PDA

View Full Version : Assange headed for American gulag




itshappening
12-08-2010, 09:58 AM
Assange Headed for US Gulag
Posted by Lew Rockwell on December 8, 2010 09:36 AM

A friend in the know predicts that Julian Assange of Wikileaks will be extradited by that US poodle, the UK, to once-neutral Sweden, where he will be found guilty and forced to pay a fine of c.$700. At that point, the US secret indictment will be revealed, and he will be renditioned to the empire. As what Joe Evilman (an enemy non-combatant) calls an enemy combatant, Assange is subhuman to the US government, sort of like a taxpayer. He will never see freedom again, but will be caged in filth in Guantanamo or Supermax or one of those other CIA torture camps scattered around the world. After he is interrogated in their bloody enhanced fashion, if he is not killed in the process, Julian Assange will become yet another number in the world’s biggest Château d’If.

I pray my friend is wrong.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/72585.html

Matt Collins
12-08-2010, 10:32 AM
What US law did he violate?

Lucille
12-08-2010, 10:34 AM
Noooo! I pray that's not his fate.

Hallamaat
12-08-2010, 10:36 AM
What US law did he violate?

Probably the laws that Lieberman will try to make up at any given moment, constitution be damned.

sailingaway
12-08-2010, 10:40 AM
What US law did he violate?

this ^^^

This is the huge problem. The 'macho' commenters and tools like Lieberman are saying 'if it isn't against the law, it should be' with no thoughtful consideration of WHY it wouldn't be against the law.

I'm not an Assange fan. I don't even know if in that release of material he MAY have broken some existing and Constitutional law -- the information is still coming to light. I also would hold against him any release of information that endangers innocent people.

HOWEVER, we need a free press or we aren't a free country. It really boils down to that.

After 9/11 they passed the patriot act and I kind of understand that, although Ron was right and they were wrong about it. We have a long tradition of reacting in too arbitrary and blanket a method when we are attacked. Historically those measures (like the Japanese relocation camps) have been attached to a declaration of war, and when the war is over, they are repealled or rethought. Here, we are creating a new WAY OF LIFE, regardless of war, and one that doesn't value or protect our liberties.

So I'm not cheering for Assange, per se, but I am very leary of the witch hunt that seems to be going on in some circles. That Scott Brown joined Lieberman in wanting to EXPAND the Wilson era espionage act to limit freedom of speech speaks worlds about him, to my mind. That Ron saw that and spoke out for truth not being treason is, of course, just Ron all over.

Now the witch hunt is being used by neocons as a new 'emergency' to reinvigorate their erroded power base, and many who don't think things through are reflexively rising to their rhetoric. This means that Ron is being vilified in some conservative corners, and that is a shame.

But if Ron DIDN'T speak out for freedom of speech and due process, out of fear of political backlash, he'd be just like all the other cowards on Capital Hill.

It is just an unfortunate side effect that some who are open minded on the conservative side, don't know what to think at this point, hearing the banging drums against Assange and hearing Ron vilified as speaking out for him. With the caveat that nasty comments hurt our side more than anything else, and noting that Marcus IS a Constitutionalist and has been a friend to Rand in his campaign, this blog at Bluegrass Bulletin kind of reflects the problem (particularly when you go to the links.) Well meaning conservatives who never really looked into the slurs against Ron before, are hearing more and some don't know what to think.
http://www.bluegrassbulletin.com/2010/12/writer-calls-ron-paul-al-qaedas-favorite-congressman.html#comments

KCIndy
12-08-2010, 10:51 AM
What US law did he violate?


Embarrassing the U.S. State Department. In the First Degree. :rolleyes:

lester1/2jr
12-08-2010, 10:52 AM
they talked about this on freedom watch last night. I think the lawyer guy said they were already assembling a grand jury.

Lucille
12-08-2010, 11:00 AM
they talked about this on freedom watch last night. I think the lawyer guy said they were already assembling a grand jury.

For the grand jury.

Exodus 23:2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2023:2,Exodus%2032:3&version=NKJV)- You shall not follow a crowd to do evil; nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after many to pervert justice.

lester1/2jr
12-08-2010, 11:01 AM
it's not up at the freedomwatch site but the guy seemed to know what he was talking about.

FunkBuddha
12-08-2010, 11:04 AM
What US law did he violate?

Irrelevant.

Matt Collins
12-08-2010, 11:06 AM
they talked about this on freedom watch last night. I think the lawyer guy said they were already assembling a grand jury.
I think last week the Judge said that the guy who released these to WL broke law, but the media outlets who publish it are protected via the 1st Amendment.

hazek
12-08-2010, 11:09 AM
Welcome to America. The land of the free and the home of the brave. The new Soviet union.

Vessol
12-08-2010, 11:17 AM
What US law did he violate?

Law? What law do you speak of?

