Wikileaks owner arrested

[byteware]

So, the New York Times and the Washington Post should also have their domain names seized the feds should lean on their web hosts to drop them right? 'Cuz they also published the wires that were leaked.

Actually, those papers were given those wires by the government in an attempt at damage control. The idea was releasing these wires in advance might lessen the damage.

This has also been thoroughly reported on.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Actually, those papers were given those wires by the government in an attempt at damage control. The idea was releasing these wires in advance might lessen the damage.

This has also been thoroughly reported on.

Nevertheless, they published the wires. Wikileaks published the wires. The content is the same. The only difference is in how they were obtained.

 

[byteware]

Paypal, Visa and Mastercard have stopped processing payments to wikileaks under government pressure. The Department of Homeland Security wants wikileaks declared a "terrorist organization." The feds are currently leaning on Facebook and Twitter to pull their respective wikileaks pages. Facebook has told them to pound sand (yay Facebook!!) and Twitter has refused comment.

Once again, the guy has not been accused of a single crime here in the United States or a single crime anywhere in the world that's related to leaking these documents. How is this not an over reaction?

I would agree, if he hadn't proudly admitted to espionage.

Yes, he hasn't been charged. However, he is proudly flaunting the fact that he has committed espionage.

So, no... I don't have a hard time with it.

If he was accused of espionage and was claiming he was innocent, then that would be different.

 

[byteware]

Nevertheless, they published the wires. Wikileaks published the wires. The content is the same. The only difference is in how they were obtained.

1) No. The content is NOT the same. Wikileaks published FAR more than the other papers did.

2) The difference in how they were obtained is... the difference between open access by the government, and espionage. I'm sure you can see why people would be concerned.

 

[A.Nonymous]

I would agree, if he hadn't proudly admitted to espionage.

Yes, he hasn't been charged. However, he is proudly flaunting the fact that he has committed espionage.

So, no... I don't have a hard time with it.

If he was accused of espionage and was claiming he was innocent, then that would be different.

No, he hasn't been accused of anything. Regardless of what he says he has done, he hasn't been accused of a single crime by the feds. If they accused him of something and then started leaning on everyone they could lean on to shut them down, then that's one thing. As of right now though, he hasn't been accused, much less charged with anything.

 

[Btros]

Sorry A.Nonymous...can't agree with you on this one. First, it has nothing to do with free speech really. Those web hosting companies...they're not their to ensure people's free speech rights. They're there to make money. They have every right to boot someone they believe is detrimental to their business. Mr. Assange has every right to put up his own servers and distribute what he wishes to. Unfortunately in this case it's illegally-obtained material he has no business possessing in the first place.

You mention politics...of course it's politics. Do you not see that it is also politics on Mr. Assange's part to release the documents?

What do you expect the Feds to do? Smile and say, "Thank you sir, may I have another?" You're surprised they're retaliating?

I get tired of people thinking free speech means you can say anything you want in any manner you want. It just doesn't work that way. There are limitations; there must be limitations, whether one agrees or not.

There are reasons why governments have secrets. Those secrets are for the protection first of the government and, though only ostensibly in some cases, for the protection of the people under the government. We simply can't have everyone knowing everything. Does not a given individual have secrets? Would he mind if those secrets are released for everyone to know? I mean, under the assertion that everything should be out in the open for all to know...

Personally, I hope this Assange guy gets nailed to the wall. I'm rather surprised he's still alive. And even more so, I hope the soldier that copied this information is placed Leavenworth for the rest of his life.

The US government is SUPPOSED to be transparent, they're not supposed to have secrets, as a government for the people, by the people. A lot of people have forgotten that.

 

[Member243850]

The US government is SUPPOSED to be transparent, they're not supposed to have secrets, as a government for the people, by the people. A lot of people have forgotten that.

Thank you... this is 120 % correct.

Hat's off +1 dude!

Seriously I just can't understand why some people LOVE governments? It boggles my mind... they (governments) love to abuse human rights and that's a fact.... period...

 

[byteware]

No, he hasn't been accused of anything. Regardless of what he says he has done, he hasn't been accused of a single crime by the feds. If they accused him of something and then started leaning on everyone they could lean on to shut them down, then that's one thing. As of right now though, he hasn't been accused, much less charged with anything.

So, your problem is that he confessed, but wasn't accused?

 

[byteware]

Jesus Christ, people like you make me sad. Sit there quietly while your rights are slowly taken away...don't worry, the government will take care of us. The US government is SUPPOSED to be transparent, they're not supposed to have secrets, as a government for the people, by the people. A lot of people have forgotten that.

Umm.. yes they are. Unfortunately, we have information that is vital to protecting the lives of US citizens. If our enemies get that information, then people will likely die. If US citizens have that information, then it will be available to our enemies as well.

