WikiLeaks alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses

[bangon04]

Assange is a smart guy. He has a slick & quick answer for everything. He got a lot more than 15 minutes of fame out this. However, I tend to agree with the likes of Animatic. If diplomats, world leaders and operatives feel they can't speak frankly about things, then they're going to be more guarded. Because the leaks stemmed from US sources, then all those operatives will be particularly guarded with their communications with the US. One Saudi official joked to Hillary recently (paraphrased from memory) something like, "don't worry about what we heard via Wikilinks, we say worse things about you."

Ironically, Wikileaks and their fans think this will bring more transparency, but the reality is it will bring more hiding and non-communication.

Think about it: if you had a friend who, every few weeks blabbed in the marketplace the most intimate and embarrassing secrets you confided with her, then you'd likely not confide in her any more.

Looks like more overseas trips and face-to-face meetings on the diplomatic budgets from now on. Can't trust electronic communications. Burn some more fuel. Ms Clinton will be building up her air miles.....

[animatic]

Not one 'revelation' surprises at all.

Bouts buddies bribes. Heads of State talk,

oh, wow I am so shocked... not at all actually.

Millenniums have passed with the same backroom dealings and decisions, between heads of state their spies and diplomats. It is how the international game is played, and the rules are hardly made on moralists catch phrases. But people starve and die and get attacked if the game isn't played well. We chose are leaders, in theory, for their abilities to deal with the real politics in the world, and not for our moralizers Utopian ideas. Real world, real politics, real decisions done well, or suffering for your corner in a real way.

The bad part about going public like this is, people who don't have to make tough decisions based on partial information and massive need to know, are now seconded guessed, but every moralist, armchair quarterback, who couldn't get in a position of power if he tired.

And the end effect is less information to make informed decisions that affect the lives of billions, and more risk for EVERYONE, including those who wring their hands over the leaked info.

I may not like everything I hear in these leaked cables, but I can easily imagine some of the end and byproducts of this 'Freedom Of Information exercise', is going to hurt me and my family in the medium and long term. Bad business, even of done for 'the right reasons'.

Not many people will be shocked by the some of the revelations. However it is one thing surmising that behaviour is happening and another having it confirmed. Confirmed you may argue with but judging by the reaction of some of the countries involved they must have something to hide or why are they reacting in such a way?

Wrt to spies and diplomats, again we all know that is how the game is played, but aren't you at all interested into how that "game" is played. Your phrase that people starve and die and get attacked if the "game" isn't played well - it's hardly a game is it for these people? Do you not think it would be worthwhile if you were better informed as how your representatives were going to play that "game". Surely that information, if available, would influence your choice of representatative? Failing that, if you knew your government would be acting with a secretive agenda that you disagreed with would you not support any initiative to identify that agenda?

Wikileaks is not going to mean the end of information gathering by any government or other agency. With regard to the end products of the information leaked so far - I cannot comment for you and your nearest and dearest and nor would I, or the billions that you say it will affect, but I appreciate the efforts of people who truly know the meaning of open and responsible government.

What this means is a partial end to trusted electronic communications and candid assessments, and a return to the passing by hand in diplomatic pouches of all sensitive information, and inherently slows the process back to the days of snail mail. And secure storage in lock file cabinets and no more use of computers for data storage and as importantly retrieval. The world is not moving at that pace, and any decision maker that decides based on days, or even hours late information is going to make more mistakes. Nations and people have fallen from information being out of date. The ship sailed in but 1,000 died because the message of agreement wasn't read till AFTER the situation escalated. Historically this is a very typical situation.

The word 'game' is a, long used, quite short and simple, euphemism for this international information and decision making process. I expect my representatives to do their job in my best interests and to keep their cards close to the vest if that is the safest course to be properly informed of the dynamics of a foreign situation. Sorry the good possible by this move is likely trumped severely by the harm that will come. Critical and candid assesements of those we are dealing with are paramount to judging who and how we deal with others. If that information is out of date or incomplete, decisions are made incorrectly and when this takes place between nations that stakes are much higher. My objections are not about the embarrassments or that fact backdoor dealings are happening, they are and always ALWAYS will be. My objection is that now world leaders will not be well informed and more will make more mistakes more often.

Edited December 3, 2010 by animatic

[Deeral]

Isn't it a pity some euro politician didn't pass a law banning American intervention in WWI and WWII. But of course, reciprocity is a hard word to translate. Just be thankful you don't have to finish your post with "Seig Heil".

