For the third time – why isn’t Julian Assange dead yet?
48 Replies to “The Decline And Fall Of The American Empire”
Another little psychopath.
Another nail in the coffin for the last super power, now everyone will know what you really think about them, Uncle Sam.
I feel the wikkileaks phenomena is quite irresponsible, but it is also irresponsible for the machinery of the US government not to protect confidential materials better.
This, the economic control the Chinese have over the US, the war on terrorism, the economic quagmire at home and the crisis in the Koreas, could truly lead to the fall of the US state, at least in influence and power, best case.
I blogged about the Korean crisis and the lose-lose situation the US could find themselves in, and these is another piece of the puzzle. You can read my blog entry here: http://kerryforrest.blogspot.com/2010/11/korean-war-may-heat-up-warns-kcna.html
I can only conclude:
1) The US leave this tool alone to act as a fly paper to identify security leaks. IOW a counter-intelligence tool.
2) The US intell community is compromised at the highest level.
3) This material is deliberately released as a false flag…..
4) If the Isreali’s conclude this compromises their security…..their relationship with the US will not be chilly it will freeze….Julian Assange will just…disappear….
Kate, when the US administration itself is bent on destruction of everything great about America—its military, its economy, its political system, its values, its individualism, etc.—why would it move to stop an ally doing some of its dirty work? Maybe if we could entice Assange to release copies of Obama’s college essays, or Kerry’s Vietnam war records?
Here’s a related question/poll. Which of the following US Presidents do you think would have the moral fiber to order the (IMO, justified) killing of Julian Assange? Just cut and paste below into your response and put a Y or Yes or N or No next to each one, along with any comments you care to make below that. It’ll be very interesting to see what SDA readers’ responses and comments are.
1. Dwight Eisenhower
2. Jack Kennedy
3. Richard Nixon
4. Gerald Ford
5. Jimmy Carter
6. Ronald Reagan
7. Bush the Elder
8. Bill Clinton
9. Bush the Younger
10. Barack Obama
Dave, you’re going to have to go back a lot farther than Ike to get a Y.
My guess would be Zachary Taylor or Andrew Jackson.
We’ll kill an entire nation before we’ll kill just one man. Stalin was right.
Why isn’t he dead yet?
Because this is still a free country, something soliders die for.
While I agree this is stupid, I don’t agree with the tagline question about being dead yet.
After all, dead animals and dead humans would be the same thing right?
I think your tag line does an injustice to this site.
Ok, Dave in PA, I’ll bite;
1. Dwight Eisenhower Y
2. Jack Kennedy Y
3. Richard Nixon Y
4. Gerald Ford Y
5. Jimmy Carter N
6. Ronald Reagan Y
7. Bush the Elder Y
8. Bill Clinton Y
9. Bush the Younger Y
10. Barack Obama N
Arent all three incidents from the same leak and leaker, Brad Manning or “Bradass”?
If it is the smae leak then the info got into the wild a long time ago. If this is a new leak then there are different problems. But I am pretty sure this is all from the Bradass
Because the DHS is more concerned about seizing MP3 sharing websites and enforcing commercial copy-right laws than protecting classified government information. That’s why.
Dave in PA. You missed one. What would Johnson do?
1. Dwight Eisenhower Y (Routine Day)
2. Jack Kennedy Y (Signed order after banging MM)0
3. LBJ Y (with photos and audiotape sent to him)
4. Richard Nixon Y (it would have happened before the leak)
5. Gerald Ford Y (done to end the national nightmare)
6. Jimmy Carter N (he would have Assange over for dinner and a prayer meeting)
7. Ronald Reagan Y (but have had absolute deniability)
8. Bush the Elder Y (it would look natural)
9. Bill Clinton 1st term N (still learning)
10. Bill Clinton 2nd Term Y (would distract from Monica)
10. Bush the Younger Y (only after being waterboarded)
12. Barack Obama N (he called Carter for advice and but Assange turned down the offer of a beer or a golf game or an iPod full of Obama speeches, but if he goes to Pakistan a predator will find him)
I have a hard time believing that this was not orchestrated from within the Obama administration.
Now, that’s not to say that they won’t do him in for their own “security” reasons.
