Interpol issues 'red notice' for arrest of WikiLeaks' Julian Assange

[siampolee]

This is a copy of a post I made elswhere.

So what conspiracy are the unintelligence services in the U.S. going to concoct to pursue charges for an offence that has no criteria on the statute book ?

Baruch Weiss, a former federal prosecutor who served in the Treasury and Homeland Security departments, asks:

What law did Assange violate? It will surprise many that there is no statute making it illegal to reveal classified information. There are statutes that criminalize the disclosure of very specific types of classified information, such as the identity of a covert operative (think Valerie Plame) or “codes, ciphers or cryptographic systems.” But there is no catch-all law that simply says, “Thou shalt not disclose classified information.”

[koheesti]

This is a copy of a post I made elswhere.

So what conspiracy are the unintelligence services in the U.S. going to concoct to pursue charges for an offence that has no criteria on the statute book ?

Baruch Weiss, a former federal prosecutor who served in the Treasury and Homeland Security departments, asks:

What law did Assange violate? It will surprise many that there is no statute making it illegal to reveal classified information. There are statutes that criminalize the disclosure of very specific types of classified information, such as the identity of a covert operative (think Valerie Plame) or "codes, ciphers or cryptographic systems." But there is no catch-all law that simply says, "Thou shalt not disclose classified information."

"Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has stated that he is considering prosecuting Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks under the [Espionage] Act."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917#Pending_Application_of_the_Act

He might even end up being hanged ala Saddam. Maybe someone will leak that video online.

[flying]

"Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has stated that he is considering prosecuting Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks under the [Espionage] Act."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917#Pending_Application_of_the_Act

He might even end up being hanged ala Saddam. Maybe someone will leak that video online.

I believe they are talking about creating a new law just to fit this situation.....not surprising eh?

Because if any were truly broken the whole course of action would have been already different.

That does not mean they are not willing to stoop low enough & create something.

[Wallaby]

Yep, they are turning the heat up. What about the papers that are publishing the leaks, what action is being taken against them.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/breaking-news/wikileaks-julian-assange-to-negotiate-bail-in-uk-courtroom-today/story-e6freonf-1225966809690

[Ulysses G.]

This is a copy of a post I made elswhere.

So what conspiracy are the unintelligence services in the U.S. going to concoct to pursue charges for an offence that has no criteria on the statute book ?

Baruch Weiss, a former federal prosecutor who served in the Treasury and Homeland Security departments, asks:

What law did Assange violate? It will surprise many that there is no statute making it illegal to reveal classified information. There are statutes that criminalize the disclosure of very specific types of classified information, such as the identity of a covert operative (think Valerie Plame) or "codes, ciphers or cryptographic systems." But there is no catch-all law that simply says, "Thou shalt not disclose classified information."

"Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has stated that he is considering prosecuting Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks under the [Espionage] Act."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917#Pending_Application_of_the_Act

He might even end up being hanged ala Saddam. Maybe someone will leak that video online.

It is clear that he could be prosecuted for espionage and that the first amendment would not protect him.

He keeps threatening to release more stolen documents if he is arrested, but it is obvious that he is going to do it anyway - no matter who is hurt because of it.

[Wallaby]

If it is so clear that he can be arrested for espionage then why hasn't he been charged? Surely the top lawmakers could find such a charge in the last few months. Perhaps you should call and tell them.

[hammered]

This is a copy of a post I made elswhere.

So what conspiracy are the unintelligence services in the U.S. going to concoct to pursue charges for an offence that has no criteria on the statute book ?

Baruch Weiss, a former federal prosecutor who served in the Treasury and Homeland Security departments, asks:

What law did Assange violate? It will surprise many that there is no statute making it illegal to reveal classified information. There are statutes that criminalize the disclosure of very specific types of classified information, such as the identity of a covert operative (think Valerie Plame) or "codes, ciphers or cryptographic systems." But there is no catch-all law that simply says, "Thou shalt not disclose classified information."

"Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has stated that he is considering prosecuting Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks under the [Espionage] Act."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917#Pending_Application_of_the_Act

He might even end up being hanged ala Saddam. Maybe someone will leak that video online.

It is clear that he could be prosecuted for espionage and that the first amendment would not protect him.

He keeps threatening to release more stolen documents if he is arrested, but it is obvious that he is going to do it anyway - no matter who is hurt because of it.

Explain how he can be prosecuted for espionage. Everyhting was sent to wikileaks mostly anonylously and they released it. It was passive and not active. the espionage if you care to term it that way was carried out by others with no connection to wikileaks except chosing it as their preferred media organ to leak it to.

By the way, since when did any government care who got hurt by anything (as long as it wasnt them or their interests). More americans have died because iof US foreign policy in recent decades than because of anything else for example. Ditto in Brits. If the release of documents can stop idiotic policies and wars of choice then that will be a good thing. If the leaks can force the corporate media to stop overtly cheerleading government policies even when evidence shows them flawed (NY Times role in the Iraq war run up is a classic case of media becoming a state propaganda operation to spread false informetion) then that will be a public service.

What is wrong by the way in the people's of the world (the goverened) having access to information? Does anyone really trust government enough to think they should control our access to information?

[Ulysses G.]

If it is so clear that he can be arrested for espionage then why hasn't he been charged?

He has not been arrested for the sex charges either - even though there is an International warrant out for him.

These things take time and an espionage charge is a lot complicated than rape.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[Wallaby]

If it is so clear that he can be arrested for espionage then why hasn't he been charged?

He has not been arrested for the sex charges either - even though there is an International warrant out for him.

These things take time and an espionage charge is a lot complicated than rape.

He hasn't been arrested for the sex charge because he is only wanted for questioning. You aren't saying he is wanted for questioning for espionage. You are saying he CAN be charged. Which, I might add, is not what the US government is saying at this time.

Why is it taking so long? Surely the top lawmakers in the US could have worked out if he can be charged by now, how many months ago were the Iraq war documents released? Surely they are intelligent enough by now to know whether he can be charged? Or at least do what Sweden did and issue an interpol red alert to have him arrested for 'questioning'.

Give the US government a call, you seem to know more than they do.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Wallaby

[Ulysses G.]

Explain how he can be prosecuted for espionage.

For disseminating privileged information that could harm the U.S.

If they do decide to bring a case, US prosecutors today would likely charge Assange or WikiLeaks with violations of the Espionage Act a broad 1917 law.

The language of this statute is sweeping. On its face it prohibits any person from communicating to anyone not authorized to receive it “any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States.”

[Wallaby]

Explain how he can be prosecuted for espionage.

For disseminating privileged information that could harm the U.S.

If they do decide to bring a case, US prosecutors today would likely charge Assange or WikiLeaks with violations of the Espionage Act a broad 1917 law.

The language of this statute is sweeping. On its face it prohibits any person from communicating to anyone not authorized to receive it "any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States."

Don't forget to charge the owners/editors of all news media that have also published the leaks. Or is the language not 'too sweeping' enough for that.

[Ulysses G.]

If it is so clear that he can be arrested for espionage then why hasn't he been charged?

He has not been arrested for the sex charges either - even though there is an International warrant out for him.

These things take time and an espionage charge is a lot complicated than rape.

He hasn't been arrested for the sex charge because he is only wanted for questioning.

There is an ARREST WARRANT out for him. What he is wanted for is not relevant in this case. These things take time.

[Ulysses G.]

Don't forget to charge the owners/editors of all news media that have also published the leaks. Or is the language not 'too sweeping' enough for that.

They could also be prosecuted, but no one is interested in prosecuting them. Assange and Manning are the main culprits and they will most likely be the ones that have to pay for spreading the stolen documents around in the first place.

[Wallaby]

The ARREST WARRANT is for questioning. It is relevant in that the US won't even go so far as to do the same. His legal team are in the process of arranging a time and place to meet with police in the UK so that he can answer the questions Sweeden want to ask. Not that he has to answer anything they ask though.

