WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange says he enjoys watching US banks "squirm" as he threatens to expose them with a "megaleak" of confidential documents. "I think it's great," Assange told the venerable US television news magazine 60 Minutes on Sunday evening. "We have all these banks squirming, thinking maybe it's them." "You …
1) No here posts with their real name. So the whole AC/not AC thing is spurious.
2) Whether or not Simon 11 donated is not the topic he raised.
3) Assange claims to offer support - so where is that support?
The only hypocrite is Assange, he is the only one who claims to offer support but has not done so (in my opinion).
"1) No here posts with their real name. So the whole AC/not AC thing is spurious."
Except if you post openly we can check your previous comments and see if you're a shill or not.
"2) Whether or not Simon 11 donated is not the topic he raised."
He accused Assange of hypocrisy so if he's so keen on supporting Manning's defence he must have contributed, right.
"3) Assange claims to offer support - so where is that support?"
How good do you think it will look for Manning if Wikileaks gives him huge amounts of money? The prosecution will jump on it as evidence of a conspiracy and claim that he is a paid spy.
This would put Manning in a far worse position than he is now.
>>"but how much have you - and others who complain about WikiLeaks - contributed to the Bradley Manning defence fund ?"
I've contributed 100% of any donations I solicited, and I've done so immediately, with good grace, and with no need for public pressure.
Re: Norfolk 'n' Goode
--"Except if you post openly we can check your previous comments and see if you're a shill or not."
How would you (who's 'we') decide if someone is a shill?
if someone had a consistent approach to the issue which you don't agree with, does that qualify them as a shill, rather than simply a person with different opinions?
Generally, when I see people crying "shill!!!", it usually seems to be someone from a particular group who's convinced themselves they're speaking for the majority of citizens, or at least the majority of thinking citizens, and who isn't prepared to doubt that conclusion, and instead invents the pleasant humble fiction that they're so obviously right that anyone doubting them must be being paid to do it.
--"How good do you think it will look for Manning if Wikileaks gives him huge amounts of money?"
Why did Wikileaks ask for donations to be used to defend Manning?
Is the potential downside of doing that not something that they had ever really thought about before?
Are you suggesting that wikileaks is run by impulsive idiots?
Re: Re: Norfolk 'n' Goode
I don't think there are any shills on the Reg boards. Just a hell of a lot of paranoid conspiraloons.
Although I agree in principal (the idea of what he is doing) I do not agree with the self promoting way he is doing it.
In PR China...
... they have a constitutional right to free speech. But use it in a way the Govt. doesn't approve and watch out!
In the USA, they have... [duplicate data removed].
1917 Espionage Act and other laws
I suppose at least they have more than one straw to clutch at.
Like the idea WikiLeaks and what it stands for but despises Assange?
I think he is undermining it more than anything else as its directing its focus away from being a noble cause to being a penis extention to perpetuate and prop up his insufferable ego.
I agree wholeheartedly. Not only is Assange a self-serving rectum-head but in being so he makes himself the story rather than the cases of corruption and naughtiness his organisation are uncovering.
<QUOTE>he makes himself the story rather than the cases of corruption and naughtiness his organisation are uncovering.</QUOTE>
I think it more likely that others are making Assange the story. If you can do nothing about the embarrassing details of the story then change the focus of where everyone is looking to divert their attention from the details. Standard technique, surely.
Pull the other one ....... It's a Ding a Ling a Linger Ringer and plays tunes for Toons
"It's unclear whether the US government has pressured US operations to remove WikiLeaks from their services... " ..... Really? Those operations just took it upon themselves to lose all street cred and render themselves as puppets to a right dodgy regime into exchanging pretty printed paper currency notes and treasury IOUs for foreign wealth and global industry and alien intellectual property rights. Yeah, ok, I can believe that too in the shadow of a big ignorant stick.
Err.... if the US government has NOT pressured US operations to remove WikiLeaks from their services, is Wikileaks a covert US government operation?
Would IT be BetaTesting the Power of the Internet with Advanced IntelAIgent Media Controls in a Novel MkUltraSensitive Neuro-Linguistic Programming Project, or is that just something else and quite different that NIRobotIQs is Flashing and Floating into and onto Markets, Hearts and Minds?
>>"Really? Those operations just took it upon themselves to lose all street cred"
Yo man, Mastercard n Amazon be losin' dey respec' in da 'hood.
There alternatives to Assange's ego.
Try Cryptome. Very soon you will also have Openleaks to choose from as well.
John Young outclasses Assange by several orders of magnitude.