If the CIA was half as good as some people think they are this piece of crap would dead months ago. It can’t happen soon enough imho.
they couldn’t parade the Zero through Dallas, thusly the take down had to be a little different than the JFK take down
and 4 of those presidents either had fore knowledge of the JFK happening, or helped in the cover up, and I think all four would have offed this ASSange fool in a flash, and so would R Reagan
Forget the presidents. Why hasn’t some freelancer double tapped him? Where’s Vince Flynn when ya need him?
It is funny, in light of Hollywood’s obsession with fantasies about dark government agencies, that Mr. Assange hasn’t “slipped in his tea and died” – or had some similar accident.
I have to say, I’m kind of disappointed. Shortly after the second world war, a man like that would have been quietly eliminated immediately after the first leak.
Mr. Assange is an especially irritating kind of spy, because he is not motivated by any sense of nationalism, but instead maintains a kind of high-pitched whine of meretricious, unctuous, superior, tawdry lickspittle complaint as he sits in judgement of the free world.
No one seems to have called him on the fact that that in spite of his pose as the selfless visionary making expiation – he has demonstrated himself to be an unctuous, self serving, mercenary, and quite possibly kinked little bastard.
He is exactly the sort of man that Ian Flemming would have invented for Mr. Bond to bump off.
I thought the Mossad would of dealt with the dirt bag alledged treasonists pig by now?
It is funny, in light of Hollywood’s obsession with fantasies about dark government agencies, that Mr. Assange hasn’t ‘slipped in his tea and died’ – or had some similar accident.”
Yes, this sort of thing always makes the conspiracy nuts look like the fools they truly are.
The government that supposedly cheerfully detonated the World Trade Center didn’t somehow arranged a quiet accident for Mr Assange?
What gives?
(Though of course, these same nuts will no doubt just weave themselves yet another batty conspiracy theory out of it all.)
“The government that supposedly cheerfully detonated the World Trade Center didn’t somehow arranged a quiet accident for Mr Assange?”
Forget Assange. The government that supposedly cheerfully detonated the World Trade center didn’t somehow find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?
To answer Kate’s question, it’s because murder is generally frowned upon. So ironic that Cjunk makes a post lamenting the absurd treatment of a young psychopath right after Kate calls for the US government to murder somebody. It’s bad when an individual does it, not when the government does!
Why isn’t he dead yet?
Because everybody in the American Intelligence Community knows what would happen if they even considered having the little waste of skin bumped off.
1) the notes from the meeting would wind up on the front page of the NYT within 36 hours,
2)Everyone at the meeting would be given the full “Ollie North” treatment. First they would be hauled before the Senate Intelligence Committee, humiliated, slandered, and their careers publicly trashed.
3) Then Eric Holder’s DOJ would go after them and they would be charged with everything from conspiracy to commit murder to spitting on the sidewalk.
4)Then turned over to some Euro-court for further prosecution.
5) IF they had anything of value left at that point, (after paying their legal fees) they would be sued for conspiracy to violate Mr. Assange’s civil rights.
That’s why.
Um…Olliver North broke the law, period. It’s a fact.
I think mr. libertariansaresmarter is a troll trying to wind us up. Since he’s so smart he surely understands the difference between a)the CIA or the Mossad taking out a dangerous man leaking classified military information in order to make it available to the enemy and b)a psychopath randomly murdering an innocent young woman for fun. Jeebuz.
Or do really consider yourself a wicked-hard-core libertarian, dude? Because I’ve always been of the opinion that killing foreigners who are spying for the enemy in time of war is one of the legitimate functions of government.
He made a deal with the Devil.
Here’s hoping the leak actually does, in plain english, spell out how the people from the US, who deal with various countries, feel about them. Maybe this will be a blessing in disguise. That in an attempt to harm, it will strengthen.
Larry is right. Nobody has the guts to make the call and Jason Bourne is retired.
@BM: Assange didn’t leak anything. He just runs a website that disseminates already leaked info. If someone should be arrested and put to trial (rather than just murdered), it would be the leakers in the army or whatever. Stop watching 24.
Obama’s not going to order a hit on Assange. They are both working for the same paymaster, and toward the same goal; the destruction of the U.S.A.
I don’t watch TV, somelibertariansaren’tthatbright. Never seen 24. Go play in traffic. “Assange didn’t leak anything. He just runs a website that disseminates already leaked info.”
Well that certainly is a distinction without a difference.
@ libertariansaresmarter
Could you please explain and list exactly which laws LTC North broke, and when?
