wikileaks

[thethingy]

I wonder if she slept with Julian Assange?
He spent a lot of time with her in Iceland.

She's a bit rough, like the other two, so he probably did..............

[mrmod]

So why exactly do the US want her and what does she have to do with Assange?

I'm missing these connections...

[billy]

if they can connect her and the others to assange and manning through twitter and finances it would probably strengthen any conspiracy charge. while a conspiracy can be acted out by two people, it's a lot easier to prove and believe if three or more are involved.
that said i'm not sure they want her. in fact i'd say they don't want her as such. they just want to say assange colluded with her and the others including manning. with out they have a much stronger case. (if she refuses to stand trial) i doubt they'll try extradition in case it backfires and she turns out to be a good witness for the defence. if she isn't there because she chose not to be it would make most jurors believe she was a guilty party which by itself would imply assange was guilty

[thethingy]

Wikileaks' Julian Assange 'fears US death penalty'

think that's the first sensible thing he's come out with......................

[billy]

personally i can't see how. i can see them locking him up for a long time if they got the chance but the death penalty would bring too many international repercussions (though they would quickly die down i suppose) naw i can't see a death penalty or a gitmo for him. in all all honesty i could see five to ten years maybe. jmo.

[thethingy]

Wikileaks given data on Swiss bank accounts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12205690

from that;

Mr Assange promised full disclosure once the information had been vetted.

Julian really annoys me, it's either freedom of speech/information or it is not, this joker is no different to the governments who choose what parts of information you can get.

"Once we have looked at the data... there will be full revelation," said Mr Assange, who is currently on bail and confined to the UK due to an extradition request from Sweden.

why not just give us it, seriously it will come out in dribs and drabs again with redactions all over so they can make more cash from donations.

[mrmod]

[he] is no different to the governments who choose what parts of information you can get.

I agree with you there.

[addy]

So he doesn't want to incriminate some of those rich people. Shame he didn't worry that much about informants in war zone.

Nah, seriously though, I suppose they're just gonna confirm if those bank documents are indeed legit before releasing them.

[thethingy]

So he doesn't want to incriminate some of those rich people. Shame he didn't worry that much about informants in war zone.

Nah, seriously though, I suppose they're just gonna confirm if those bank documents are indeed legit before releasing them.

Doubtful the bank would confirm that, really cant see them saying "yip, that's all the right account numbers and you got all the balances correct"

The leaks all need to be viewed with scepticism, Julian "the beast" Assange was blatantly on TV receiving the DVD's with the alleged account details on them yesterday, that's a crime in Switzerland as the leaker Mr Elmer knows only too well, I think Julian really believes that no one can touch him and being a third rate journalist can somehow shield him from all the crimes that he is committing, perhaps the vetting process involves removing all the actual Swiss details to save him getting jailed, which is still censorship regardless of the reason.

[thethingy]

Swizz bank secrecy laws only apply inside Switzerland.
Sharing or publicizing Swizz bank information is not a crime outside of Switzerland's borders.

I read it as Swiss laws apply to the Swiss accounts, there claim is that the accounts information is from from Swiss banks in the Cayman Islands not from Switzerland based banking servers, If it was the case that some of the info came from Swiss servers then I don't think it matters where you steal the data from or who you hand it to, kind of like the retarded British youth who armed with his 286 pc and dial up connection hacked in to the US military servers from the UK, he is facing charges and extradition to the US although he has never been to the US.

[billy]

seriously. what pisses me off is that a game is being played. instead of getting the leaks and publishing them.
they're (no names) using the leaks as bargaining chips and personal cash generators. the primary aim seems to make as much fame and money off them as possible before actually leaking them. personally i couldn't give a toss about the swiss bank leaks. ( i wonder if bianca jagger has any accounts their?) or for that matter any other leaks, (not really) i do think wikileaks could have gone on to do and help form good, maybe even great things. now it's all a sham. a media event come circus. it really doesn't serve any other purpose.

if a crime is committed against a state or a person/company within a state from outside the state, i'm pretty sure extradition to trial can be applied for and granted throughout europe and many western countries. (i think)

[thethingy]

seriously. what pisses me off is that a game is being played. instead of getting the leaks and publishing them.