Also, openleaks.org is up. And their launch content (little more than their FAQ) has already been leaked to and posted on cryptome.org
As someone that was born and raised surrounded by technology and as someone that truly values what the Internet has brought to us in terms of convenience and access to information, I have to say that I am Assange's side all the way. Whistle-blowing is a right we should stand for and make sure is kept. The internet is our tool, not the US government tool.
He is the only man in history that had a been accused of rape and was investigated by the Interpol. That shows how low governments have gone in order to eleminate any opposition to their status quo. If the US, Swiss, UK and Swedish governments are concerned with this man, there is a good chance he is doing something good (as he is not a terrorist).
Assange is the man of the decade in my opinion.
only person ever?
erm... Roman Polanski?
Ok, so that's two. And both of them under pressure from the USA. Don't let association with Polanski's case tarnish Assanges case though; In most modern countries what he did isn't even a criminal offense, if an offense at all.
--"In most modern countries what he did isn't even a criminal offense, if an offense at all."
That rather sounds like you've already decided that you know exactly what he did, and that it is a criminal offense in Sweden, you're just blaming Sweden for what they decide is illegal.
That's more than /I've/ done, and I'm no fan of Assange.
@ Geoffrey W
Uhm... what pressure is Polanski under?
Seriously, the man gets convicted of statutory rape, meaning he had sex with a minor. Trial and everything. He then jumps bail and flees the country. Now when did this happen? OVER 30 YEARS AGO.
He's been working in the film industry (his chosen profession prior to his conviction for rape) in Europe and had even won awards for his work. So what, and I mean what pressure had he been under? The only thing he can't do is come back to the US where he'd be incarcerated.
If the US wanted to flex their muscle on a guy who sleeps with underage girls, they would have had Polanski in custody a long time ago.
So dont defend Assange or pretend you know anything about the Swedish law. Why doesn't Assange go back and face the music and get himself tested? Oh wait, that would blow away his mythos that he's just a regular guy who could be carrying an STD.
For non-Scandinavian types, ALL sex can be deemed "rape" in sweden, even consensual sex. This may seem counter intuitive to the anglo-saxon legal tradition, but it is never the less a statement of absolute fact.
I would suggest that the lack of nuance in the reporting of Assange's alleged sexual misdemenours reflects badly on those who report it and those who mindelessly and ignorantly repeat it.
What assange "did" and the chronology is not really in question. Whether these actions constituted a sexual offense under the Swedish criminal code "is" in question.
"venerable US television news magazine 60 Minutes"
such a leaktease
If he's got goodies, and genuinely wants to expose them, he should just publish already.
I know he's a massive self-publicist and everything but it's reaching the point where I'm starting to genuinely doubt he has any real commitment to getting anything published except column inches about Julian Assange.
Release the documents already
He needs to get on with publishing these (starting to at least, understand there is a lot to go through). Otherwise it seems more and more like self-enrichment and self-promotion rather than the mythical free information campaign he's on. Or perhaps he's waiting for the pay-off from our financial overlords.
He's right about Jefferson and Madison...
"...were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter".
- Thomas Jefferson (in a letter to Colonel Edward Carrington)
I say, I say, I say...
What's the secret of comedy?
I don't know, what is the secret of good...
Maybe he's just waiting for a slow news day, you know one where the whole of north Africa isn't a tumultuous mob, howling for the blood of dictators.
Too much EGO
If he is going to release the documents he should just go ahead and do it rather than trying to time things to maximise publicity for himself.
RE: Too much EGO
You're just using that as a stick to beat him with. If he did publish quickly then you, or someone like you, would criticise him for doing it too quickly and not taking care with the data. You are part of the damage limitation task force and I claim my five pounds.
--"You are part of the damage limitation task force and I claim my five pounds."
It'll be waiting at the chemist with your next prescription, Geoffrey.
Since, of course, we already know *exactly* who you are.
could be a ploy..
...like in the crime thrillers where Columbo mentions a crucial piece of "lost" evidence... provoking a implicating reaction from the criminal which closes the case.
Can't wait to hear the B.S. P.R. from bankers incorporated.
I truly dont mind them squirming , rolling in their beds at night and being nervous.
I for one LOVE IT .But explain one thing. Why wait ?
Why wait to publish and let the banks handle the mess they created ? No reason seem to hold.
Same thing with the collection of cables . Why wait ?
Wikileaks is a " we may but we dont " leak documents site ?