See…on July 20, 1990, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),[4] LTC North’s convictions were vacated, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been impermissibly affected by his immunized congressional testimony. The Supreme Court declined to review the case. After further hearings on the immunity issue, Judge Gesell dismissed all charges against North on September 16, 1991, on the motion of the independent counsel.
So please explain the “facts” of which you are aware, but the entire American judicial system is not?
As of about a week ago, apparently there’s a warrant out for Assange regarding a couple of sexual assaults in Sweden.
Probably for the same reason that that guy in Yemen is still around, even though Obama said it’s OK to punch his ticket.
Nobody wants to go do it. Soldiers of Fortune gotta eat.
It’s quite amazing, that so many here seriously believe that the state should kill someone for exposing state documents (apparently already leaked), which in any case belong to us, the people.
I think it is refreshing that the state’s dirty laundry is made public.
Integrity, honesty, and transparency, are fundamental to a truly accountable state. There should be nothing to hide. What are they afraid of?
“The truth will set you free” (Jesus)
“The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.” (Churchill)
Why is the state so scared of the truth?
Johan – those comments were intended for the The CBC: you’ll just have to take our word for it thread above this one, surely.
“Integrity, honesty, and transparency, are fundamental to a truly accountable state. There should be nothing to hide.”
Bless you. Your naïveté is almost child-like.
OK, so you won’t mind if we publish your CRA tax records on the net then?
Johan, should the US government also make detailed schematics of nuclear warheads available as well? In the interests of transparency and all.
Johan..
The reason this is bad isn’t the information that got out, it is THAT the information got out.
The MOST important thing in intelligence is sources and methods. The actual data you get normally has a very short shelf life. The location of the Normandy Invasion was the most important secret in the world on June 5th of 1944… by the end of the month it was worthless. How much would information detailing Mohammed Atta’s plans have been worth on 9/9/01? How much was it worth on the evening of 9/11? On the evening of Dec 7 1941 the plans of the Imperial Japanese Navy were pretty clear for all to see… 24 hours before they would have been worth a fortune though.
So the intel game is all about relationships. Relationships with individuals and relationships with other governments, because that is HOW you get the next bit of information. Despite what you see in James Bond movies secret agents don’t go sneaking into secret lairs or well guarded installations. In real life they befriend or blackmail people who work in those places to bring out the information they need. In the real world it’s NOT Jason Bourne or James Bond, it’s all about Oleg Penkovsky, Lt. Col. Elizaveta Mukasei, Klaus Fuchs, and the Rosenbergs.
No one government can do it all on their own. The US (till recently) was unchallenged in the collection of “overhead imagery” and electronic eavesdropping. However since the days of the Church Committee we have been very weak on “HUMINT” or human intelligence, so often times we trade what we have with other nations that do have HUMINT capabilities.
This is in no small part due to the fact that we can’t be trusted to keep secrets. People put their careers, their freedom, their lives and their families lives on the line to cooperate with the CIA or the State Department and what happens? It all winds up on the front page of the New York Times. Then if they are very lucky and IF the bureaucracy allows it, MAYBE they can get relocated to the USA. Then again, maybe not. We have hung more than a few people out to dry in our time.
This also happens on the Governmental level. When the CIA ‘Secret Prisons” got exposed, everyone in all the countries that had cooperated with us… people who were assured that we would keep it all confidential… got hung out to dry. The political consequences were pretty severe in some cases.
Bottom line, this hurts us because it means that nobody with two brain cells to rub together is going to give any US agent any sort of information for at least a generation. Iran and North Korea are full of people who don’t like their government, who grew up in a time of poverty and famine… and it is statistically certain that some of these people work in these countries military or the nuclear program. You think any of them are going to risk giving information to a US agent while crap like this keeps going on? NO. The risk is just to great.
This applies not only to individuals, but to countries. Lets say we wanted to launch a secret raid like the one Reagan launched on Lybia, or the Israelis did at Entebbie. You think the nations that got burned in the “secret prison” leak are going to let us use their airspace or their airports for refueling?
Or lets say you were a human rights activist in some place like Burma or Lybia or Saudi… if it gets out that you are meeting with an American who works for the US State Department you are probably going to get sent to a re-education camp… if you are lucky… and your family will probably go with you.
