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

[Ulysses G.]

Terrorists have no rights under the Geneva Convention as pointed out above.

[hammered]

The US govt stated they weren't officially 'at war' so they could get around the Geneva Convention and thus term any prisoners of war 'enemy combatants' and deny them the rights associated with being prisoners of war.

Nonsense. The terrorists do not wear uniforms, so would not be entitled to the rights of POWS anyway.

I hope you were never in uniform or bearing arms in the name of a military with that attitude. If you were that country would clearly need to look to better educating its troops in the rights that stem from the Geneva Conventions.

More nonsense (as I am sure that you know) :

ALL soldiers have to wear uniforms according to the Geneva Convention.

It is not nonsense. The Geneva conventions provide protections to a lot more than just troops and sets out many rules. That is serious. Off subject but the mercenaries of Blackwater likely fall into your category under the Geneva Convention.

[KhunAussie52]

The US govt stated they weren't officially 'at war' so they could get around the Geneva Convention and thus term any prisoners of war 'enemy combatants' and deny them the rights associated with being prisoners of war.

Nonsense. The terrorists do not wear uniforms, so would not be entitled to the rights of POWS anyway.

The Geneva conventions protect civilians

Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall, at all times, be humanely treated, and shall be protected, especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity. Women shall be especially protected against any attack on their honour, in particular against rape, enforced prostitution, or any form of indecent assault. Without prejudice to the provisions relating to their state of health, age and sex, all protected persons shall be treated with the same consideration by the Party to the conflict in whose power they are, without any adverse distinction based, in particular, on race, religion or political opinion. However, the Parties to the conflict may take such measures of control and security in regard to protected persons as may be necessary as a result of the war.

• Article 4 defines prisoners of war to include:
  • 4.1.1 Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict and members of militias of such armed forces
  • 4.1.2 Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:
    • that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
    • that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
    • that of carrying arms openly;
    • that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

    [*]4.1.3 Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.[*]4.1.4 Civilians who have non-combat support roles with the military and who carry a valid identity card issued by the military they support.[*]4.1.5 Merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.[*]4.1.6 Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.[*]4.3 makes explicit that Article 33 takes precedence for the treatment of medical personnel of the enemy and chaplains of the enemy.

  [*]Article 5 specifies that prisoners of war (as defined in article 4) are protected from the time of their capture until their final repatriation. It also specifies that when there is any doubt whether a combatant belongs to the categories in article 4, they should be treated as such until their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.

[hammered]

Terrorists have no rights under the Geneva Convention as pointed out above.

There is no international definiton of terrorist. Protocol one actually provides POW status to resistance fighters

[TAWP]

Terrorists have no rights under the Geneva Convention as pointed out above.

There is no international definiton of terrorist. Protocol one actually provides POW status to resistance fighters

Not only that, a person not falling under definitions of POW still falls under definition of 'normal criminal', and as such the 'unregulated gap' between a civilian criminal and a POW was something the Bush administration invented that has no basis in reality.

Edited December 6, 2010 by TAWP

[kujirasan]

These digressions are useless and irrelevant , you guys sure know how to ruin a good entertainment ; The whole issue was concerned with broken condoms, the Saga of Swedish Lesbians, and heroic action of Julian at the epic Battle of Boudoir , what Geneva Convention has to do with a broken condom?

Where is LaoPo, to enlighten us more about Chastity Laws of Sweden, and whether Its consumer protection authority has started testing condom for durability or not?

[Wallaby]

Well I suppose if they aren't actually prisoners of war then any sentences made by a military court should be null and void. All prisoners should have reasonable access to lawyers, the red cross should be allowed full access to ALL prisoners and their trials expedited in the country they were accused of committing a crime.

Where is the outcry against the newspaper publications of the leaks. When are the domain sites going to shut down their links. When is ebay (paypal) going to stop people buying things from their advertisements. When is the US going to charge the editors/owners of those publications?

Wikileaks published documents about the Iraq 'war' months ago. Where are the charges against Assange for that? Surely with the top lawmakers in the country on this they could have found a charge by now.

Seems to me its all piss and wind at the moment. If he has done something wrong by publishing these leaks then charge him, and the editors/owners of all the media that published it as well.

