you lie constantly..

He is charged, 4 counts with one being rape.


Please show me where he has been charged with ANY crime at all.....
That is an outright fabrication and wrecks your whole debate, as usual...



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 03:23 AM
link   
reply to post by zcflint05
 


The minute that the feds throw Edward and Berstien into the crowbar motel, I'll feel certain this is not politically motivated.

In a deeper sense, this seriously wounds the true sense of justice regular folks feel. I'm certain there are those who don't like Wikileak's actions, but to employ some bully-tactic of having a man held without bail for a weirdo Euro-sex(?!) crime...

I reminisce about old adages... self-evident truths, unalienable rights, free expression, Congress shall pass no law...

Without doubt to a vast audience now, the mask has been pulled back to reveal the stitched mustache, the polished leather, the clicking of heels in salute. The mask reveals the same face we've seen in black and white images that overlooks a ditch filled with the twisted limbs of corpses.

Welcome, to the desert of the real.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 04:21 AM
link   
Some ultra-pro-USA-nationalists here really don´t seem to get the point.

Assange has NOT spied on anyone, has NOT stolen anything !!

It was people working for USA government/army who stole/leaked the documents to wikileaks.

Every news station and newspaper etc. which have released these documents are as quilty as Assange.

It just amazes me how stupid some people can be wanting Assange to be charged with espionage and so on.

Why people don´t think?



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 

See, you lie constantly..

He is charged, 4 counts with one being rape.


Please show me where he has been charged with ANY crime at all.....
That is an outright fabrication and wrecks your whole debate, as usual...



I´d like to see that evidence also.

Actually what happened was NOT even close a rape. The women didn´t even say it was rape. They just wanted Assange to go to a STD-test because they had unprotected sex with Assange. They claimed that they went to police in order to get Assange to go to the tests. They didn´t accuse him of rape.
It just has been blown outta proportion and really makes you wonder what´s the real agenda for the women who willingly had sex with him went to police. Actually the other of the two women twitted after sex something about "being with intellectual people" and did not seem to be shocked after being raped. The tweet can be found via google.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by HomerinNC
Good, he deserves what he gets..I hope him AND Pvt Bradley are co defendants
edit on 12/10/2010 by HomerinNC because: (no reason given)


And i hope you enjoy being treated like a mushroom.

Because that is exactly what *you* deserve, for your subservient ignorant attitude.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 04:35 AM
link   
reply to post by finallianstallion
 


Ahh but they *do* think...

They *think* you are going to fall for the propaganda and froth up into a rabid chanting drone calling for Assange's head, while conveniently forgetting the *real* cases of illegality perpetrated by the very people, who are now desperately trying to convince you to bleat along to their hymn sheet.

Assange has committed *no* crime.

The people he has informed the world about have.

Like they always say, a good offense (tptb propaganda) is the best defense (getting us to forget about their crimes, and focus of Assange instead)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 

See, you lie constantly..

He is charged, 4 counts with one being rape.


Please show me where he has been charged with ANY crime at all.....
That is an outright fabrication and wrecks your whole debate, as usual...



Ok pay attention. I am going to go s l o w l y so you can understand how this works. Feel free to grab a buddy who knows, ya know, how to read and has comprehension skills he can lend you.

This is an article containing information about the topic dated December 12th, 2010. Inside it contains letters, which are grouped together to form words. Those words are then grouped together to form sentences. When its all placed together, you read from left to right, top to bottom to understand the article and the information contained within it.

Julian Assange held in UK jail on Swedish rape charge

The following is the very first part of the article, just underneath the picture:


WIKILEAKS founder Julian Assange has refused bail in London after being arrested on a warrant based on four counts of alleged sexual assault committed in Sweden.



With me so far? I would normally stop here since it answers your baseless allegation, but I will continue.

Why was he denied bail?

The 39-year-old Australian was refused bail after a British judge ruled that there was a danger he might flee the country because the judge felt he had weak links to the UK and access to large amounts of money and support through his activity with the whistleblowing website.


in addition to this


When he appeared in court, Mr Assange initially refused to offer an address beyond an Australian post office box number, prompting Judge Riddle to warn him that there would be serious consequences of his behaviour.


Ok another big clue coming up, pay attention:


Mr Assange faces two counts of sexual molestation, one count of unlawful coercion and one count of rape involving two women in Sweden in August.