So what happens is that the US Intelligence agencies wind up being blind. We don’t know what’s going on. We don’t know where things are, what’s being planned, or anything. We don’t know what other nations are planning till after it’s done… which means more 9/11’s, more Pearl Harbors, more Tet Offensives, more people dying because we didn’t know what was coming.
That’s why this is bad.
@Larry: North was acquitted on a technicality but we can say with a great deal of certainty that he broke the law. I don’t need men in robes to tell me the facts when they are obvious.
The only one here is consistent in his opposition to big opaque government is Johan. He gets it. Besides, there is nothing leaked here that we didn’t know already. So what happens is that the US Intelligence agencies wind up being blind. We don’t know what’s going on. We don’t know where things are, what’s being planned, or anything. We don’t know what other nations are planning till after it’s done… which means more 9/11’s, more Pearl Harbors, more Tet Offensives, more people dying because we didn’t know what was coming.
You are talking out your rear. The US and others have had leaks to far more malevolent interests before and they still have intel. I guess you wouldn’t even consider that the US should rein in the number of people who have access to high-level security?
JJM,
My CRA records: none of your business, as that is my private information. (However, I would not mind that much if everyone’s income tax returns were public information (like it is in some countries), perhaps it would encourage honesty?)
The state’s records: indeed your business, as the state work for you.
MissAntrophy,
Why? The leaks in question pertain, I think, merely to the state’s (our servant’s) statements, NoM, and other discussion points, taken/made while working for us (the master’s). Exposing their idiocy and undiplomatic ramblings will hopefully make it easier for us to fire some of them.
Publishing e.g. nuclear war head designs (unless already in the public domain) can be compared to a patent infringement, i.e. affecting one company’s (one people’s) comparative advantage. (Not a perfect analogy, but I am sure you see the difference.)
Larry Rasczak,
I have no problems with one state (people) keeping secrets from other states (peoples), assuming it helps protect the people’s life & liberty.
In this case, however, it seems to me the leaked information primarily exposes politician’s and diplomats’ incompetence and lack of integrity.
Take this example (assuming it is true): “Slovenia was told to take a prisoner if it wanted to meet with President Obama”.
– Is this a game that we want our dear leaders to play?
– Is exposing this something that will jeopardize people’s lives and national security?
I don’t think so.
One more time for the slower members of the class.
1) At one time I use to hold a security clearance, and I would be more than happy to see the rules for access to classified data tightened up.
2)Again the point is not WHAT was leaked, from the little I’ve seen it’s nothing higher than SECRET/NOFORN and most of it was common knowledge to anyone who paid attention anyway. The point is THAT it was leaked. As I said, the U.S. simply isn’t trustworthy. This means we don’t get the data we need.
Unsubstantiated statements like “the U.S. will still get intel” are magical thinking. James Bond and Jason Bourne are FICTION. We have been looking for Bin Laden for over 10 years, and the reason we haven’t found him isn’t that people don’t know where he is… it’s that those people who DO know won’t talk with us. Things like this are a big part of the reason why.
One more time for the slower members of the class.
1) At one time I use to hold a security clearance, and I would be more than happy to see the rules for access to classified data tightened up.
2)Again the point is not WHAT was leaked, from the little I’ve seen it’s nothing higher than SECRET/NOFORN and most of it was common knowledge to anyone who paid attention anyway. The point is THAT it was leaked. As I said, the U.S. simply isn’t trustworthy. This means we don’t get the data we need.
Unsubstantiated statements like “the U.S. will still get intel” are magical thinking. James Bond and Jason Bourne are FICTION. We have been looking for Bin Laden for over 10 years, and the reason we haven’t found him isn’t that people don’t know where he is… it’s that those people who DO know won’t talk with us. Things like this are a big part of the reason why.
“Assange didn’t leak anything. He just runs a website that disseminates already leaked info.”
Well that certainly is a distinction without a difference.
——————–
If you want to stop leaks it is a critical distinction. If you want to stir a crisis to justify government taking control of the Internet,
then it is better to go after Wikileaks.
Today Wikileaks, and Pirate Bay, tomorrow …
Sorry, but I would assume the main reasons people do not tell the US where Bin Laden is located might include:
a) They do not know where Bin Laden hides
b) They like Bin Laden
c) They fear Bin Laden
d) They are pissed with the US
Anyone who wanted to tell the US could do so without exposing their identity.