The United States is a nation ruled by FIAT! Not LAW!

HOLLYWOOD
12-08-2010, 11:34 AM
Still that SMIRK on Defense Sec. Robert Gates when the correspondent said the UK arrested Assange and he's in jail.

That fucker Gates knew the British Boot Lickers of the FEDERAL RESERVE would do the dirty work for the US. This will come to a head someday, and the tyranny and recklessness of government to do as it pleases around the world to anyone, is going to create an awful lot of Hatred and Reprisals... both foreign and domestic.

This also shows you the well coordinated operations of governments against people.

As of last night... the Swedish government have NOT filed any charges against Assange, they just want to question him. But we all know how that went with the US dictation to websites like The Pirate Bay.

Well polished Nazism is the New America.

lester1/2jr
12-08-2010, 11:37 AM
got it


http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/freedom-watch/index.html#/v/4451249/is-us-violating-assanges-civil-rights/?playlist_id=157991

CUnknown
12-08-2010, 11:45 AM
He violated the Julian Assange law, the one they haven't made yet, but it will be made just for him. It will read: "It is illegal for Julian Assange to not be in jail."

fisharmor
12-08-2010, 12:08 PM
What US law did he violate?

+rep
They've already done this with really tan guys with long beards for the last decade... they're just moving on to white folks now.

HOLLYWOOD
12-08-2010, 12:12 PM
The U.S. extradites him... "Sen. Dianne Feinstein is already talking about charging him with espionage."http://theweek.com/article/index/210129/whats-next-for-wikileaks-julian-assange-7-theories

What's next for WikiLeaks' Julian Assange: 7 theories
The WikiLeaker-in-chief is in a British jail, fighting extradition to Sweden, or even the U.S. What will happen to the embattled provocateur and his site now?
posted on December 8, 2010, at 10:53 AM

WikiLeaks chief Julian Assange is in jail in Britain (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/12/08/2010-12-08_wikileaks_founder_julian_assange_jailed_in_brit ain_in_connection_with_swedish_ra.html?r=news), awaiting trial on Swedish sex crimes charges, but what will happen next is unclear. Deemed a flight risk and denied bail, Assange will stay incarcerated at least until his Dec. 14 hearing. In his absence, WikiLeaks is still "operational," says spokeswoman Kristinn Hrafnsson (http://www.aolnews.com/ca/article/julian-assange-arrested-so-whats-next-for-wikileaks/19750273), but Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and the site's Swiss bank have cut off much of its funding. (Those companies have since faced retaliatory attacks (http://www.businessinsider.com/cyber-hackers-that-took-down-swiss-bank-site-have-now-taken-down-mastercardcom-2010-12) from sympathetic hackers.) Here are seven guesses as to what's in store for Assange and his secrets-spilling site:

Without Assange, WikiLeaks descends into "chaos"
Assange left Hrafnsson, an Icelandic TV journalist, in charge during his absence, but the organization is already reeling, says Kevin Poulsen in Wired (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/wikileaks-reels/). According to a "dispirited" WikiLeaks activist, the group's "secrecy and compartmentalization are apparently hindering its operations," since only Assange knows some key information. Assange has bragged that he is "the heart and soul" of WikiLeaks, and without him, "the organization will most likely start to fall apart now," says the WikiLeaks staffer. "We are experiencing chaos."

Assange roils the world with his top-secret "doomsday file"
According to reports, a particularly damaging WikiLeaks "insurance file... will be released if anything drastic were to happen to the organization" or Assange himself, says Clayton Tarwater in US News Source (http://www.usnewssource.com/headlines/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-arrested-whats-next_14026.html). No one knows what the heavily encrypted file (also known as the "doomsday file") contains, but hundreds of thousands of people worldwide have it on their computers, ready to receive the encryption key if Assange is killed, or even given a long jail sentence. Rumor has it that the file includes "top secret state information that governments around the world definitely would not want in the public’s hands."


The U.S. extradites him
U.S. officials may have already indicted Assange under seal, says Justin Elliott in Salon (http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/12/07/julian_assange_extradition). Sweden should have dibs at trying him, but such high-profile extraditions are often decided by politics, and the U.S. could already be "working behind the scenes to secure his extradition." When dealing with the British authorities, "that's easier said than done," says Jennifer Rubin in The Washington Post (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-turn/2010/12/julian_assange_arrested.html). But Sen. Dianne Feinstein is already talking about charging him with espionage. Let's not get tripped up over "arcane definitions of espionage," says S.E. Cupp in the New York Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/12/08/2010-12-08_prosecute_assange_blackmail_conspiracy_even_man slaughter_would_be_welldeserved_f.html). Al Capone was nailed on tax charges; given Assange's "insurance" file, "why can't we just get him on blackmail?"