There are some secrets, like the current location of all our nuclear armed submarines, that the government needs to keep secret. That's just the way it goes.

 

[A.Nonymous]

So, your problem is that he confessed, but wasn't accused?

I can confess that I robbed a bank. That doesn't mean it's true. I guess by your logic I should be thrown in jail immediately and then there should be an investigation to see if there really was a crime committed.

 

[byteware]

I can confess that I robbed a bank. That doesn't mean it's true. I guess by your logic I should be thrown in jail immediately and then there should be an investigation to see if there really was a crime committed.

If a bank has just been robbed and you walk into a police station with a firearm and a bag full of cash... absolutely.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Wikileaks isn't in that situation. Like I said earlier, at this point the US government has not accused them or Assange of a single crime related to leaking these memos. Regardless of what he says he's done, they haven't even accused him of a crime. If he was in the US, they would have no legal authority to even arrest him for these leaked memos, yet you have former Presidential candidates calling for him to be executed. That's not extreme and over reacting?

 

[byteware]

Wikileaks isn't in that situation.

What do you mean Wikileaks isn't in that situation?

Have government secrets been stolen and released to the public?

Is wikileaks claiming that they have those secrets?

Has wikileaks posted those secrets on it's website?

I guess, the only difference between your scenario and mine is that in mine you turned yourself in... with Wikileaks, they are thumbing their noses saying "you can't get us".

 

[A.Nonymous]

And in the situation you suggested I would immediately be placed under arrest. At that point the cops might seize my car as evidence and search my home (which they'd still need a warrant for). All of that is due process.

Assange hasn't been arrested for anything related to the leaked cables, nor has he been formally accused by the feds or any other agency of any crimes related to the leaked cables. Despite that, he's already being punished for it.

 

[byteware]

And in the situation you suggested I would immediately be placed under arrest. At that point the cops might seize my car as evidence and search my home (which they'd still need a warrant for). All of that is due process.

Now... if you said the same thing from Cuba... would they immediately place you under arrest? Obviously not. Even if you photographed each stage of the robbery? Told them you were going to do it, and then did it?

Assange hasn't been arrested for anything related to the leaked cables, nor has he been formally accused by the feds or any other agency of any crimes related to the leaked cables. Despite that, he's already being punished for it.

He isn't being punished. What he has done is a threat to our national security. Seriously. shutting down the site, and hopefully preventing any further leaks of this nature is something we need to do to protect our national security. Unfortunately, that has nothing to do with him being guilty.


Let me put it to you this way... if we know that the drug cartels are trying to buy a nuclear weapon, do we need to convict them of a crime in order to disrupt their activities? Is that punishing him?



Here's another thing, the site is actively participating in espionage against us... that is reason enough for us to take action against the site, whether or not we take action against the owner/operator.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Now... if you said the same thing from Cuba... would they immediately place you under arrest? Obviously not. Even if you photographed each stage of the robbery? Told them you were going to do it, and then did it?

We're not talking about Cuba. We're talking about the US. By your logic you could argue that if he was in Iran and just stepped out on his front porch and said the government sucked he'd be executed. Yes, that's probably true, but that's Iran, not the US.

He isn't being punished. What he has done is a threat to our national security. Seriously. shutting down the site, and hopefully preventing any further leaks of this nature is something we need to do to protect our national security. Unfortunately, that has nothing to do with him being guilty.

No, he's not being punished. His domain name has basically been seized the feds have leaned on Visa, Mastercard and Paypal to suspend his funds, they've leaned on Amazon to pull his web hosting and they're leaning on Twitter and Facebook to pull his accounts. But he's not being punished. Oh, and we have potential 2012 Presidential candidates calling for his execution (which is apparently OK to do). But he's not being punished.

Let me put it to you this way... if we know that the drug cartels are trying to buy a nuclear weapon, do we need to convict them of a crime in order to disrupt their activities? Is that punishing him?

If Assange has committed a crime, then freaking charge him with one. Heck, just publicly come out and say you're going to charge him with a crime. Accuse him of a crime if he's committed one. That's all I'm saying.

Let's say for the sake of argument that the guy has committed a crime. Heck, let's say he's even committed a crime that is worthy of execution. Is it too much to ask that he actually be accused/charged with said crime before they drop the hammer on him? Is that really asking too much?

Here's another thing, the site is actively participating in espionage against us... that is reason enough for us to take action against the site, whether or not we take action against the owner/operator.

Again, accuse the site and it's owners of espionage then. Go to court. File the appropriate paperwork. Let the site owners respond. Let a judge and/or jury decide if the site is really participating in espionage or if the feds are simply over reacting and go from there. It's a little thing called due process. Fifth Ammendment much?