Isn't it a pity that a law has not been enacted that prevents ignoramuses perpetuating the myth that the US saved Europe from subjugation by Hitler and his bullies. Those in touch with reality would give much of the credit to the Russians - and a handful of British, Commonwealth and European fighter pilots - for that.

You obviously get your version of history from Hollywood aka a dreamworld.

Didn't the US try to avoid both wars until they eventually realised what was a steak?

US foreign policy is and has always been completely out of touch with the rest of the world

THese wikileaks will show this even more clearly - they will give the world a useful insight into just how wide of the mark the US usually is and may even teach the US a thing or two

[geriatrickid]

Interesting that the reference to WWI & WWII comes up. In both cases, the USA had adopted insular position. The US public didn't want to get involved. The wikileaks is going to give further emphasis to the growing US isolationist movement, a disengagement and pull back. Spme will welcome this. However, once shipping lanes become choked as the USN departs, once struggling nations collapse without US aid and support and once SE Asia loses the benefit of the US counterbalance to Chinese expansionism, people will soon go back to the pleas of help us, help us. The USA can easily throw up an economic wall and get by. As long as it has Canada as its largest trading partner, supplier of resources and energy, it really doesn't have the same problems as everyone else. Iran supplies 18% of China's oil. Let China bribe the Iranians. The EU needs Iran's oil, let them kiss the mullahs posteriors. The EU and Russia suffer the burden of Taliban opium, let them deal with it. Russia and China have their Islamic fundamentalists on their borders, let them deal with it. It's time the USAA pulled back and let the rest of the world deal with the problems for a change. Instead of providing the funding to turn the battle against AIDs in Africa, the US can take that money and pay down its debt. Instead of financing the malaria programs in Thailand, the USA can take that money and pay for the medical care of its citizens. Instead of trying to keep stability in Pakistan, let the Pakistanis play with their nukes and launch against India. When the fallout lands in Thailand and in the EU, let the Chinese and Russians respond.

[SergeiY]

Interesting that the reference to WWI & WWII comes up. In both cases, the USA had adopted insular position. The US public didn't want to get involved. The wikileaks is going to give further emphasis to the growing US isolationist movement, a disengagement and pull back. Spme will welcome this. However, once shipping lanes become choked as the USN departs, once struggling nations collapse without US aid and support and once SE Asia loses the benefit of the US counterbalance to Chinese expansionism, people will soon go back to the pleas of help us, help us. The USA can easily throw up an economic wall and get by. As long as it has Canada as its largest trading partner, supplier of resources and energy, it really doesn't have the same problems as everyone else. Iran supplies 18% of China's oil. Let China bribe the Iranians. The EU needs Iran's oil, let them kiss the mullahs posteriors. The EU and Russia suffer the burden of Taliban opium, let them deal with it. Russia and China have their Islamic fundamentalists on their borders, let them deal with it. It's time the USAA pulled back and let the rest of the world deal with the problems for a change. Instead of providing the funding to turn the battle against AIDs in Africa, the US can take that money and pay down its debt. Instead of financing the malaria programs in Thailand, the USA can take that money and pay for the medical care of its citizens. Instead of trying to keep stability in Pakistan, let the Pakistanis play with their nukes and launch against India. When the fallout lands in Thailand and in the EU, let the Chinese and Russians respond.

Pakistan is a strong ally of the USA and the only country ever that had dropped atomic bombs in another country is the USA.

The Taliban brought down the opium trade to nearly zero but it made a big comeback since the USA started the war over there.

You posting lies and silly propaganda.

And nobody saying 'help us help us help us' that is just a wet dream

[moskito]

Here comes that reciprocity word again. Before the bombings of Hamburg, Dresden.............. there was a thing called the Blitz, then V-1 and V-2; v was for Vengeance not victory, because they already knew they were toast.

And you know, after the first few concentration camps were liberated, sympathy for Germans was a bit hard to find. Strange that.

So you justify Churchill and his bombings even when the war was over anyway? Great guy you are or you just have no clue of history. Concentration camps, that was clear we are coming to that point. The USA had concentration camps too for every asian looking after Pearl Harbor. The Brits had concentration camps in India and South Africa and a lot of other countries, just because the people want them out there, The Russians had camps in the Stalin era, The Spanish killed thousands of Indians and what they just cant kill, the Americans (mostly English btw) wiped out. Should I go on?