Since the US has been chasing Bin Laden for 10 years, presumably these latest leaks won’t make the slightest difference.
Another little psychopath.
Another nail in the coffin for the last super power, now everyone will know what you really think about them, Uncle Sam.
I feel the wikkileaks phenomena is quite irresponsible, but it is also irresponsible for the machinery of the US government not to protect confidential materials better.
This, the economic control the Chinese have over the US, the war on terrorism, the economic quagmire at home and the crisis in the Koreas, could truly lead to the fall of the US state, at least in influence and power, best case.
I blogged about the Korean crisis and the lose-lose situation the US could find themselves in, and these is another piece of the puzzle. You can read my blog entry here: http://kerryforrest.blogspot.com/2010/11/korean-war-may-heat-up-warns-kcna.html
I can only conclude:
1) The US leave this tool alone to act as a fly paper to identify security leaks. IOW a counter-intelligence tool.
2) The US intell community is compromised at the highest level.
3) This material is deliberately released as a false flag…..
4) If the Isreali’s conclude this compromises their security…..their relationship with the US will not be chilly it will freeze….Julian Assange will just…disappear….
Kate, when the US administration itself is bent on destruction of everything great about America—its military, its economy, its political system, its values, its individualism, etc.—why would it move to stop an ally doing some of its dirty work? Maybe if we could entice Assange to release copies of Obama’s college essays, or Kerry’s Vietnam war records?
Here’s a related question/poll. Which of the following US Presidents do you think would have the moral fiber to order the (IMO, justified) killing of Julian Assange? Just cut and paste below into your response and put a Y or Yes or N or No next to each one, along with any comments you care to make below that. It’ll be very interesting to see what SDA readers’ responses and comments are.
1. Dwight Eisenhower
2. Jack Kennedy
3. Richard Nixon
4. Gerald Ford
5. Jimmy Carter
6. Ronald Reagan
7. Bush the Elder
8. Bill Clinton
9. Bush the Younger
10. Barack Obama
Dave, you’re going to have to go back a lot farther than Ike to get a Y.
My guess would be Zachary Taylor or Andrew Jackson.
We’ll kill an entire nation before we’ll kill just one man. Stalin was right.
Why isn’t he dead yet?
Because this is still a free country, something soliders die for.
While I agree this is stupid, I don’t agree with the tagline question about being dead yet.
After all, dead animals and dead humans would be the same thing right?
I think your tag line does an injustice to this site.
Ok, Dave in PA, I’ll bite;
1. Dwight Eisenhower Y
2. Jack Kennedy Y
3. Richard Nixon Y
4. Gerald Ford Y
5. Jimmy Carter N
6. Ronald Reagan Y
7. Bush the Elder Y
8. Bill Clinton Y
9. Bush the Younger Y
10. Barack Obama N
Arent all three incidents from the same leak and leaker, Brad Manning or “Bradass”?
If it is the smae leak then the info got into the wild a long time ago. If this is a new leak then there are different problems. But I am pretty sure this is all from the Bradass
Because the DHS is more concerned about seizing MP3 sharing websites and enforcing commercial copy-right laws than protecting classified government information. That’s why.
Dave in PA. You missed one. What would Johnson do?
1. Dwight Eisenhower Y (Routine Day)
2. Jack Kennedy Y (Signed order after banging MM)0
3. LBJ Y (with photos and audiotape sent to him)
4. Richard Nixon Y (it would have happened before the leak)
5. Gerald Ford Y (done to end the national nightmare)
6. Jimmy Carter N (he would have Assange over for dinner and a prayer meeting)
7. Ronald Reagan Y (but have had absolute deniability)
8. Bush the Elder Y (it would look natural)
9. Bill Clinton 1st term N (still learning)
10. Bill Clinton 2nd Term Y (would distract from Monica)
10. Bush the Younger Y (only after being waterboarded)
12. Barack Obama N (he called Carter for advice and but Assange turned down the offer of a beer or a golf game or an iPod full of Obama speeches, but if he goes to Pakistan a predator will find him)
I have a hard time believing that this was not orchestrated from within the Obama administration.
Now, that’s not to say that they won’t do him in for their own “security” reasons.