Something's fishy. Either leak or shut up Julian :)
Jefferson? The very same Jefferson that wanted to use Executive Privilege to avoid releasing private letters in the Aaron Burr case, claiming a peril to public safety?
Poor Jefferson must be so fed up of all the morons that have been using his name day after day...
Assange should be an IMPARTIAL party in the process of leaking information. He is quite plainly biased towards any organisation that doesn't fit his ideology and as such he isn't fit to be involved.
I wonder if information ABOUT Wikileaks would be published with the same relish?
Soldiers put themselves at risk when they sign up for the forces. It's their job to get in the way of bullets etc.
What a dick
And these new leaks, I hope they are better than the recent US "cables" which seemed to me an exercise in stating the obvious...
shameless attention whore
The leaked State Department cables weren't even whistleblowing anyway -- more like the geopolitical equivalent of OK! and Hello! magazines.
If you have nothing to hide
Then you don't need to squirm
(So I guess all the banks are squirming. Good. Maybe WL can info-rape some UK banks next.)
Not this tired shit again
"if you have nothing to hide..." yah-de-yah.
Then you won't mind if I just trawl your email, bank statements, household bills etc. Or why stop there? Lets have a rummage through your office drawers...or how about your bedroom...? How trawling through your kids homework? Maybe I'll post on facebook all the juicy stuff? What - you're overdrawn and the credit card is maxed out, and the wife didn't know? Aw, shame that...but afterall - you have nothing to hide.
See where that stupid and dangerous statement can lead?
Be aware - 'personal' privacy is a f*ing right *I* will be retaining until they pull it from my cold, dead fingers. You - the public - (or the goverment) do not need to know *everything* about me.
Personally, I'd be pretty bloody pissed if someone started publishing my bank statements online, which is tantamount to what Asssange is doing. A lot of people here are getting confused as to what information he intends to publish.
Publishing the shady operations of the banks is fair game; but when he start publishing what the mega-rich spend their money on, or how much money they have, he's crossed a privacy line IMO. Rich or not - they're entitled to the same personal privacy we are.
Assange would do well to highlight any shady dealings the banks get up to...and kudos to him for doing so. But he should know to draw the line at publishing actual account information. Or it'll be your information next.
Please...don't start *any* privacy comment with "If you have nothing to hide..." crap ever again.
"If you're a whistleblower and you have material that is important, we will accept it, we will defend you"
Really Mr. Assange? Really, really? So how much help have you given Manning, eh? He's been rotting in a military jail, faces about 52 years if convicted and beyond a pathetic sop of a donation to his defence, you appear to have done the some total to sod all to help him.
Surely you could give some of the $1.5million you got for the book deal to Manning? 10% would cover his entire defence FFS. Less, as others have managed to raise about $100k, so you would only need to give a paltry 3.5%. And that is ignoring whatever other donation you (and WikiLeaks) have received.
"Truth-rape" is probably more apposite
Am I the only one with a mortgage?
If we've learned anything from the past two or three years, it's that the banks essentially dictate the economy. If the info on the banks is so damaging it will cause banks to go under and more government bailouts to occur, I fail to see how that is good for anyone.
I assume that most people on here are paid in cash and not goats or potato's for the jobs they do. What do you do when the money dries up because the banks are in a mess?
Exaggeration? Perhaps. But I fail to see how attacking banks in order to cause siginificant damage can be for the good of man.
"Am I the only one with a mortgage?"
So, not only are banks "too big to fail."
But you seem to think they're too big to be accountable to the law.
(Assuming that the leaks will reveal illegal activity, which I think is a certainty.)
@ Cool Hand Luke...
But for the most part those who praise Assange don't have a pot to piss in, thus nothing to lose.
Those that have a pot to piss in... see Assange for the danger he represents.
Of course any corporation and government are fair game. Individuals like Assange or his company Wikileaks are not fair game. (He did go in to the press w lawyers threatening to sue...)
accesory to grand theft
Make them squirm? ...... Really all he is doing is giving them more time to steal/hide our money and plan their escape.
Was he ?
Was he sitting on a chair stroking a white cat. After which he said; 'Yes I enjoy making them squirm' I shall sell the documents to the highest bidder. For.. 1 Million dollars. Mwwwaahhhhh,
no one can stop me!!!! Not even you Mr Bond.
RIP John Barry.
Commercial Entities are not Authorities
And never will be. Just wanted to make that distinction :)
Assange is walking on the edge of a cliff...
...I would think he would realize who he is messing with, and what the repercussions could be. If he doesn't, he's a dim bulb, and that is not likely. If he does, he's even more of a dim bulb.