[Ulysses G.]

• Article 4 defines prisoners of war to include:
  • 4.1.1 Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict and members of militias of such armed forces
  • 4.1.2 Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:
    • that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
    • that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
    • that of carrying arms openly;
    • that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

That leaves out terrorists. Some members are trying split hairs where no hairs exist.

[hammered]

Terrorists have no rights under the Geneva Convention as pointed out above.

There is no international definiton of terrorist. Protocol one actually provides POW status to resistance fighters

Not only that, a person not falling under definitions of POW still falls under definition of 'normal criminal', and as such the 'unregulated gap' between a civilian criminal and a POW was something the Bush administration invented that has no basis in reality.

Exactly right.

[neverdie]

As usual, certain governments and powers to be consider themselves above the law. You boyz seem to be forgetting that

[Ulysses G.]

So do certain s___bags!

Edited December 6, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[KhunAussie52]

So do certain s___bags!

Comments from concerned Australians.

who support what Wikileaks is doing.

-I think we can all safely assume these charges of sexual misconduct are trumped up in order to bring him within reach of these corrupt politicians. They appear to want him dead - what does that tell you folks? They're scared of being exposed for the lying frauds they really are!

-I think that the US government is trying to shaft this man..They and other governments don't want the truth to get out..that politics is a dirty world and they are not the shining white knights that they want us to think they are...The truth always hurts..good luck to him..

looks like a lot of people are trying to silence him! Funny how so many of them are LEADERS in democratic (masquerading as such) societies who are only too happy to tell others how bad they are and they are the only repositories of free speech! Assange has shown himself to be beyond their net of evil manipulation.

-Duhhh! when has the US been upfront about its intrusion on other countries' affairs? Guess it's the Anglo in them. Wanting to be the British of the "new World". And now, in the era of information available to whoever seeks it, the US cries foul and thinks up sexual crimes to soil one man's reputation. Shame on Sweden too for bending over to the US interests.

-So the "hypocrites" are very unhappy about the truth being put out there... poor babies!. Maybe if they were not so two faced in the first place they wouldn't be jumping up and down now about what has been released.

-So Australia's Govt is not protecting a citizen who has not been charged of any crime.. Just like David Hicks... And Guantanamo Bay.... Who are the real terrorists... maybe our Governments... Wikileaks are doing the world a favor.. This truth is long overdue...!

-The Damage done to the US was DONE by their lying to their people

-It is clear most incidents surrounding Wikileaks are undeniably and understandably politically motivated (not justified, just understandable) - given this, it is just as likely the claim of assault is an attempt to discredit their founder, to discount the information that they have already, or may, release. It could also be an attempt to claim fame; it could be a case of a confused woman OR it could be the truth.(cont)

-Transparent bullying. Notice how the Australian is not supporting one of our own in this instance. They are huntring Assange for an assertion made in Sweden that may or not have foundation. If it were you or I, no media attention would be afforded. But when the Yanks stick their nose in - it becomes all about them - without consideration to the foundation of the assertions made. Punishment before trial - that's fair, eh? C'mon Julia where's Julian's support from his own...!\

-AMERICA !! TOO MANY LIES !!! SO MUCH TOO HIDE !!!???

-If you want to smear the character of an enemy, accuse him of sex crimes. Works to turn public opinion against that person.

-It appears the word 'terrorist' can now be used by Governments of the world for spreading the truth. It now casts doubts on other assertions the Governments make on others they have branded terrorists. Of course there are real terrorists out there that cause death and suffering to further their own agendas. To call a whistle blower a terrorist should be a grave concern for all in the future who might wish to reveal the truths our Governments don't want us to know about.

Just a few comments from concerned Australians,posted over the last 24 hours.

Out of 53 comments posted,only 3 were against Wikileaks.

Long live wikileaks!!!!!

[Ulysses G.]

Quotes from Conspiracy blogs? Here is what the Australian government thinks.

Assange won't be welcomed home: Attorney General

Attorney-General Robert McClelland says WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange won't be welcomed back into the country if he's convicted of breaking Australian laws.

