Sign in / up

back to article Stratfor leak: US 'has secret indictment' of Julian Assange

US prosecutors have drawn up secret charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, according to a leaked internal email extracted from private US intelligence firm Stratfor and obtained by the whistleblower site. WikiLeaks began releasing the first tranche of more than five million Stratfor emails on Monday in a bid to show …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Chad H.

    One thing I dont get

    Why is this all this worry about being extradited from sweeden, when other active cases at the moment suggest the US can pluck anyone they like from the UK without any real bother?

    I should think he's probably safer there, than here.

    11 1

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Steve Knox
      Reply Icon
      Meh

      Re: One thing I dont get

      There's no real worry -- his lawyers are just using the tried-and-true legal strategy of throwing out anything they think anyone might believe in an attempt to muddy the waters.

      The rest of this article is equally uninformative:

      I would expect any government which suffered a data breach to attempt to indict those responsible for the breach, and it's not uncommon for intelligence-related indictments to be kept under wraps at least until such time as there is a reasonable chance of apprehending the subject.

      I wouldn't expect WikiLeaks to come out with anything other than data supporting their position that the US is after them. A great deal of their cachet comes from convincing others that their paranoia is justified.

      And OF COURSE Stratfor is going to make as vague a claim as possible regarding the accuracy of the leaked e-mails. The more public uncertainty about them the better for Stratfor, even if they are fake.

      5 20
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Re: One thing I dont get

        "I would expect any government which suffered a data breach to attempt to indict those responsible for the breach"

        They've already got the person responsible; Bradley Manning. Julian Assange is a foreign national who had no part in the "data breach", but received the data as a third party.

        The data wasn't "intelligence-related", in the sense that it didn't really contain anything of direct military value. But it was politically embarrassing for the US government.

        Treating the publishers of information from whistle-blowers as terrorists makes about as much sense as extraditing people for shipping batteries at the behest of the FBI.

        23 0
        1. Chad H.
          Reply Icon

          Re: Re: Re: One thing I dont get

          "I would expect any government which suffered a data breach to attempt to indict those responsible for the breach"

          ---

          Great, lets start with the guy who thinks its a good idea to send a mentally usnstable man on the fast track to a discharge because of his behaviour into a position where he gets to handle sensitive information.

          8 2
        2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          Reply Icon
          Facepalm

          Re: Re: Re: One thing I dont get

          ".....They've already got the person responsible; Bradley Manning. Julian Assange is a foreign national who had no part in the "data breach"...." You are swallowing the Wikileaks version of events, that A$$nut and Co in no way encouraged or prompted the theft, and simply were the unsuspecting recipients of an anonymous data dump. And if you believe that, I have some real estate in the Everglades you might be interested in.

          5 25
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Pint

            @Chad

            My guess is that he may be a little worried that the charges of ‘rape’ might actually be upheld by a court in Sweden.

            0 4
  2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
    Facepalm

    The "truth" courtesy of A$$nut?

    Yeah, right! If he told me it was sunny outside I'd immediately get an umbrella.

    3 25
    1. Goat Jam
      Reply Icon

      Re: The "truth" courtesy of A$$nut?

      Matt, do you honestly think you do the vapid right-wing nut case cause any good with your inane posts?

      Honestly, sometimes I think you are a lefty troll trying to make neo-nazi fascists look even worse than they already do.

      But then I think you might be a right wing shill trying to make other right wingers with incredibly narrow "USA USA Rah Rah" world views look moderate by comparison.

      21 2
      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Pirate

        Re: Re: The "truth" courtesy of A$$nut?

        GJ, I take your upset as reassurance that I am indeed sane and capable of independent thought. Maybe you should try the latter some time? In the meantime, please feel free to post something - anything! - relevant to the actual thread. Maybe you'd like to account for why you consider the word of a convicted hacker as gospel?

        3 25
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Re: Re: The "truth" courtesy of A$$nut?

          "Maybe you'd like to account for why you consider the word of a convicted hacker as gospel?"

          While he's thinking about that could you account for why you consider the word of the politico's and uncivil servants in the US government and the members of the US security services as gospel?

          0 0
          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
            Reply Icon
            Facepalm

            Re: The "truth" courtesy of A$$nut?

            "....could you account for why you consider the word of the politico's and uncivil servants in the US government and the members of the US security services as gospel?" I don't, but unlike many of the Anonsheep here I actually check a number of sources before making an opinion, I don't just follow the trendy thought-du-jour as they do.