So....why doesn't the US issue a similar warrant to have him arrested for questioning?

As you said, he should be charged with espionage, why then hasn't he been. Or maybe, just maybe, you are jumping the gun a bit. If the US government don't think she shoudl be charged just yet, what do you know that makes you say that he should be. You seem to know more than the US government.

And why haven't the US government acted against all the other media outlets for publishing the leaks.

[hammered]

Don't forget to charge the owners/editors of all news media that have also published the leaks. Or is the language not 'too sweeping' enough for that.

They could also be prosecuted, but no one is interested in prosecuting them. Assange and Manning are the main culprits and they will most likely be the ones that have to pay for spreading the stolen documents around in the first place.

A very telling remark and one that damns the traditonal media

Old Liebeman and his freedom hating mates are currently trying to ammend the espioage act to make it more directly usable against Assange as it is seen as a facist law that a precedent on leaks if created as it stands now will effectively make the medai job of reporting on the US government impossible (according to lawyers). Still the Lieberman approach creates problems of retroactivity and the use of the law as stands is opening a huge can...

Interesting to see how far the US government will go in its efforts to undermine the rights of people to know. Equally 9injteresting to see how enthralled to the government the corproate media are. Also interesting to see if the corporate media will stand side by side with a media organization under attack by a government or if they prefer to remain discredited.

[hammered]

The ARREST WARRANT is for questioning. It is relevant in that the US won't even go so far as to do the same. His legal team are in the process of arranging a time and place to meet with police in the UK so that he can answer the questions Sweeden want to ask. Not that he has to answer anything they ask though.

So....why doesn't the US issue a similar warrant to have him arrested for questioning?

As you said, he should be charged with espionage, why then hasn't he been. Or maybe, just maybe, you are jumping the gun a bit. If the US government don't think she shoudl be charged just yet, what do you know that makes you say that he should be. You seem to know more than the US government.

And why haven't the US government acted against all the other media outlets for publishing the leaks.

Why havent the US government acted on any of the information released that showed crimes?

[SweeneyAgonistes]

If you read the original Washington Post article which was quoted here

"Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has stated that he is considering prosecuting Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks under the [Espionage] Act."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917#Pending_Application_of_the_Act

you'll see that they're rather less confident that Assange could be prosecuted.

[Ulysses G.]

You are trying to deny the obvious. He is wanted for questioning because he is a suspect in the sex crime case.

As to the espionage charges, dozens of officials have announced this as a possibility and the media have covered it extensively. Do you read anything but anarchist blogs?

Obama Wants Wikileaks' Assange Charged With Espionage

The Obama administration is pressing Britain, Germany, Australia, and other allied Western governments to consider opening criminal investigations of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and to severely limit his nomadic travels across international borders, American officials say.

Officials tell The Daily Beast that the U.S. effort reflects a growing belief that WikiLeaks and organizations like it threaten grave damage to American national security, as well as a growing suspicion in Washington that Assange has damaged his own standing with foreign governments and organizations that might otherwise be sympathetic to his anti-censorship cause.

American officials confirmed last month that the Justice Department was weighing a range of criminal charges against Assange and others as a result of the massive leaking of classified U.S. military reports from the war in Afghanistan, including potential violations of the Espionage Act by Bradley Manning, the Army intelligence analyst in Iraq accused of providing the documents to WikiLeaks.

http://www.infowars....spionage/print/

Edited December 7, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[powderpuff]

Yeah I really loved his recent blackmail ploy.

This guy is an anarchist who wants the overthrow of governments.

Takes more than merely hating George W. Bush to be a patriot.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

So the americans are thinking about charging him with something, but in the meantime they're trying to get others to do something on their behalf. That's not the same as 'It is clear that he could be prosecuted for espionage and that the first amendment would not protect him.'

o you read anything but anarchist blogs?

I try to balance them with the witterings of geriatric fascists, hence my membership of Thaivisa.

[Ulysses G.]