Mr Assange has been involved with the online posting of about 250,000 US diplomatic memos.

He is also the subject of a Swedish arrest warrant over sex-crime allegations.

The 39-year-old was born in Australia and holds an Australian passport.

Mr McClelland says the Federal Police are looking in to whether Mr Assange has broken any Australian laws.

"I'm aware the US Attorney has said that US law-enforcement authorities are looking very closely at the fact that United States laws may have been breached and the Australian Federal Police are looking at whether any Australian laws have been breached," Mr McClelland says.

"We have also indicated that we will provide every assistance to United States law-enforcement authorities."

Mr McClelland also says the Australian government considered canceling Mr Assange's passport, but there were "issues in respect of serving a notice of cancellation".

"More importantly, there (are) issues as to whether it would be constructive or counter-productive to the law enforcement," he says.

Assange's passport would set off alarms if presented at an airport, and Mr McClelland questioned "whether it would be counter-productive to remove the identification that would in fact trigger the law-enforcement process."

The WikiLeaks founder has not been seen in public since the release of 250,000 leaked US cables last Sunday.

He has refused to give his whereabouts but is reportedly hiding out in Britain.

In a question-and-answer session on The Guardian newspaper's website on Friday, he said his team was taking security precautions due to "threats against our lives.

http://orange.iprime.com.au/index.php/news/prime-news/assange-wont-be-welcomed-home-attorney-general

Edited December 6, 2010 by thaiphoon
Fonts/size changed for better reading

[Wallaby]

There was another report recently that stated the British authorities were well aware of where he was. He's hiding because of death threats, not from authorities.

Don't forget, he's only wanted in Sweden for questioning. Never knew you could have a warrant issued for your arrest because they want to 'question' you. In my experience in prosecution here in Australia a person has every right to refuse to answer anything. Perhaps there isn't the same right to silence in Sweden, I just don't know but it does seem odd.

But really, why the hell are people questioning the credibility of Assange, what has that got to do with it. How about the governments responding to the leaks. Talk about shifting the goalposts and attacking the messenger instead of the questions the leaks raise.

[LaoPo]

For good order Koheesti:

I didn't write that but it looks like it, the way you quoted; it is a part from an article, not my words.

Just for the record.

LaoPo

Strictly against the rules of the board.

Report it.

100% not allowed.

No, but thank you anyway. I don't report that easy.

I'm sure Koheesti made a mistake.

LaoPo

[philw]

A long sentence for espionage in a Marine Brig would be well deserved by Mr Assange.

Why ??

Publication is not certainly espionage.

Perhaps he is doing us a favour ( note spelling ) by making public that which should be known.

[philw]

There was another report recently that stated the British authorities were well aware of where he was. He's hiding because of death threats, not from authorities.

Don't forget, he's only wanted in Sweden for questioning. Never knew you could have a warrant issued for your arrest because they want to 'question' you. In my experience in prosecution here in Australia a person has every right to refuse to answer anything. Perhaps there isn't the same right to silence in Sweden, I just don't know but it does seem odd.

But really, why the hell are people questioning the credibility of Assange, what has that got to do with it. How about the governments responding to the leaks. Talk about shifting the goalposts and attacking the messenger instead of the questions the leaks raise.

Your final para is dead right.

The point is the info info contained in the content.

Why should we not know ????

[LaoPo]

He said that the WikiLeaks site - which was last week forced to move to a Swiss host after being dumped by US internet companies - had come under siege from ''a huge number of cyber-attacks''.

The organisation held further secret material which it regarded as a ''thermo-nuclear device'' to be released if it needs to protect itself, he said.

That's not a smart move. He's trying to blackmail the US, Sweden, other world governments and multi-national corporations and he thinks he'll just walk away? LOL

For good order Koheesti:

I didn't write that but it looks like it, the way you quoted; it is a part from an article, not my words.

Just for the record.

LaoPo

that is true. sloppy editing on my part late at night.

Gentleman!

LaoPo

[philw]

Quotes from Conspiracy blogs? Here is what the Australian government thinks.

Assange won't be welcomed home: Attorney General

Attorney-General Robert McClelland says WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange won't be welcomed back into the country if he's convicted of breaking Australian laws.