Great Britain was and is not a single dime better than every other nation. Its just the Media that let us remember the concentration camps in Germany...poor Joos, let us sent more money.

Anyway, I had nothing to do with ww2 and I bet you was at least a child at this times or you got your sources only from massmedia. I just hate the idiots which always blame Germany for a war which is nearly 100 years ago but appreciate their troops in Iraq or elsewhere. YOU are the people which learned nothing!

[moskito]

Interesting that the reference to WWI & WWII comes up. In both cases, the USA had adopted insular position. The US public didn't want to get involved. The wikileaks is going to give further emphasis to the growing US isolationist movement, a disengagement and pull back. Spme will welcome this. However, once shipping lanes become choked as the USN departs, once struggling nations collapse without US aid and support and once SE Asia loses the benefit of the US counterbalance to Chinese expansionism, people will soon go back to the pleas of help us, help us. The USA can easily throw up an economic wall and get by. As long as it has Canada as its largest trading partner, supplier of resources and energy, it really doesn't have the same problems as everyone else. Iran supplies 18% of China's oil. Let China bribe the Iranians. The EU needs Iran's oil, let them kiss the mullahs posteriors. The EU and Russia suffer the burden of Taliban opium, let them deal with it. Russia and China have their Islamic fundamentalists on their borders, let them deal with it. It's time the USAA pulled back and let the rest of the world deal with the problems for a change. Instead of providing the funding to turn the battle against AIDs in Africa, the US can take that money and pay down its debt. Instead of financing the malaria programs in Thailand, the USA can take that money and pay for the medical care of its citizens. Instead of trying to keep stability in Pakistan, let the Pakistanis play with their nukes and launch against India. When the fallout lands in Thailand and in the EU, let the Chinese and Russians respond.

LOL, thanks you made my day Geriatrickid I am sure you are a 100% USAmerican and agree and belive everything your country is telling you. The USA is so economically dependent from other countries thesedays like not much other nations. With just weapons and financial market influence you just cant "throw up the economic wall" without more people in your country loosing their jobs as too many already did. If you dont get oil from Irak and the Saudis (who is kissing whoms ass here)`Canada is currently destroying its country for oilsand and become the third on worldwide exhaust emissions.

USA fighting AIDS in Africa? dont make me laugh more. Which country or which countries pharmaceutical industry forbid the delivery of affordable Medication to African countries, just because they want make more money with it?

The funniest thing is the constant USAmerican talks about weapons of mass destruction and your India Pakistan example here. As far as I remember there was just ONE country in the world who used the Nuclear Bomb. Not just one time, no twice. Hiroshima and Nagasaki should remind you of something. BUT wonder wonder wonder do the Japanese still hate the USAmericans for that? No, not all nations are stupid like SOME of the brits here, guess why.

All in all it is not easy for the USA just to pull back, but they better should start with it and start taking care more of their own countrymen instead of playing the big brother for countries who can pay...with what ever....btw, the European Drug problem is by far not so huge like that one in the USA where kids shoot kids for some crack kokain.

To make it clear, I like the USA and the most Americans I met, I just hate the government and the people behind them! Specially these ones with the dreadlocks :jap:

[metisdead]

We are drifting off-topic. The topic is:

WikiLeaks alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses

Let's try to get back to that.

[SergeiY]

We are drifting off-topic. The topic is:

WikiLeaks alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses

Let's try to get back to that.

Its actually not wikileaks that makes these allegations.

But in a document that according to wikileaks comes from the USA embassy in Thailand and which seems to be written by the US ambassador these allegation were made.

in short:

US ambassador alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses (according to leaked document)

[metisdead]

We are drifting off-topic. The topic is:

WikiLeaks alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses

Let's try to get back to that.

Its actually not wikileaks that makes these allegations.

But in a document that according to wikileaks comes from the USA embassy in Thailand and which seems to be written by the US ambassador these allegation were made.

in short:

US ambassador alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses (according to leaked document)

Correct.

What I was getting at, conversation was continuing to drift toward to WW1 & WW2.

Let's get back on topic.

[whybother]

We are drifting off-topic. The topic is:

WikiLeaks alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses

Let's try to get back to that.

Its actually not wikileaks that makes these allegations.