So the americans are thinking about charging him with something, but in the meantime they're trying to get others to do something on their behalf. That's not the same as 'It is clear that he could be prosecuted for espionage and that the first amendment would not protect him.'

Actually it is, but he is not in the U.S, so International cooperation would make it much easier to arrest him.

[hammered]

So the americans are thinking about charging him with something, but in the meantime they're trying to get others to do something on their behalf. That's not the same as 'It is clear that he could be prosecuted for espionage and that the first amendment would not protect him.'

o you read anything but anarchist blogs?

I try to balance them with the witterings of geriatric fascists, hence my membership of Thaivisa.

Where are these anarchist blogs. Gotta beat reading Murdochs egomaiacal meglomaniacal propaganda apparatus. Probably a lot more chance of reading the truth too;)

[Ulysses G.]

I try to balance them with the witterings of geriatric fascists..

Your postings do tend to point in that direction.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

In what direction? Balancing the wittering of fascist geriatrics? I like to think so but it's nice of you to agree.

[Wallaby]

The ARREST WARRANT is for questioning. It is relevant in that the US won't even go so far as to do the same. His legal team are in the process of arranging a time and place to meet with police in the UK so that he can answer the questions Sweeden want to ask. Not that he has to answer anything they ask though.

So....why doesn't the US issue a similar warrant to have him arrested for questioning?

As you said, he should be charged with espionage, why then hasn't he been. Or maybe, just maybe, you are jumping the gun a bit. If the US government don't think she shoudl be charged just yet, what do you know that makes you say that he should be. You seem to know more than the US government.

And why haven't the US government acted against all the other media outlets for publishing the leaks.

Why havent the US government acted on any of the information released that showed crimes?

Of course, I agree with you.

I'm merely pointing out the stupidity of posters that want Assange hung drawn and quartered but don't want anything done to others who do the same thing.

[Wallaby]

So the americans are thinking about charging him with something, but in the meantime they're trying to get others to do something on their behalf. That's not the same as 'It is clear that he could be prosecuted for espionage and that the first amendment would not protect him.'

Actually it is, but he is not in the U.S, so International cooperation would make it much easier to arrest him.

So why not do what Sweden has done, get an arrest warrant for 'questioning'. Surely the US lawmakers aren't as daft as you make them out to be.

[hammered]

The ARREST WARRANT is for questioning. It is relevant in that the US won't even go so far as to do the same. His legal team are in the process of arranging a time and place to meet with police in the UK so that he can answer the questions Sweeden want to ask. Not that he has to answer anything they ask though.

So....why doesn't the US issue a similar warrant to have him arrested for questioning?

As you said, he should be charged with espionage, why then hasn't he been. Or maybe, just maybe, you are jumping the gun a bit. If the US government don't think she shoudl be charged just yet, what do you know that makes you say that he should be. You seem to know more than the US government.

And why haven't the US government acted against all the other media outlets for publishing the leaks.

Why havent the US government acted on any of the information released that showed crimes?

Of course, I agree with you.

I'm merely pointing out the stupidity of posters that want Assange hung drawn and quartered but don't want anything done to others who do the same thing.

Agreed on that. They should also act on the crimes by their military exposed by wikileaks.

[kujirasan]

The Circus is getting better, much better!

Lately PayPal, has discovered that wikiLeak is doing something against their rule! and shut their accounts! The timing is bit strange, for past few years wikileak been going the same thing allover, so how come now the payPal crew have discovered that WikiLeak is violating their rules and regulation? Guess they are blundering into the mire like the illustrious Swedes!

LaoPo can you enlighten us about the Lieutenant Colonel Mattias Ardin.

There are few article in Swedish, he seems to have been seconded to NATO in Afghanistan,

Edited December 7, 2010 by kujirasan

[Wallaby]

And his bank account has been frozen because of some issue about his 'address'. Like they would freeze everyone's account that had problems with their address.

Here comes the Church of Scientolo......sorry, US government antics.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

I guess corrupt dictators usually bring the requisite two forms of ID and a phone bill when opening an account in Switzerland.