If the CIA was half as good as some people think they are this piece of crap would dead months ago. It can’t happen soon enough imho.
they couldn’t parade the Zero through Dallas, thusly the take down had to be a little different than the JFK take down
and 4 of those presidents either had fore knowledge of the JFK happening, or helped in the cover up, and I think all four would have offed this ASSange fool in a flash, and so would R Reagan
Forget the presidents. Why hasn’t some freelancer double tapped him? Where’s Vince Flynn when ya need him?
It is funny, in light of Hollywood’s obsession with fantasies about dark government agencies, that Mr. Assange hasn’t “slipped in his tea and died” – or had some similar accident.
I have to say, I’m kind of disappointed. Shortly after the second world war, a man like that would have been quietly eliminated immediately after the first leak.
Mr. Assange is an especially irritating kind of spy, because he is not motivated by any sense of nationalism, but instead maintains a kind of high-pitched whine of meretricious, unctuous, superior, tawdry lickspittle complaint as he sits in judgement of the free world.
No one seems to have called him on the fact that that in spite of his pose as the selfless visionary making expiation – he has demonstrated himself to be an unctuous, self serving, mercenary, and quite possibly kinked little bastard.
He is exactly the sort of man that Ian Flemming would have invented for Mr. Bond to bump off.
I thought the Mossad would of dealt with the dirt bag alledged treasonists pig by now?
It is funny, in light of Hollywood’s obsession with fantasies about dark government agencies, that Mr. Assange hasn’t ‘slipped in his tea and died’ – or had some similar accident.”
Yes, this sort of thing always makes the conspiracy nuts look like the fools they truly are.
The government that supposedly cheerfully detonated the World Trade Center didn’t somehow arranged a quiet accident for Mr Assange?
What gives?
(Though of course, these same nuts will no doubt just weave themselves yet another batty conspiracy theory out of it all.)
“The government that supposedly cheerfully detonated the World Trade Center didn’t somehow arranged a quiet accident for Mr Assange?”
Forget Assange. The government that supposedly cheerfully detonated the World Trade center didn’t somehow find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?
To answer Kate’s question, it’s because murder is generally frowned upon. So ironic that Cjunk makes a post lamenting the absurd treatment of a young psychopath right after Kate calls for the US government to murder somebody. It’s bad when an individual does it, not when the government does!
Why isn’t he dead yet?
Because everybody in the American Intelligence Community knows what would happen if they even considered having the little waste of skin bumped off.
1) the notes from the meeting would wind up on the front page of the NYT within 36 hours,
2)Everyone at the meeting would be given the full “Ollie North” treatment. First they would be hauled before the Senate Intelligence Committee, humiliated, slandered, and their careers publicly trashed.
3) Then Eric Holder’s DOJ would go after them and they would be charged with everything from conspiracy to commit murder to spitting on the sidewalk.
4)Then turned over to some Euro-court for further prosecution.
5) IF they had anything of value left at that point, (after paying their legal fees) they would be sued for conspiracy to violate Mr. Assange’s civil rights.
That’s why.
Um…Olliver North broke the law, period. It’s a fact.
I think mr. libertariansaresmarter is a troll trying to wind us up. Since he’s so smart he surely understands the difference between a)the CIA or the Mossad taking out a dangerous man leaking classified military information in order to make it available to the enemy and b)a psychopath randomly murdering an innocent young woman for fun. Jeebuz.
Or do really consider yourself a wicked-hard-core libertarian, dude? Because I’ve always been of the opinion that killing foreigners who are spying for the enemy in time of war is one of the legitimate functions of government.
He made a deal with the Devil.
Here’s hoping the leak actually does, in plain english, spell out how the people from the US, who deal with various countries, feel about them. Maybe this will be a blessing in disguise. That in an attempt to harm, it will strengthen.
Larry is right. Nobody has the guts to make the call and Jason Bourne is retired.
@BM: Assange didn’t leak anything. He just runs a website that disseminates already leaked info. If someone should be arrested and put to trial (rather than just murdered), it would be the leakers in the army or whatever. Stop watching 24.
Obama’s not going to order a hit on Assange. They are both working for the same paymaster, and toward the same goal; the destruction of the U.S.A.
I don’t watch TV, somelibertariansaren’tthatbright. Never seen 24. Go play in traffic.
“Assange didn’t leak anything. He just runs a website that disseminates already leaked info.”
Well that certainly is a distinction without a difference.
@ libertariansaresmarter
Could you please explain and list exactly which laws LTC North broke, and when?