But in a document that according to wikileaks comes from the USA embassy in Thailand and which seems to be written by the US ambassador these allegation were made.

in short:

US ambassador alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses (according to leaked document)

And I reckon he'd have some pretty good sources for those allegations too.

[SergeiY]

We are drifting off-topic. The topic is:

WikiLeaks alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses

Let's try to get back to that.

Its actually not wikileaks that makes these allegations.

But in a document that according to wikileaks comes from the USA embassy in Thailand and which seems to be written by the US ambassador these allegation were made.

in short:

US ambassador alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses (according to leaked document)

And I reckon he'd have some pretty good sources for those allegations too.

Which kind of sources? Dreams? Cognitive bias? Movies? Thanong from The Nation? 007? dudes like you who know everything and get all thing always right?

[whybother]

Which kind of sources? Dreams? Cognitive bias? Movies? Thanong from The Nation? 007? dudes like you who know everything and get all thing always right?

Yes, you're right. The ambassador just made it up. Where would he find out something like that?

[Piengrudee]

To me, Wikileaks are evil evil people who release either fake clips or document not suitable for the general public.

[Deeral]

Get real!

"Allegedly"????? you need to differentiate between sources here.

No-one - not even the US foreign office has questioned the authenticity of these documents.

THis is not "allegedly" - these leaks are quoting official docos.

Wikileaks draws few if any inferences from them.

THe WORLD - media, diplomats universities etc are studying these docos and THEY are making implications and drawing inferences from them.

Don't criticise wikileaks as if anything they publish is "allegedly" they are merely reproducing govt docos.

Edited December 4, 2010 by Deeral

[Deeral]

To me, Wikileaks are evil evil people who release either fake clips or document not suitable for the general public.

THere are 2 schools of thoufght on this...

one is that Wikileakse are releasing genuine documentsThe other is they are not.

The former is held by all diplomats and governments throughout the world

The latter is held by Piengrudee and a small demented slug called Simon who lives in Toowoomba

[VincentRJ]

Although the Bout cables may come in handy. The cables that will be published about the cozy conversations with the elite will make uncomfortable reading.

This is the publication schedule:

http://thaicables.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/thailand_decode.pdf

More leaks please if helps to expose the hypocrisy of the so called 'world leaders'

No more leaks please.... there are some thing I do not want to know.... many of us do not want to know... and remember, there are 2 sides to every story..! Wikileaks only show one side.

Only 2 sides to every story?? C'mon! Where have you been? There are many sides to most stories, and Wikileaks shows one side we rarely see. Good on them!, I say. Do we want to live in a world of hypocrisy and secrets? Some might be comfortable burying their head in the sand. But I want complete transparency and honesty.

I bet I'm not the only one.

[Deeral]

<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>Although the Bout cables may come in handy. The cables that will be published about the cozy conversations with the elite will make uncomfortable reading. <br><br>This is the publication schedule:<br><font color="#444444"><a href="http://thaicables.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/thailand_decode.pdf" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external"><font face="Arial"><font size="3">http://thaicables.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/thailand_decode.pdf</font></font></a></font><br>

<br><br>More leaks please if helps to expose the hypocrisy of the so called 'world leaders'<br>

<br><br><br>No more leaks please....   there are some thing I do not want to know....     many of us do not want to know...  and remember, there are 2 sides to every story..!   Wikileaks only show one side.<br>

<br><br>Only 2 sides to every story?? C'mon!  Where have <b>you</b> been? There are many sides to most stories, and Wikileaks shows one side we rarely see. Good on them!, I say. Do we want to live in a world of hypocrisy and secrets? Some might be comfortable burying their head in the sand. But I want complete transparency and honesty.<br><br>I bet I'm not the only one.<br>

<br><br>Wikileaks aren't telling ANY side to a story - they are releasing the docos - the stories are made by those who read these. (or in some cases can't read them.)

<div><br></div><div>Yes OF COURSE we need open-ness and transparency!</div><div><br></div><div>If you look at the US reaction (or the rest of the world for the most part for that that matter) you will see that only the nutters are trying to silence Wikileaks - the other countries are on the surface at least looking for legal and democratic ways to dealing with it. but most realise that this is ing=formation that we are entitled to.</div><div><br></div><div>Only countries like Thailand try to block the web site as this is against the most basic democratic principles..</div><div><br></div><div>Basically Wikileaks is separating the democrats from the paranoids and quite effectively too. Al ot od very silly people are showing their true colours as a result of this.</div>

Edited December 4, 2010 by Deeral

[SergeiY]

Get real!

