WikiLeaks website again offline after company cuts DNS service

[LaoPo]

I read Max Hastings the gentleman who wrote the article. He was a foreign correspondent and reported from more than sixty countries and eleven wars for BBC television and for the Evening Standard in London. Hastings was the first journalist to enter the liberated Port Stanley during the Falklands War. After ten years as editor and then editor-in-chief of The Daily Telegraph, he returned to the Evening Standard as editor in 1996 until his retirement in 2001. He received a knighthood in 2002.

He has presented historical documentaries for BBC TV, and is the author of many books, including Bomber Command which earned the Somerset Maugham Award for non-fiction in 1980. Both Overlord and The Battle for the Falklands won the Yorkshire Post Book of the Year Prize.

You just keep walking into them.

Interesting!

It's also interesting to learn that the same Mr. Max Hastings wrote another article, just 3 1/2 weeks ago, on November 27th, called:

"Whatever happened to freedom of speech?"

http://www.dailymail...dom-speech.html

Interesting views this man has...a bit controversial versus his views upon others, but ala...who cares ?

*** คริสมาสต์มีความสุข * Merry Christmas * Bon Natal * Bon Nadal * Frohe Weihnachten * Joyeux Noël * God jul * חג מולד שמח * Zalig Kerstmis * Buon Natale * 圣诞快乐 * Navidad Feliz * счастливое рождество * Natal Feliz * ハッピークリスマス * Nollaig Shona * Selamat Natal * Glædelig Jul * Hyvää Joulua * Καλά Χριστούγεννα * 메리 크리스마스 * Wesołych Świąt ***

LaoPo

Edited December 23, 2010 by LaoPo

[Ulysses G.]

I'm surprised you're in the centre or middle (of Politics) since I wouldn't have thought you would be middle/center by your kind of opinions...

I prefer the US to be the preeminent world power over China and Russia as it has proven much more benign - and despite the fact that it is far from flawless - and I support Israel's right to exist - despite its imperfections. I also think that soft drugs should be made legal and that there should be free health care in America when we can afford it. These are hardly radical opinions unless the person that is judging is way to the left or way to the right.

[LaoPo]

I'm surprised you're in the centre or middle (of Politics) since I wouldn't have thought you would be middle/center by your kind of opinions...

I prefer the US to be the preeminent world power over China and Russia as it has proven much more benign - and despite the fact that it is far from flawless - and I support Israel's right to exist - despite its imperfections. I also think that soft drugs should be made legal and that there should be free health care in America when we can afford it. These are hardly radical opinions unless the person that is judging is way to the left or way to the right.

From your point of view it's not so hard to understand that you prefer the US to be/stay the world power #1.

Russia will stay a major player in the world because of their immense commodities' reserves but will never be(come) a world power anymore (Even Brazil is a more dynamic power with some 190 million people and a booming economy PLUS enormous reserves in commodities and agricultural powers).

Russia has a rather small population of a mere 142 Million versus 308 million in the US, next to that the average age for males is just 63 years of age (because of alcohol abuse!!) vs female 74; with a declining population versus a considerable growth in the US of almost 10% in the past decade alone, mainly due to immigration.

The Western world has ruled the world for the past 2 centuries but China (and India) is another cookie.

Economically spoken China will overtake the US as the world power within 15-25 years but in military powers the US will stay on top, playing as the world power #1 for a long time to come, also because of the huge investments in the weapon industry which are FAR higher than all other western an eastern powers combined.

Whether that's a good thing or not remains to be seen but I certainly hope that the consensus of a decreasing nuclear weapon arsenal in both Russia and US will continue but also in the conventional weapon industry, although I doubt the latter.

If America would only stop investing in the weapons industry for 20-50%, your health care system, for 100% of the population, would be a piece of cake.

Soft drugs.....well, hashish and marihuana were long considered to be harmless but new studies have proven it isn't as harmless as it seems but of course a joint now and than couldn't do much harm to the more clever user. But not all of them are that clever...

Sorry for going off topic, but I wish everybody a:

*** คริสมาสต์มีความสุข * Merry Christmas * Bon Natal * גליקלעך ניטל * Bon Nadal * Frohe Weihnachten * Joyeux Noël * God jul * חג מולד שמח * Zalig Kerstmis * Buon Natale * 圣诞快乐 * Navidad Feliz * счастливое рождество * Natal Feliz * ハッピークリスマス * Nollaig Shona * Selamat Natal * Glædelig Jul * Hyvää Joulua * Καλά Χριστούγεννα * 메리크리스마스 * Wesołych Świąt *** :jap:

LaoPo

[chuckd]

I read Max Hastings the gentleman who wrote the article. He was a foreign correspondent and reported from more than sixty countries and eleven wars for BBC television and for the Evening Standard in London. Hastings was the first journalist to enter the liberated Port Stanley during the Falklands War. After ten years as editor and then editor-in-chief of The Daily Telegraph, he returned to the Evening Standard as editor in 1996 until his retirement in 2001. He received a knighthood in 2002.