 

[byteware]

We're not talking about Cuba. We're talking about the US. By your logic you could argue that if he was in Iran and just stepped out on his front porch and said the government sucked he'd be executed. Yes, that's probably true, but that's Iran, not the US.

No, he's not being punished. His domain name has basically been seized the feds have leaned on Visa, Mastercard and Paypal to suspend his funds, they've leaned on Amazon to pull his web hosting and they're leaning on Twitter and Facebook to pull his accounts. But he's not being punished. Oh, and we have potential 2012 Presidential candidates calling for his execution (which is apparently OK to do). But he's not being punished.

If Assange has committed a crime, then freaking charge him with one. Heck, just publicly come out and say you're going to charge him with a crime. Accuse him of a crime if he's committed one. That's all I'm saying.

Let's say for the sake of argument that the guy has committed a crime. Heck, let's say he's even committed a crime that is worthy of execution. Is it too much to ask that he actually be accused/charged with said crime before they drop the hammer on him? Is that really asking too much?

Again, accuse the site and it's owners of espionage then. Go to court. File the appropriate paperwork. Let the site owners respond. Let a judge and/or jury decide if the site is really participating in espionage or if the feds are simply over reacting and go from there. It's a little thing called due process. Fifth Ammendment much?

Just so we are clear...you take issue with the government taking action to prevent the further release of state secrets without charging Assange with a crime?

 

[A.Nonymous]

Just so we are clear...you take issue with the government taking action to prevent the further release of state secrets without charging Assange with a crime?

Yes. The Fifth Amendment clearly grants the right to due process. If Assange has indeed committed a crime, then accuse him of that, file charges, etc....

 

[Bob Maxey]

Paypal, Visa and Mastercard have stopped processing payments to wikileaks under government pressure. The Department of Homeland Security wants wikileaks declared a "terrorist organization." The feds are currently leaning on Facebook and Twitter to pull their respective wikileaks pages. Facebook has told them to pound sand (yay Facebook!!) and Twitter has refused comment.

Once again, the guy has not been accused of a single crime here in the United States or a single crime anywhere in the world that's related to leaking these documents. How is this not an over reaction?

Well, we know he is guilty because he takes pride in admitting that he is guilty. We have proof he is guilty because you could visit the site and see what he posted. Second, potential for damage is great. Third, I think he is a horse

 

[hakr100]

Just so we are clear...you take issue with the government taking action to prevent the further release of state secrets without charging Assange with a crime?

Without due process? That's the sort of crap that filled up Gitmo. We've had enough of that extralegal bullshit. If Assange is a spy, indict him on those charges and try him.

 

[Bob Maxey]

The US government is SUPPOSED to be transparent, they're not supposed to have secrets, as a government for the people, by the people. A lot of people have forgotten that.

You do not know what you are talking about. Transparency does not mean all will be revealed. I get it; you want them to release the proof of Aliens, Roswell, and Area 51. Are you saying that the government should tell us absolutely everything they are doing? You need to learn a few things before you trot out your naive view of the world and how it should operate.

Bob Maxey

 

[Bob Maxey]

I can confess that I robbed a bank. That doesn't mean it's true. I guess by your logic I should be thrown in jail immediately and then there should be an investigation to see if there really was a crime committed.

But if a bank was indeed robbed, if you told the investigators the time and place, if you posted pictures of the robbery, if you posted stolen video tape on the web and if you took pride in your abilities to rob a bank and admitted it to the world, dam sure, in a cell you will go until the investigation can begin.

I think anyone that walks into a cop shop and admits he robbed a bank, seems to me they will be held for a bit.

Bob Maxey

 

[A.Nonymous]

Well, we know he is guilty because he takes pride in admitting that he is guilty. We have proof he is guilty because you could visit the site and see what he posted. Second, potential for damage is great. Third, I think he is a horse

 

[A.Nonymous]

But if a bank was indeed robbed, if you told the investigators the time and place, if you posted pictures of the robbery, if you posted stolen video tape on the web and if you took pride in your abilities to rob a bank and admitted it to the world, dam sure, in a cell you will go until the investigation can begin.

I think anyone that walks into a cop shop and admits he robbed a bank, seems to me they will be held for a bit.

Bob Maxey

Sure. They're arrested which is equivalent of being accused of a crime. Then they investigate and go from there. Wikileaks and Assange have not been accused of a single crime related to leaking these memos.

 

[Bob Maxey]

Without due process? That's the sort of crap that filled up Gitmo. We've had enough of that extralegal bullshit. If Assange is a spy, indict him on those charges and try him.

Kindly tell me what laws and constitutional protection applies to enemy combatants taken during a war.

Bob Maxey