Mr Assange has been involved with the online posting of about 250,000 US diplomatic memos.

He is also the subject of a Swedish arrest warrant over sex-crime allegations.

The 39-year-old was born in Australia and holds an Australian passport.

Mr McClelland says the Federal Police are looking in to whether Mr Assange has broken any Australian laws.

"I'm aware the US Attorney has said that US law-enforcement authorities are looking very closely at the fact that United States laws may have been breached and the Australian Federal Police are looking at whether any Australian laws have been breached," Mr McClelland says.

"We have also indicated that we will provide every assistance to United States law-enforcement authorities."

Mr McClelland also says the Australian government considered canceling Mr Assange's passport, but there were "issues in respect of serving a notice of cancellation".

"More importantly, there (are) issues as to whether it would be constructive or counter-productive to the law enforcement," he says.

Assange's passport would set off alarms if presented at an airport, and Mr McClelland questioned "whether it would be counter-productive to remove the identification that would in fact trigger the law-enforcement process."

The WikiLeaks founder has not been seen in public since the release of 250,000 leaked US cables last Sunday.

He has refused to give his whereabouts but is reportedly hiding out in Britain.

In a question-and-answer session on The Guardian newspaper's website on Friday, he said his team was taking security precautions due to "threats against our lives.

http://orange.iprime.com.au/index.php/news/prime-news/assange-wont-be-welcomed-home-attorney-general

Thank you for that.

Maybe civil liberty is better entranched in the uk.

Still far from perfect though...........

Long live Mcdonalds in the land of the free...............( to be searched. )

[powderpuff]

5,000 dead victims of Sept 11 (note the spelling) are crying out for justice.

Bleeding heart libs blow.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

Ah. Wikileaks was now behind September the 11th, was it? Or is it just foreigners generally who are to blame?

[LaoPo]

Editeed to add: should democratic governments be responsible to the people or not. If not there is no difference between a (sham) democracy and a totalitarian regime.

There is no difference between England or Australia and the USSR or communist China ? What a statement.

Why not awnswer the question

Lyndon Johnson did not run for a second term because the American people did not approve of his policy in Vietnam.

Dwight D. Eisenhower got elected because the American people approved of the way he prosecuted WW II.

The American government is held responsible for it's actions by the American people. Hillary Clinton will never again hold a public office in the US because it was on her watch that so many sensitive State documents were stolen.

I believe 3000 were shot by the Chinese government Tiananmen Square protests of 1989

1. Lyndon Johnson: Isn't that an enormous understatement ? Daniel Ellsberg/Pentagon Papers was the "cause" why the American people did no longer believe their Government because of all the lies and cheating and thus Johnson had to make way.

2. Dwight D. Eisenhower: Correct and

3. The American Government: I hope so this time too; and about Hillary Cinton: I feel for her since she was put on the wrong leg by the CIA, presenting her the list with information they wanted, on her plate, and she fell for it. She should have resisted. Sad really.

4. Tiannamen Square: An enormous tragedy may they RIP.

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

So do certain s___bags!

Same same s____bag UG ?

DANIEL ELLSBERG

............

http://en.wikipedia....Daniel_Ellsberg

LaoPo

[TAWP]

5,000 dead victims of Sept 11 (note the spelling) are crying out for justice.

Bleeding heart libs blow.

Dead: 2,977

Please don't disrespect the dead with your lies.

[LaoPo]

Wikileaks founder Assange to meet police 'by consent'

WITH VIDEO

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11932442

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

Julian Assange to be questioned by British police

Monday 6 December 2010 21.32 GMT

Julian Assange is to meet British police after a new European extradition warrant was issued over alleged sexual assaults in Sweden.

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is expected to appear in a UK court tomorrow after his lawyers said he would meet police to discuss a European extradition warrant from Sweden relating to alleged sexual assaults.

As the legal net continued to close around the whistleblowers' website and US attorney general, Eric Holder, said he had authorised "a number of things to be done" to combat the group, Assange appeared to be reconciling himself to a lengthy personal court battle to avoid extradition.