What rattles my cage, apart from no name getting rich, is we have two basic and equally important rights being played against one another here by wiki, the right to free speech and the right to privacy, wiki are asserting that the right to free speech entitles them to disclose what they like regardless of whose privacy they violate, and they are publishing peoples private emails and bank details not just governments. I think if we have to live in a world where we cant have the right to privacy and free speech then I think I'd rather keep my speech to myself and have my privacy, seriously though the embassy cables are mostly employees talking to there employers not elected accountable's talking to elected accountable's and this Swiss bank stuff is clearly private or the account holders wouldn't bother to have gone to the trouble of using Swiss accounts.

I think in this thread Julian is quoted as being not very happy when his criminal case papers were made public, I'd bet he thought that he had an expectation of privacy, that he denies anyone else, I think in this world you should be able to talk to your employer privately and talk to solicitors / priests / the wife without it being published all over the world and your banking details should be secret should you want them to be and if that private chat or private banking means someone else's right to free speech is violated then so be it because you cant have privacy and free speech.

[billy]

while i think outing gov pork is good and so is outing bent people in public office (people who take bribes) as well as a lot of other things
i'm not so sure outing bank accounts is. outing the way banks do business etc, definitely but once personal accounts get outed it really does start getting too personal. of course if the accounts are of politicians who have much more that they earn in some off shore account then yes. but whose to say if that.s what the accounts are.

i think there is a line between personal privacy and freedom of the press. freedom of speech should to some extent surpass most boundaries, while freedom of the press should not.

[thethingy]

i think there is a line between personal privacy and freedom of the press. freedom of speech should to some extent surpass most boundaries, while freedom of the press should not.

You know I don't think I would class wiki as the press or as journalists, say The News Of The world or the BBC or CNN published something about you and you had a grievance with it then you would have the right to redress from the courts, wiki you just cant get any redress as they are a bunch of outlaws (as in the wiki is not a company with accounts publicly available sense), if wiki were to make themselves legitimate then I think they should be granted the same freedoms and protections that the press has, but wiki is just hiding all the donation cash for themselves (hope someone publishes there Swiss accounts), so wiki I think should be treated as citizens handling stolen property and selling stolen goods.

[billy]

i know wiki is still running, i just get the feeling it's era has ended. there'll always be whistle-blowers, there always was.
the truth is that very often what they expose is forgotten very quickly. the cablegate leaks already feel bland and nothing of note. any new ones that come out are treated with malaise.

non of it was comparable to watergate and the like, nothing there that will bring down a president. nothing there really that will make a difference to anything, except maybe the laws pertaining to freedom of the press and future whistle blowers. sometimes an action can have an adverse effect, i think this is one of those occasions. i hope his film does well.

[srijantje]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan...concession

[billy]

sad as it is it's not going to have any impact as such
a few heads (Palestinian) may roll but the world will simply ignore these leaks like it does and did to all the others.
we see too many dying on the news for a leak to make a difference, we've grown immune to death and subterfuge.
i feel sorry if any Palestinians lose their lives over the leaks but it won't change my life. it's all just a donkey used t carry the god assange into being the next messiah.

[srijantje]

yes,it's a sad world we live in

[srijantje]

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/01...he-cables/

[thethingy]

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/01...he-cables/

The primary reason for the meeting, however, was Assange’s anger at the Guardian. Assange accused the Guardian of “theft” and “criminal” activity for passing a copy of the cable database to The New York Times, the third media outlet in on the publishing agreement. Assange wanted to cut the Times out, after the U.S. paper had published a critical front-page article about him. But the Guardian was having none of his demands and passed the cables to the Times anyway.

Grrrrrr, Julian is the biggest hypocrite of all time, so the Guardian can leak and that's "theft" but wiki obtaining the material in the first place is not, so Julian can censor The New York Times but governments cant censor, honestly this guy is the biggest prick I've ever read about..........