See…on July 20, 1990, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),[4] LTC North’s convictions were vacated, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been impermissibly affected by his immunized congressional testimony. The Supreme Court declined to review the case. After further hearings on the immunity issue, Judge Gesell dismissed all charges against North on September 16, 1991, on the motion of the independent counsel.
So please explain the “facts” of which you are aware, but the entire American judicial system is not?
As of about a week ago, apparently there’s a warrant out for Assange regarding a couple of sexual assaults in Sweden.
Probably for the same reason that that guy in Yemen is still around, even though Obama said it’s OK to punch his ticket.
Nobody wants to go do it. Soldiers of Fortune gotta eat.
It’s quite amazing, that so many here seriously believe that the state should kill someone for exposing state documents (apparently already leaked), which in any case belong to us, the people.
I think it is refreshing that the state’s dirty laundry is made public.
Integrity, honesty, and transparency, are fundamental to a truly accountable state. There should be nothing to hide. What are they afraid of?
“The truth will set you free” (Jesus)
“The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.” (Churchill)
Why is the state so scared of the truth?
Johan – those comments were intended for the The CBC: you’ll just have to take our word for it thread above this one, surely.
“Integrity, honesty, and transparency, are fundamental to a truly accountable state. There should be nothing to hide.”
Bless you. Your naïveté is almost child-like.
OK, so you won’t mind if we publish your CRA tax records on the net then?
Johan, should the US government also make detailed schematics of nuclear warheads available as well? In the interests of transparency and all.
Johan..
The reason this is bad isn’t the information that got out, it is THAT the information got out.
The MOST important thing in intelligence is sources and methods. The actual data you get normally has a very short shelf life. The location of the Normandy Invasion was the most important secret in the world on June 5th of 1944… by the end of the month it was worthless. How much would information detailing Mohammed Atta’s plans have been worth on 9/9/01? How much was it worth on the evening of 9/11? On the evening of Dec 7 1941 the plans of the Imperial Japanese Navy were pretty clear for all to see… 24 hours before they would have been worth a fortune though.
So the intel game is all about relationships. Relationships with individuals and relationships with other governments, because that is HOW you get the next bit of information. Despite what you see in James Bond movies secret agents don’t go sneaking into secret lairs or well guarded installations. In real life they befriend or blackmail people who work in those places to bring out the information they need. In the real world it’s NOT Jason Bourne or James Bond, it’s all about Oleg Penkovsky, Lt. Col. Elizaveta Mukasei, Klaus Fuchs, and the Rosenbergs.
No one government can do it all on their own. The US (till recently) was unchallenged in the collection of “overhead imagery” and electronic eavesdropping. However since the days of the Church Committee we have been very weak on “HUMINT” or human intelligence, so often times we trade what we have with other nations that do have HUMINT capabilities.
This is in no small part due to the fact that we can’t be trusted to keep secrets. People put their careers, their freedom, their lives and their families lives on the line to cooperate with the CIA or the State Department and what happens? It all winds up on the front page of the New York Times. Then if they are very lucky and IF the bureaucracy allows it, MAYBE they can get relocated to the USA. Then again, maybe not. We have hung more than a few people out to dry in our time.
This also happens on the Governmental level. When the CIA ‘Secret Prisons” got exposed, everyone in all the countries that had cooperated with us… people who were assured that we would keep it all confidential… got hung out to dry. The political consequences were pretty severe in some cases.
Bottom line, this hurts us because it means that nobody with two brain cells to rub together is going to give any US agent any sort of information for at least a generation. Iran and North Korea are full of people who don’t like their government, who grew up in a time of poverty and famine… and it is statistically certain that some of these people work in these countries military or the nuclear program. You think any of them are going to risk giving information to a US agent while crap like this keeps going on? NO. The risk is just to great.
This applies not only to individuals, but to countries. Lets say we wanted to launch a secret raid like the one Reagan launched on Lybia, or the Israelis did at Entebbie. You think the nations that got burned in the “secret prison” leak are going to let us use their airspace or their airports for refueling?
Or lets say you were a human rights activist in some place like Burma or Lybia or Saudi… if it gets out that you are meeting with an American who works for the US State Department you are probably going to get sent to a re-education camp… if you are lucky… and your family will probably go with you.