Jennifer Robinson, a solicitor with Finers Stephens Innocent which represents the Australian freedom of information campaigner, told the Guardian: "We have a received an arrest warrant [related to claims in Sweden]. We are negotiating a meeting with police."

Another lawyer representing Assange, Mark Stephens, added: "He has not been charged with anything. We are in the process of making arrangements to meet the police by consent in order to facilitate the taking of that question and answer that is needed."

Stephens explained that the interview would happen in the "foreseeable future" but he could not give a precise time. According to other sources, it is thought that Assange would appear before a court to negotiate bail

Continues here:

http://www.guardian....-assange-police

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

Julian Assange's Swiss bank account closed

WikiLeaks founder has account – used for donations – closed by PostFinance owing to 'false information' about residency

The international pressure on Julian Assange increased today after the banking arm of the Swiss post office announced that it had closed the WikiLeaks founder's account because he had given "false information".

"PostFinance has ended its business relationship with … Julian Paul Assange," the bank said in a statement.

"The Australian citizen provided false information regarding his place of residence during the account opening process."

It said that although Assange had given his residence as an undisclosed address in Geneva, he could offer no proof of being a Swiss resident.

WikiLeaks had advertised the PostFinance account details online to "donate directly to the Julian Assange and other WikiLeaks Staff Defence Fund," giving an account name of "Assange Julian Paul, Geneve".

A spokesman for the bank told the Associated Press the account was closed this afternoon, but added that there would be "no criminal consequences" for misleading authorities.

"That's his money, he will get his money back," he said. "We just close the account and that's it."

Continues here:

http://www.guardian....ount?intcmp=239

LaoPo

[electau]

Who are the citizens of the USA working in the State Department (Foreign affairs) who accessed these so called "classified" documents and then sent them to Wikileaks.

It is claimed that 2 to 3 million persons have accessed these documents in the past.

Classified documents should be under lock and key and access should only be to those with the required security clearance.

And if you have sensitive documents on a computer or server with backup copies expect them to be read and downloaded.

Clinton is the political figure who should be made to explain the release of these sensitive files.

　

[LaoPo]

US embassy cables: browse the database

Use our interactive guide to discover what has been revealed in the leak of 250,000 US diplomatic cables. Mouse over the map below to find key stories and a selection of original documents by country, subject or people. Click on red dots for latest stories

http://www.guardian....ables-wikileaks

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

WikiLeaks cables: Burma general considered Manchester United buyout

Junta leader Than Shwe thought about spending $1bn on football club despite country being devastated by cyclone Nargis

Monday 6 December 2010 14.31 GMT

Burmese ruler Than Shwe was urged to make a takeover bid for Manchester United by his grandson, according to the US embassy in Rangoon Photograph: David Longstreath/AP

The leader of Burma's military junta considered making a $1bn (£634m) bid to buy Manchester United football club around the time it was facing rising anger from the United Nations over its "unacceptably slow" response to cyclone Nargis.Than Shwe, commander in chief of the armed forces and a fan of United, was urged to mount a takeover bid by his grandson, according to a cable from the US embassy in Rangoon. It details how the regime was thought to be using football to distract its population from ongoing political and economic problems.The proposal was made prior to January 2009; only months earlier, in May 2008, the Burmese junta had been accused of blocking vital international aid supplies after Nargis struck, killing 140,000 people.

Than Shwe reportedly concluded that making a bid for United might "look bad" at the time, but the revelation that the proposal was even considered is likely to fuel criticism of the regime's cruelty. The senior general instead ordered the creation of a new multimillion dollar national football league at the same time as aid agencies were reporting that one year on, many survivors of the cyclone still lacked permanent housing, access to clean water, and tools for fishing and agriculture.

The mooted price tag for Manchester United was exactly the same as the aid bill to cover the most urgent food, agriculture and housing for the three years after the cyclone, as estimated by international agencies including the UN. The proposal revealed that the regime, which is increasingly exploiting its oil and gas reserves, felt confident of finding such a sum. According to Forbes magazine's valuation of the club at the time, $1bn would have been enough to acquire a 56% controlling stake.

Continues here:

http://www.guardian....over?intcmp=239

LaoPo

Edited December 6, 2010 by LaoPo