He has presented historical documentaries for BBC TV, and is the author of many books, including Bomber Command which earned the Somerset Maugham Award for non-fiction in 1980. Both Overlord and The Battle for the Falklands won the Yorkshire Post Book of the Year Prize.

You just keep walking into them.

Interesting!

It's also interesting to learn that the same Mr. Max Hastings wrote another article, just 3 1/2 weeks ago, on November 27th, called:

"Whatever happened to freedom of speech?"

http://www.dailymail...dom-speech.html

Interesting views this man has...a bit controversial versus his views upon others, but ala...who cares ?

*** คริสมาสต์มีความสุข * Merry Christmas * Bon Natal * Bon Nadal * Frohe Weihnachten * Joyeux Noël * God jul * חג מולד שמח * Zalig Kerstmis * Buon Natale * 圣诞快乐 * Navidad Feliz * счастливое рождество * Natal Feliz * ハッピークリスマス * Nollaig Shona * Selamat Natal * Glædelig Jul * Hyvää Joulua * Καλά Χριστούγεννα * 메리 크리스마스 * Wesołych Świąt ***

LaoPo

Having just finished reading Mr. Hasting's commentary, I find it is right on target. His claim is freedom of the press is not being threatened by big government but rather, by the political correctness that so permeates our societies. His words ring true.

He closes his article thusly:

"Freedom in Britain is not today threatened by law or official ­censorship, but by an oppressive liberalism which is almost equally pernicious."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1333542/Whatever-happened-freedom-speech.html#ixzz191Kzi7nA

[Piengrudee]

Wikileaks must be removed from the face of earth, after what they say about Thai, Thailand, and our family.

[animatic]

One mans centrism is another mans radical left, and still others arch conservatism.

For far too many, not being able to draw arbitrary lines in the sand, means they have difficulty

defining themselves and their place in society. Pretty sad really.

I am more than happy having elements of both extremes hate me for not subscribing to their narrowness of views. While being assured by meeting general humanity, that I am placed at reasonable opinions that vary from situation to situation based on logical common sense, some general kindness, and presently understood information at hand, but subject to change when new information changes the picture. Most people at least start at one point and move towards another through their lives, and only a loud minority never modulate their views nor change with the times.

You mileage may vary, invariably and inevitably.

Edited December 24, 2010 by animatic

[LaoPo]

Wikileaks must be removed from the face of earth, after what they say about Thai, Thailand, and our family.

WikiLeaks didn't say anything...there were others who spoke about "Thai" issues but I'm happy I'm able to read what I wish to read rather than to face a Government that doesn't allow Freedom of Speech....

*** คริสมาสต์มีความสุข * Merry Christmas * Bon Natal *גליקלעך ניטל * Bon Nadal * Frohe Weihnachten * Joyeux Noël * God jul * חג מולד שמח * Zalig Kerstmis * Buon Natale * 圣诞快乐 * Navidad Feliz * счастливое рождество * Natal Feliz * ハッピークリスマス * Nollaig Shona * Selamat Natal * Glædelig Jul * Hyvää Joulua * Καλά Χριστούγεννα * 메리 크리스마스 * Wesołych Świąt ***

:jap:

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

He closes his article thusly:

"Freedom in Britain is not today threatened by law or official ­censorship, but by an oppressive liberalism which is almost equally pernicious."

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz191Kzi7nA

Exactly.......exactly in that last sentence lies the danger of a further limitation of Freedom of Speech.....not by liberal people but by the ones who oppose liberalism.

*** คริสมาสต์มีความสุข * Merry Christmas * Bon Natal *גליקלעך ניטל * Bon Nadal * Frohe Weihnachten * Joyeux Noël * God jul * חג מולד שמח * Zalig Kerstmis * Buon Natale * 圣诞快乐 * Navidad Feliz * счастливое рождество * Natal Feliz * ハッピークリスマス * Nollaig Shona * Selamat Natal * Glædelig Jul * Hyvää Joulua * Καλά Χριστούγεννα * 메리 크리스마스 * Wesołych Świąt ***

:jap:

LaoPo

[Ulysses G.]

Assange telling whoppers?

Assange's accusers are WikiLeaks fans, lawyer says

KARL RITTER, Associate Press

Published: 07:07 a.m., Friday, December 24, 2010

STOCKHOLM (AP) — The two Swedish women accusing Julian Assange of sex crimes are supporters of WikiLeaks, not pawns of the CIA, and they simply seek justice for a violation of their "sexual integrity," their lawyer says.