Now, what other BS argument do you want to make? I have answered all of your questions and provided all documentation you demand, yet apparently can't read or comprehend. I will chalk up the accusation you made that I am a liar to your inability to read and comprehend the information in addition to your lack of knoowledge and understanding of judicial procedures, including terminology used.

Hint:
A count is equivelant to a charge - Assange has 4 counts, or charges, pending against him for sexual misconduct. 1 count/charge of rape, 2 counts/charges of sexual molestation, and 1 count/charge of unlawful coercion.

Some more info to hopefully help you understand this process. If someone is charged with a crime, and flees the state / country, a warrant can be issued based solely on the unlawful flight to avoid prosecution. That warrant allows whatever jurisdiction finds the person, detain and extradite him/her back to the origional jursidction to face the origional charges. These warrants become more techincal when it deals with International extradition as opposed to one state to the next.

Next baseless allegation and claim?

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



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Rosha
 


Maybe we need to alter the ultimate end game from "winning" to "revolutionary change"
Change is going to cost us a lot of inconvenience and we may not even like it once it arrives.
So we kind of seem to be on the brink of wanting things to stay the same or being brave and courageous and making revolutionary change and jumping into the unknown. Not really knowing what it's going to look like.
So now that we are as close to change as we've been in a LONG TIME, I can see people having a change of heart and wanting to cling to the "system" that is , after all, the only one they've known.
I really don't think people are as prepared emotionally and psychologically as they like to think they are.
There's more to it than storing some cans of food and water.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Seeing as how the cables were about other countries as well, I think he should be tried in an international court. Also, I think they should refuse to extradite him on grounds that he won't get a fair trial...because we all know that he won't. He'll likely be found guilty even though it is blatantly obvious that he didn't engage in anything even close to espionage.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Mate..your posts are boring at best...

The warrant is in relation to Julian being wanted for QUESTIONING in relation to an ongoing investigation.

If you can show me one scrap of proof that he has been CHARGED then I will start a new thread apologizing for calling you a troll..

And please don't use big font again..It just increases the length of your already ridiculously long posts that say little..



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by gnosticquasar
Seeing as how the cables were about other countries as well, I think he should be tried in an international court. Also, I think they should refuse to extradite him on grounds that he won't get a fair trial...because we all know that he won't. He'll likely be found guilty even though it is blatantly obvious that he didn't engage in anything even close to espionage.


It's been made clear that extradition is not possible for political prisoners and that's what a charge of espionage from any country would make him..



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by finallianstallion
 


I disagree and here is why. The assumption is wikileaks did nothing but receive the documents and report it. There is evidence / testimony / statements that wikileaks provided software to Mr. Manning to encrypt and bypass military software than looks in emails etc for anything not normal.

If this is confirmed, then wikileaks did not just report the cables, but actively participated in stealing them. Also, as I said before and will repeat again, the Supreme Court rulings on this topic state the US Government cannot stop the publishing of classified information for the soul purpose of heading off embarrasment.

With the number of documents being released, not all of them are "embarrasing" but actually contain information for methods of operation, sources etc etc. It can be argued wikileaks violated the espionage act based on that.

Nothing has been decided on the US side as of yet, so that espionage part is up in the air. You guys are going to make your arguments based on how you think the law should work,. as opposed to how its applied and used.

18 USC 793
18 USC 794
18 USC 798

798 deals specifically with possession and release of classified information.

Familiarize yourself with:
Prior Restraint
Pentagon Papers

A very important piece of information I think people either ignore or overlook when making an argument by invoking the Pentagon Papers.


Times v. United States is generally considered a victory for an extensive reading of the First Amendment, but as the Supreme Court ruled on whether the government had made a successful case for prior restraint, its decision did not void the Espionage Act or give the press unlimited freedom to publish classified documents.

A majority of the justices ruled that the government could still prosecute the Times and the Post for violating the Espionage Act by publishing the documents. Ellsberg and Russo were not acquitted of violating the Espionage Act; they were freed due to a mistrial from irregularities in the government's case.[3]


While I applaud the entheusiasm of defending Assange, the argument some of you make is based on partial information of how the law works, ignoring how Supreme Court decision have reshaped / defined the law.

As I have stated, Holding the Government accountible is fine. However, when its done in such a lose manner, it does absolutely no good at all. The moral argument is lost, and so is sympathy from people who initially thought the goal was to stop the wars, only to find out revenge was the factor.

Essentially a phyric victory.




top topics



 
53
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join