"Allegedly"????? you need to differentiate between sources here.

No-one - not even the US foreign office has questioned the authenticity of these documents.

THis is not "allegedly" - these leaks are quoting official docos.

Wikileaks draws few if any inferences from them.

THe WORLD - media, diplomats universities etc are studying these docos and THEY are making implications and drawing inferences from them.

Don't criticise wikileaks as if anything they publish is "allegedly" they are merely reproducing govt docos.

No-one - not even the US foreign office has questioned the authenticity of these documents.

Ambassador John: "I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of these documents."

(click on the image in the OP, there is the full text of the ambassador statement)

But you are right its a question of 'who speaks' and you need to differentiate between the sources.

As not only not Ambassador John but also the US foreign office will NOT vouch for the authenticity of these documents. Its is still only an allegation by wikileaks that these documents are authentic.

Meanwhile the claim "Russia bribes ..." is the subject of one of these leaked documents. An it is an allegation too, made by US diplomats in a confidential communication channel.

Assumed the documents are authentic, we still don't now how reliable and truthful some points in these memos are. Could be still letters/cables written by a lunatic paranoid schizo.

We also don't know if that are all cables ever written by a certain source or of we are getting only a selection and if these selection is random or more concentrated on special criteria.

And in case of this subject one thing is clear it is NOT a prove that Russia bribed anyone.

Funny is that someone who wrote 'The USA bribed more' caused a shitstorm by patriotic USamericans and their geriatric friend, meanwhile no-one gives much shit about the US claim that Russia bribed.

If we get anything from these documents, than mostly just a glimpse on the way of thought of US diplomats and their confidential communication. And its still vague, because we don't know if we get just a selection.

Edited December 4, 2010 by SergeiY

[Deeral]

BTW - I notice I'm not the only one experiencing long-term formatting problems on TV!!!

[Deeral]

Get real!

"Allegedly"????? you need to differentiate between sources here.

No-one - not even the US foreign office has questioned the authenticity of these documents.

THis is not "allegedly" - these leaks are quoting official docos.

Wikileaks draws few if any inferences from them.

THe WORLD - media, diplomats universities etc are studying these docos and THEY are making implications and drawing inferences from them.

Don't criticise wikileaks as if anything they publish is "allegedly" they are merely reproducing govt docos.

No-one - not even the US foreign office has questioned the authenticity of these documents.

Ambassador John: "I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of these documents."

http://www.thaivisa....s-hit-thailand/ (click on the image in the OP, there is the full text of the ambassador statement)

But you are right its a question of 'who speaks' and you need to differentiate between the sources.

As not only not Ambassador John but also the US foreign office will NOT vouch for the authenticity of these documents. Its is still only an allegation by wikileaks that these documents are authentic.

Meanwhile the claim "Russia bribes ..." is the subject of one of these leaked documents. An it is an allegation too, made by US diplomats in a confidential communication channel.

Assumed the documents are authentic, we still don't now how reliable and truthful some points in these memos are. Could be still letters/cables written by a lunatic paranoid schizo.

We also don't know if that are all cables ever written by a certain source or of we are getting only a selection and if these selection is random or more concentrated on special criteria.

And in case of this subject one thing is clear it is NOT a prove that Russia bribed anyone.

Funny is that someone who wrote 'The USA bribed more' caused a shitstorm by patriotic USamericans and their geriatric friend, meanwhile no-one gives much shit about the US claim that Russia bribed.

If we get anything from these documents, than mostly just a glimpse on the way of thought of US diplomats and their confidential communication. And its still vague, because we don't know if we get just a selection.

"Ambassador John: "I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of these documents." - you really can't be that naive?????? - can you? - you DO understand what he said really don't you??

[geriatrickid]

We are drifting off-topic. The topic is:

WikiLeaks alleged Russia bribed Bout witnesses

Let's try to get back to that.

Lucky you posted that as I was about to swat a bug.

Saved me from a spanking I reckon.

[Deeral]

Questioning the veracity of the leaks is a completely facile approach to the subject. More than anything it is an indication of the paucity of arguments available to Wikileaks critics.