            0 2
  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Seems like America can pluck pretty much anyone from anywhere for anything they feel like, scum sucking fuckers!

    15 2
    1. Ian Michael Gumby
      Reply Icon
      Devil

      @AC

      No, not anyone. There are limits.

      Assange should be thankful he didn't piss off former KGB agents.

      Don't worry about extradition. Just worry about living.

      American's look like amateurs when it comes to the world of espionage and dirty tricks.

      7 3
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: @AC

        "American's look like amateurs when it comes to the world of espionage and dirty tricks."

        Well, until you remember various confirmed beyond any kind of doubt whatsoever CIA activities, like supporting right-wing terrorist groups in South America to overthrow elected governments, and MK Ultra.

        As for the guy just extradited for the Batteries-to-Iran affair, what struck me a few days ago was 'so how much time did Ollie North do, again? And is he still a hero to who I feel fairly confident are the same types behind the extradition?'

        3 0
        1. Ian Michael Gumby
          Reply Icon
          Mushroom

          Re: Re: @AC

          Justin,

          Kind of mashing a couple of things up.

          But lets put things in perspective.

          Ollie North got caught.

          Watergate, Nixon got caught.

          What about something more recent? CIA types getting caught in Italy?

          Then contrast that against the assassination of the Russian from exposure to nuke material. (Rumor has it that it was KGB yet no one has been charged.)

          Also look at the latest assassination of an Iranian Nuke Guy who was blown up by a bomb attached to his car by some people on a motorcycle as he was driving to work. Iran claims Mossad (Israel) did this. No one caught.

          My point? We've lost our edge in covert ops that are outside the scope of military action.

          1 1
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Re: Re: @AC

            Okay, well if that's your point, how do you know what covert ops the CIA, or whoever, has done successfully? Surely the definition of success is you don't know about it - or, if its something that will be roundly condemned, you think someone else is responsible. While the failures would need to be put into perspective, i.e. weighed against the successes.

            Anyway, I didn't mention being reminded of Ollie North as any sort of rebuttal; just an observation of the hypocrisy of the extradition justification PR.

            0 0
          2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
            Reply Icon
            Big Brother

            Re: @AC

            "....We've lost our edge in covert ops that are outside the scope of military action." IMG, you forget that the best covert action not only never makes the public eye but also goes undetected by the enemy. As an example, as proof of the Nork involvement in building the Syrian reactor bombed at Kibar in 2007, the CIA and Mossad mounted a joint operation that even went as far as stealling digital pictures the Nork scientists had taken of each other in Syria! It was largely the CIA that unmasked the illegal nuke weapons technology network of Pakistani Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, forcing the Pakistani government to confront him in 2004 (and anyone that wants to maintain that neither the Pakistani government or the SIS knew what Khan was up to really needs a reality check). Don't assume a lack of headlines means a lack of success.

            0 2
      2. Scorchio!!
        Reply Icon

        Re: @AC

        Indeed, as the case of one Alexander Litvinenko indicates, Anna Politkovskaya and hundreds (yes) of other journalists throughout the former Soviet Union. Assassination has been given official blessing in Russia as an instrument of policy; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_Russia

        0 0
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      @AC 1916

      "Seems like America can pluck pretty much anyone from anywhere for anything they feel like, scum sucking fuckers!"

      Actually, if you look around for 5 minutes, you will find that the Decider-in-Chief can have anyone, anywhere, killed for anything he feels like (or nothing). That now includes US citizens in the USA.

      The President and his executive staff can do anything they like to any person in the world, and no law court has the slightest say in the matter.

      So all this stuff about prosecutions and grand juries is just window dressing.

      6 1
  4. P. Lee
    Terminator

    Most damaging of all

    > Like all private emails, they were written casually, with no expectation that anyone other than the sender and recipient would ever see them.

    Geopolitical analysis doesn't stretch to understanding smtp or echelon.

    Liars all!

    8 0
    1. Dave Bell
      Reply Icon

      Re: Most damaging of all

      Yeah, but at the end of the day an email like this really should be written with an eye to how it might look in court. Stratfor only had to say that an indictment was likely, and handling of any relevant information should keep that possibility in mind. It didn't need to suggest they had their own, possibly illicit, contacts within the US Government.

      This one is obviously of potential interest to the lawyers, not like, "Jack, can we do lunch tomorrow?"