Assange becomes an "albino Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr."... or Solzhenitsyn... or Spartacus
Being jailed in Britain on "trumped up" Swedish sex charges is the best thing that could have happened to Assange, says Jack Shafer in Slate (http://www.slate.com/id/2277096/). It "changes the 'conversation.'" Overnight he has gone from being a menace to a martyr, "an albino Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., writing his letter from jail," or a "pint-sized Solzhenitsyn, fighting for freedom from the gulag." And as the leaks continue, the jailed Assange will "become like Spartacus," more inspirational than controversial.


He becomes irrelevant as rivals outflank WikiLeaks
"WikiLeaks is going to be brought down by its competitors, not by governments," says John Young, a founder of WikiLeaks, to The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/07/wikileaks-what-happens-next). And Assange already faces a big challenge from a former key lieutenant, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, who broke off from the group over Assange's priorities, ego, and lack of transparency, taking several important staffers with him. Domscheit-Berg's rival site has not yet launched.


Assange becomes immortalized as Time's "Man of the Year"
The WikiLeaks frontman "will presumably get Time magazine's 'Person of the Year' nod," says Robert Wright in The New York Times (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/julian-assange-neocon-tool/), and Time will "no doubt remind us that the award recognizes impact, not virtue; Hitler and Stalin are past winners." Assange is leading Time's online poll by a wide margin, says Australia's Herald Sun (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/julian-assange-leads-time-magazine-person-of-the-year-poll/story-e6frf7lf-1225967642823), but "online bookmaker YouWager.com is betting on Time playing it safe" with someone like Lady Gaga. (Watch a Russia Today report about a suggestion Assange get a Nobel Prize (http://theweek.com/article/index/210131/should-julian-assange-get-a-nobel-prize))


WikiLeaks is taken down by a Sutxnet-type worm
"In theory, it should be possible" for the U.S., or even a group of sophisticated hackers, to "deploy a computer worm that could burrow into a computer hard drive and look specifically for WikiLeaks files, as the recent Sutxnet worm did" with Iran's nuclear reactors, says Tom Gjelten at NPR (http://www.npr.org/2010/12/08/131892110/wikileaks-dodges-obstacles-to-stay-online). The worm would then destroy the files, rendering Assange's threat moot. But that would be "highly controversial" for the U.S. to pull off. "Does the U.S. government have the right to go into your computer and erase material that you obtained legally," asks cyber expert Herbert Lin. "That's a very, very deep question."

fisharmor
12-08-2010, 12:20 PM
WikiLeaks is taken down by a Sutxnet-type worm

Oh noes teh .gov worm is crawling across my desk to my unattached thumbdrive, backup tape, and unwriteable CD!

What morons.

archangel689
12-08-2010, 12:29 PM
WikiLeaks is taken down by a Sutxnet-type worm
"In theory, it should be possible" for the U.S., or even a group of sophisticated hackers, to "deploy a computer worm that could burrow into a computer hard drive and look specifically for WikiLeaks files, as the recent Sutxnet worm did" with Iran's nuclear reactors, says Tom Gjelten at NPR (http://www.npr.org/2010/12/08/131892110/wikileaks-dodges-obstacles-to-stay-online). The worm would then destroy the files, rendering Assange's threat moot. But that would be "highly controversial" for the U.S. to pull off. "Does the U.S. government have the right to go into your computer and erase material that you obtained legally," asks cyber expert Herbert Lin. "That's a very, very deep question."


Far fetched. Very far fetched. Firstly, if a hacker can't break into wikileaks servers on his own to delete the materials, how is a hacker supposed to write a worm to exploit many servers automatically to delete the materials?

Even a serious worm would not be able to achieve the saturation needed to destroy the files forever. One worm wouldn't do it, either, you'd need one for each platform and I'm sure these files exist on hardened oses... which are not going to be broken into very easily. Even if this miracle (calamity) were to occur, it would still probably not remove the files as people will have burned these files to dvds and other read only media, or simply disconnected their machines from the internet.

This futile attempt at taking out wikileaks is hilarious to anyone with a computer science background. Watching politicians make grandiose remarks when they don't even understand the full gravity of the situation. You cannot control this without absolute authoritarian control of the internet.

This means open source code would have to be illegal and hardware based back doors would have to be mandatory inside every system, you would have to have a national firewall, all encryption would have to have backdoors in it.... you'd have to license compilers. it would have to be total orwell and this won't happen theres too much of a grounding already in open source; Programmers don't like being put in a sandbox they tend to break out of it rather easily.

archangel689
12-08-2010, 12:31 PM
Oh noes teh .gov worm is crawling across my desk to my unattached thumbdrive, backup tape, and unwriteable CD!