So what happens is that the US Intelligence agencies wind up being blind. We don’t know what’s going on. We don’t know where things are, what’s being planned, or anything. We don’t know what other nations are planning till after it’s done… which means more 9/11’s, more Pearl Harbors, more Tet Offensives, more people dying because we didn’t know what was coming.
That’s why this is bad.
@Larry: North was acquitted on a technicality but we can say with a great deal of certainty that he broke the law. I don’t need men in robes to tell me the facts when they are obvious.
The only one here is consistent in his opposition to big opaque government is Johan. He gets it. Besides, there is nothing leaked here that we didn’t know already.
So what happens is that the US Intelligence agencies wind up being blind. We don’t know what’s going on. We don’t know where things are, what’s being planned, or anything. We don’t know what other nations are planning till after it’s done… which means more 9/11’s, more Pearl Harbors, more Tet Offensives, more people dying because we didn’t know what was coming.
You are talking out your rear. The US and others have had leaks to far more malevolent interests before and they still have intel. I guess you wouldn’t even consider that the US should rein in the number of people who have access to high-level security?
JJM,
My CRA records: none of your business, as that is my private information. (However, I would not mind that much if everyone’s income tax returns were public information (like it is in some countries), perhaps it would encourage honesty?)
The state’s records: indeed your business, as the state work for you.
MissAntrophy,
Why? The leaks in question pertain, I think, merely to the state’s (our servant’s) statements, NoM, and other discussion points, taken/made while working for us (the master’s). Exposing their idiocy and undiplomatic ramblings will hopefully make it easier for us to fire some of them.
Publishing e.g. nuclear war head designs (unless already in the public domain) can be compared to a patent infringement, i.e. affecting one company’s (one people’s) comparative advantage. (Not a perfect analogy, but I am sure you see the difference.)
Larry Rasczak,
I have no problems with one state (people) keeping secrets from other states (peoples), assuming it helps protect the people’s life & liberty.
In this case, however, it seems to me the leaked information primarily exposes politician’s and diplomats’ incompetence and lack of integrity.
Take this example (assuming it is true): “Slovenia was told to take a prisoner if it wanted to meet with President Obama”.
– Is this a game that we want our dear leaders to play?
– Is exposing this something that will jeopardize people’s lives and national security?
I don’t think so.
One more time for the slower members of the class.
1) At one time I use to hold a security clearance, and I would be more than happy to see the rules for access to classified data tightened up.
2)Again the point is not WHAT was leaked, from the little I’ve seen it’s nothing higher than SECRET/NOFORN and most of it was common knowledge to anyone who paid attention anyway. The point is THAT it was leaked. As I said, the U.S. simply isn’t trustworthy. This means we don’t get the data we need.
Unsubstantiated statements like “the U.S. will still get intel” are magical thinking. James Bond and Jason Bourne are FICTION. We have been looking for Bin Laden for over 10 years, and the reason we haven’t found him isn’t that people don’t know where he is… it’s that those people who DO know won’t talk with us. Things like this are a big part of the reason why.
One more time for the slower members of the class.
1) At one time I use to hold a security clearance, and I would be more than happy to see the rules for access to classified data tightened up.
2)Again the point is not WHAT was leaked, from the little I’ve seen it’s nothing higher than SECRET/NOFORN and most of it was common knowledge to anyone who paid attention anyway. The point is THAT it was leaked. As I said, the U.S. simply isn’t trustworthy. This means we don’t get the data we need.
Unsubstantiated statements like “the U.S. will still get intel” are magical thinking. James Bond and Jason Bourne are FICTION. We have been looking for Bin Laden for over 10 years, and the reason we haven’t found him isn’t that people don’t know where he is… it’s that those people who DO know won’t talk with us. Things like this are a big part of the reason why.
“Assange didn’t leak anything. He just runs a website that disseminates already leaked info.”
Well that certainly is a distinction without a difference.
——————–
If you want to stop leaks it is a critical distinction. If you want to stir a crisis to justify government taking control of the Internet,
then it is better to go after Wikileaks.
Today Wikileaks, and Pirate Bay, tomorrow …
Sorry, but I would assume the main reasons people do not tell the US where Bin Laden is located might include:
a) They do not know where Bin Laden hides
b) They like Bin Laden
c) They fear Bin Laden
d) They are pissed with the US
Anyone who wanted to tell the US could do so without exposing their identity.
Since the US has been chasing Bin Laden for 10 years, presumably these latest leaks won’t make the slightest difference.