      3 0
  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I look forward to his extradition and trial in the US.

    3 21
    1. Ian Michael Gumby
      Reply Icon
      Boffin

      You are going to have to wait for that..

      Assange has a date in Swedish court first.

      Then he's going to face a civil lawsuit over the latest gift from Anon.

      The US can take their time...

      1 2
  6. ElReg!comments!Pierre

    So... it has come to this.

    http://xkcd.com/1022/

    12 3
  7. Phil Endecott

    > Government and diplomatic sources from around the world give

    > Stratfor advance knowledge of global politics and events in exchange

    > for money.

    Reminds me a bit of Levenson this week: "A network of corrupt officials" in the "police, military, health and government" who would pass on information in exchange for large amounts of money.

    8 0
  8. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
    Mushroom

    A "secret indictment", huh?

    Break out the SS regalia. Reanimate Judge Freisler. Open the star chamber.

    Then again, what would one expect from the a nation in which the president arrogates himself the absolute freedom[tm] to terminate random citizens (which would thus be anti-citizens, I guess) if a case can be made in a secret legal document that he can, in fact, do so?

    The US is currently shit tier and heading deeper into the brown bog. It doesn't need to be this way. Things can be changed with judicious application of crowbars.

    8 2
    1. Ian Michael Gumby
      Reply Icon
      Mushroom

      Re: A "secret indictment", huh?

      Clearly. You know nothing of US Law.

      Secret Grand Juries happen. It was already reported that there was a federal grand jury investigating Assange. No reports as to the outcome in the media. Nothing shocking there.

      Manning's article 32 hearing released some information tying Assange to the theft, so Assange can't claim clean hands.

      So yet again no shocker.

      But if you Google for news on Assange you may come across reports in Israel where he offered to do an interview under some bizarre terms and when the reporter got the docs through legal means, Assanage tied to claim that they were his 'intellectual' property. Seems another newspaper heard that one claim too.

      ( This begs the question as to why Assange felt the docs were his in the first place...)

      All of this is in the Press BTW...

      But what is interesting is that Assange is probing Swedish journalists.

      You can read the story here: http://www.thelocal.se/39374/20120228/

      Keep defending Assange. But at least know the man you follow...

      2 6
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Re: A "secret indictment", huh?

        Google. still not a verb.

        http://google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/

        0 0
    2. Dave Bell
      Reply Icon

      Re: A "secret indictment", huh?

      We used to have something like Grand Juries in the British legal system. The French have judges in charge of police investigations. There are all sorts of different ways of organising these things.

      There are probably a good few meetings between the Police and the CPS which we never hear about. I'm not sure our system is all that much better than that which anyone else uses.

      3 0
    3. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Facepalm

      Re: A "secret indictment", huh?

      Aw, you mean you weren't one of the sheeple jumping up and down for joy when he replaced the "evil Bushitler", or trying to claim Obambi deserved his Nobel Prize? Bot, aren't the sheeple fickle nowadays!

      0 2
  9. Dennis Wilson
    Unhappy

    Torrent

    I was going to pass an informed comment but unzipping 600gb of emails will take a while so you will have to wait

    3 0
  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    BASTARDS!

    THEY ARE ALL BASTARDS! We have to be careful....they are out there...watching every single step you make.....

    1 1
  11. Winkypop Silver badge
    FAIL

    US intelligence firm Stratfor

    So not actually very intelligent then.

    3 1
  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Assange is a psychopath

    All he wants is media attention and your money for his legal defense. He's creating his own problems and he can expect to be held accountable for his actions be it in Sweden and elsewhere.

    4 11
    1. Magnus_Pym
      Reply Icon

      Re: Assange is a psychopath

      We are responsible for our actions. After all if Stratfor gained private information that they knew was not meant for them then released that information to other third parties then the directors would soon be in prison...

      ... Oh no. wait

      6 0
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Re: Assange is a psychopath

        Nice one, Magnus!

        0 1
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      A psychopath?

      Are sure you mean psychopath? Like an axe murderer? I haven't heard that accusation before.

      Around here, people who want media attention and your money are just called politicians.

      4 0
      1. Scorchio!!
        Reply Icon
        Thumb Down

        Re: A psychopath?

        I suggest that you read the literature, which is replete with examples of successful psychopaths working in a business environment. Try reading the work of Robert Hare, who really has been blazing a trail for a very long time. There are many misconceptions about psychopathy, schizophrenia and so on. The press are very good at shaping opinions in this way.