What morons.
http://th02.deviantart.net/fs10/300W/i/2006/127/4/e/The_LOLCOPTER_by_Level8.jpg

Andrew-Austin
12-08-2010, 12:33 PM
I don't think they will do that, its a bit over the top to do to someone who can be considered a journalist, even if they don't consider him to be a journalist. It will make them look terribly bad. The violate jeering of the media is one thing, what action they really take against him is another.

I think the speculation that they will just try to assassinate his reputation/character is more probable.

Sarge
12-08-2010, 12:37 PM
Are any BOA employees in jail over this? If not, why not? They are Americans and not an Australian.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bank-of-america-settles-muni-market-fraud-charges-2010-12-07?dist=afterbell

Lucille
12-08-2010, 01:16 PM
Oh dear God, no:

LRC: They’re Readying the Cattle Car (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/72610.html)


The US is already explaining to its client state, Sweden, how it will deliver (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2010/12/us-talking-to-swedes-about-assange.html) Julian Assange of WikiLeaks up to cage, torture, destruction.

Belfast Telegraph: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange may face trial in US (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-may-face-trial-in-us-15024382.html):


Informal discussions have already been held between US and Swedish officials about the possibility of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange being delivered into US custody, according to diplomatic sources.

jbrace
12-08-2010, 01:27 PM
Could Assanage be charged with Espionage, or would he be protected underneath the 1st amendment?

If he is protected, how can he with him not being a citizen of the United States?

dannno
12-08-2010, 01:30 PM
It would be awesome after the establishment is taken down to be the one to go release the guy from his prison cell..

fisharmor
12-08-2010, 01:35 PM
If he is protected, how can he with him not being a citizen of the United States?

If he's not a citizen, can he be tortured to death in a public square?
If he's not a citizen, and he owns a home in this country, can the US Govt confiscate it to quarter troops?
If he's not a citizen, can he be enslaved in this country without due process?
Can he be forced to give testimony against himself?
Can his chosen religion be stamped out within our borders?

CITIZENSHIP DOES NOT GRANT RIGHTS.

jbrace
12-08-2010, 01:57 PM
If he's not a citizen, can he be tortured to death in a public square?
If he's not a citizen, and he owns a home in this country, can the US Govt confiscate it to quarter troops?
If he's not a citizen, can he be enslaved in this country without due process?
Can he be forced to give testimony against himself?
Can his chosen religion be stamped out within our borders?

CITIZENSHIP DOES NOT GRANT RIGHTS.

I understand that, but I'm in a debate from a legal standpoint. Unfortunately, I have reached the conclusion that he can be charged with Espionage if extradited to the U.S.


TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 37 > § 798
Prev | Next

§ 798. Disclosure of classified information
How Current is This?

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—

(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or

(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or

(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or

(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Feeding the Abscess
12-08-2010, 02:07 PM
Supreme Court rulings have made clear that what Assange has done is protected under the 1st Amendment.

jbrace
12-08-2010, 02:46 PM
Supreme Court rulings have made clear that what Assange has done is protected under the 1st Amendment.

Link to rulings?

Lucille
12-08-2010, 03:00 PM
Link to rulings?

U.S. Supreme Court
NEW YORK TIMES CO. v. UNITED STATES, 403 U.S. 713 (1971)
403 U.S. 713

NEW YORK TIMES CO. v. UNITED STATES
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
No. 1873.
Argued June 26, 1971
Decided June 30, 1971 * (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=403&invol=713)

Endgame
12-08-2010, 04:15 PM
If the US gets their hands on him, I hope what they do is as outrageous and brutal as possible. Assange and Wikileaks will be replaced overnight and the world will be made to see what the US government is capable of.

Fredom101
12-08-2010, 04:21 PM
Follow the money. This has everything to do with the big bank leak. The ruling class does NOT want that info out and they will do everything they can to tear down Assange and Wikileaks. Problem is, the truth is bullet proof. They are screwed no matter what.

Bman
12-08-2010, 04:31 PM
What US law did he violate?

This one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006

amy31416
12-08-2010, 04:45 PM
This one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006


"The term 'unlawful enemy combatant' means —
(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al-Qaida, or associated forces); or
(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense."
...
"The term 'lawful enemy combatant' means a person who is —
(A) a member of the regular forces of a State party engaged in hostilities against the United States;
(B) a member of a militia, volunteer corps, or organized resistance movement belonging to a State party engaged in such hostilities, which are under responsible command, wear a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry their arms openly, and abide by the law of war; or
(C) a member of a regular armed force who professes allegiance to a government engaged in such hostilities, but not recognized by the United States."

Which describes Assange?

Bman
12-08-2010, 04:48 PM
Which describes Assange?


IMHO They'll make it up as they go along. But that's what I see them using. They'll initially call it hostilities against the United States of America. Hell watch the interviews, it's already been used.

anaconda
12-08-2010, 05:20 PM
Maybe Ron Paul can be of assistance to Mr. Assange. And Rand Paul.