Edited December 4, 2010 by Deeral

[SergeiY]

Get real!

"Allegedly"????? you need to differentiate between sources here.

No-one - not even the US foreign office has questioned the authenticity of these documents.

THis is not "allegedly" - these leaks are quoting official docos.

Wikileaks draws few if any inferences from them.

THe WORLD - media, diplomats universities etc are studying these docos and THEY are making implications and drawing inferences from them.

Don't criticise wikileaks as if anything they publish is "allegedly" they are merely reproducing govt docos.

No-one - not even the US foreign office has questioned the authenticity of these documents.

Ambassador John: "I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of these documents."

http://www.thaivisa....s-hit-thailand/ (click on the image in the OP, there is the full text of the ambassador statement)

But you are right its a question of 'who speaks' and you need to differentiate between the sources.

As not only not Ambassador John but also the US foreign office will NOT vouch for the authenticity of these documents. Its is still only an allegation by wikileaks that these documents are authentic.

Meanwhile the claim "Russia bribes ..." is the subject of one of these leaked documents. An it is an allegation too, made by US diplomats in a confidential communication channel.

Assumed the documents are authentic, we still don't now how reliable and truthful some points in these memos are. Could be still letters/cables written by a lunatic paranoid schizo.

We also don't know if that are all cables ever written by a certain source or of we are getting only a selection and if these selection is random or more concentrated on special criteria.

And in case of this subject one thing is clear it is NOT a prove that Russia bribed anyone.

Funny is that someone who wrote 'The USA bribed more' caused a shitstorm by patriotic USamericans and their geriatric friend, meanwhile no-one gives much shit about the US claim that Russia bribed.

If we get anything from these documents, than mostly just a glimpse on the way of thought of US diplomats and their confidential communication. And its still vague, because we don't know if we get just a selection.

"Ambassador John: "I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of these documents." - you really can't be that naive?????? - can you? - you DO understand what he said really don't you??

Deeral: "No-one - not even the US foreign office has questioned the authenticity of these documents."

Ambassador John: "I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of these documents."

Don't shoot the messenger. chill.

yes, you claimed no-one "questioned the authenticity of these documents" but its also the fact that no-one would really admit or vouch for the authenticity of any of these documents. Denies or 'no comment' are more likely what you will hear from Washington.

And thats why next to other reasons is there that little word "allegedly".

Q:Do i believe that they are authentic? - A:I don't see much reasons to doubt that.

[TAWP]

If the bloody morons are so "unbiased" as they want the world to believe. Let them release ALL the cable traffic from all the other countries in their possession. If they have this from the US, let's see what the rest of the world has to say....or is he afraid he may have his bluff called?

I am going to assume you are able to read. In that case, you can read on their site how they operate:

- Someone has to donate (send) them documents about an event etc.

- They will review it and if deemed important they will release it.

- The lack of releases from some countries / events is NOT due to some censorship but due to LACK of whistle blowers, sending the documents.

If you have any cables from China etc, they would love to get them...

[sydneyjed]

So Wikileak 'made up ' and released 250.000 sheets of documents last week...Get real!!

[katasyd]

So Wikileak 'made up ' and released 250.000 sheets of documents last week...Get real!!

If they were made up, i'm sure there would have been many legal cases of defamation/slander already filed to silence and arrest him but all they can get him on is a trumped up sexual assault charge in Sweden.

USA will have to assassinate him for this diplomatic problem to go away.

[Ulysses G.]

USA will have to assassinate him for this diplomatic problem to go away.

It is too late for that, but charging him with espionage would be fair and just.

[katasyd]

USA will have to assassinate him for this diplomatic problem to go away.

It is too late for that, but charging him with espionage would be fair and just.

I read an article about that espionage law in the US and they decided it would be too hard to get a conviction on Julian Assange being it could be proven to be a politically motivated charge.

Also, being locked up in Sweden would not be a bad thing because they don't extradite anyone if it's proven that the charges are political motivated.

USA can't touch him, he stole nothing and never had restricted access to these files, he just published them as a third party.

It's been nearly a year since the Iraq and Afghanistan war leaks that were confidential surfaced and still the USA don't have a way to charge him.

Who watches the watchers?

[Ulysses G.]

I am pretty sure that it has not been decided if he will be charged with espionage, or not. What you read was probably just speculation, by someone who was guessing and may or may not have known what he/she was talking about.