        1 0

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Assange is a psychopath

      No, that's not 'psychopath'. Possibly the guys in the US helicopter shooting the unarmed innocents in Iraq are though. And while most of the grunts doing the torturing in US military prisons are probably just like everyone else, easily led, I suspect there are one or two genuime psychopaths in the US military, judicial and political systems giving orders and making policy.

      6 2
      1. Ian Michael Gumby
        Reply Icon
        Mushroom

        Re: Re: Assange is a psychopath

        @Justin.

        Seems you don't remember the facts.

        Lets see if we can clear up your misunderstanding.

        It appears you're referencing the edited footage Assange posted under a very prejudicial title.

        Remind me again the following...

        1) What were the RoE (Rules of Engagement) for which the US military was operating under?

        2) Did the US Chopper come under fire prior to the footage shown?

        3) Where were the journalists? Weren't they embedded with the enemy forces that were armed and did fire upon US ground troops?

        Kinda thing that makes you wonder if you understand what happened when you put things in to perspective.

        When a reporter embeds themselves in to a dangerous situation, you should expect bad things to happen.

        There's a recent report of a journalist who got killed during a mortar attack in Syria. Apparently she was trying to go back and get her shoes while they were shelling the building where they were staying.

        Funny, I don't see you calling for protests at the Syrian Embassy or calling Syria murders.

        Oh wait. Syria != USA.

        2 2
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Re: Re: Assange is a psychopath

          i. I saw the video.

          ii. Protests at the Syrian Embassy? That would be about as productive as protests at the US Embassy!

          iii. You don't see me calling Syria murderers? Lots of Syrias, are there?

          As I see it, everyone in the world knows the Assad regime are murderers - bar perhaps the more stupid of it's supporters. China and Russia know, but are just about as bad and so it goes on. Like watching Sarajevo and Rwanda all over again.

          iv. So, your brain really does hurt, doesn't it.

          0 1
          1. Chad H.
            Reply Icon

            @ Justin

            No, Russia and China know whats going on.

            They just dont want the precedent set that we get to walk in and stop it when we catch them doing what Assad does.

            0 0
            1. Anonymous Coward
              Reply Icon
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: @ Justin

              I thought that's what I said.

              0 0
  13. Crisp

    Secret charges.

    Coming soon, secret trials, secret arrests, and secret sentences.

    I don't know why American just didn't do what they wanted to do in the first place and just pluck him from his bed in the dead of night.

    6 2
    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Facepalm

      Re: Secret charges.

      Probably because the US authorities enjoy watching the twit destroy his own rep with his attacks on ex-Wikileakers, previous partners in the press, and his hilarious attempts to avoid a court date in Sweden.

      Besides, it's election year, and Obambi needs the moonbat vote, so don't expect any real action against A$$nut until after the election is done and dusted.

      0 3

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "stole a large number of company emails"?

    I'm pretty sure the definition of theft includes provision that the owner is deprived of possession.

    "Stratfor is not a government organization, not is it affiliated with any government. The emails are private property. Like all private emails, they were written casually, with no expectation that anyone other than the sender and recipient would ever see them."

    Is no exemption from the law, corporates don't get special treatment even if they are, for now, more powerful than most elected governments.

    "Friedman concludes by apologising for last year's breach and the inconvenience it has resulted in for the firm's subscribers and employees."

    I can't even continue, the arrogance of this man just defies all description.

    3 1
  15. Bernard M. Orwell
    Big Brother

    How about....

    Some quotes from leaked Stratfor emails:

    "These assholes [Anonymous] should get the death sentence, along with their hero Julian Assange.”

    On 12/7/10 3:26 PM, Fred Burton wrote: "Founder needs to be water boarded until he gives us the code "

    #GIFiles: "If I thought I could switch this dickhead off without getting done I don't think I'd have too much of a problem."

    #GIFiles: "Not for Pub --We have a sealed indictment on Assange. Pls protect"

    So, when we were all shouting that the US were secretly planning nasty things for Assange/Anon/Wikileaks, and the jackboot brigade were calling us tinfoil hat wearers, they were wrong all the time. The so-called "crackpot conspiracy theories" turn out to be true.

    Remarkable.

    I'll keep reading and let you know if anymore quality, hypocritical quotes appear. I do love the way that a company that made its money by stealing secret information is outraged when someone else steals their secret information.

    Delicious.

    7 0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like