Claes Borgstrom, a self-professed feminist who used to be Sweden's ombudsman for gender equality, told The Associated Press he finds it "very upsetting" that Assange, his lawyers and some supporters are suggesting the case is a smear campaign against WikiLeaks, the secret-spilling website Assange founded.

"He's been spreading false rumors that he knows are untrue. It's reckless against these two women," Borgstrom said by phone Thursday. "They, too, are supporters of WikiLeaks. They support its work."

Read more: http://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Assange-s-accusers-are-WikiLeaks-fans-lawyer-says-919091.php#ixzz1952Jr4Nc

[metisdead]

An off topic comment has been removed from view.

[Wallaby]

Where is Assange telling 'whoppers'.

Everyone knows the girls are fans of wikileaks, why do you think they invited him to Sweden in the first place. They are big fans of him. Do you think they would sleep with him if they didn't like him?

I haven't heard the girls themselves say they aren't CIA pawns, only a reporter give an 'opinion'.

Why do you care what he is like? Perhaps you could try commenting on the cables, after all, he didn't leak them, he only published them, same as any self respecting journalist would do.

Here is the full transcript of his interview, warts and all, good and bad.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9309000/9309320.stm

[Ulysses G.]

Where is Assange telling 'whoppers'.

Did you read the lawyers comments?

"He's been spreading false rumors that he knows are untrue. It's reckless against these two women,"

Edited December 25, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[Wallaby]

Where is Assange telling 'whoppers'.

Did you read the lawyers comments?

"He's been spreading false rumors that he knows are untrue. It's reckless against these two women,"

Yes I read it. He is giving his view that he has been telling lies. So what, where is the evidence? Assange says one thing and the girls lawyer says another. Could it be that the lawyer is telling porkies? or does that thought never cross your mind.

I'm sure the girls can sue him if he is lying, but don't hold your breath.

One thing of that interview that did intrigue me is that the lawyer quoted client confidentiality when asked if it was the girls choice to appeal.

hmmm, one wonders why there is 'selective' client confidentiality. I suppose they are confidential unless it supports their cause then its not a problem.

[Ulysses G.]

I asked if Assange is telling whoppers. That is for the reader to decide.

[venturalaw]

Where is Assange telling 'whoppers'.

Did you read the lawyers comments?

"He's been spreading false rumors that he knows are untrue. It's reckless against these two women,"

Yes I read it. He is giving his view that he has been telling lies. So what, where is the evidence? Assange says one thing and the girls lawyer says another. Could it be that the lawyer is telling porkies? or does that thought never cross your mind.

I'm sure the girls can sue him if he is lying, but don't hold your breath.

One thing of that interview that did intrigue me is that the lawyer quoted client confidentiality when asked if it was the girls choice to appeal.

hmmm, one wonders why there is 'selective' client confidentiality. I suppose they are confidential unless it supports their cause then its not a problem.

"I'm sure the girls can sue him if he is lying," - or perhaps bring charges against Assange for rape? Oh, wait a minute - they already did!

It's quite common for one to consider filing an appeal if one loses in a lower court. With that in mind, what specifically are you referring to when you raise the issue of confidentiality? I have never heard of 'selective' client confidentiality. Could you please provide a definition?

[Wallaby]

Sure.

Selective client confidentiality is when the prosecution only selects certain parts of evidence into the public domain when it is self serviing. When questioned on other, or full disclosure the prosecution will cite client confidentiality because it isn't in their interest for it to become public. They have no consideration for client confidentiality when it helps their case but when evidence doesn't help the case they cite confidentiality.

Therefore, they are selective.

Happens all the time.

Would you mind informing me which lower court decision the girls appealed? As far as I know it hasn't been to court nor has Assange been charged.

Edited December 25, 2010 by Wallaby

[Wallaby]

"I'm sure the girls can sue him if he is lying," - or perhaps bring charges against Assange for rape? Oh, wait a minute - they already did!

I don't know of any charges against Assange. My understanding is that the warrant is for questioning. If I am wrong I apologise.

[venturalaw]

"I'm sure the girls can sue him if he is lying," - or perhaps bring charges against Assange for rape? Oh, wait a minute - they already did!

I don't know of any charges against Assange. My understanding is that the warrant is for questioning. If I am wrong I apologise.

He is wanted for questioning. Regarding the appeal, we are debating criminal procedure. A statement by an attorney that his or her client plans to appeal if said client is unsuccessful in a lower court is not necessarily a breach of confidentiality.

Publishing statements that emanated from an attorney's confidential communication(s) with a client is not necessarily violative of an attorney's duty of confidentiality. Actually, it is quite common if agreed to by the client, particularly if it assists the client's case. Regarding the selectivity of the release of said information, the word 'selectivity' suggests that it is at the whim of the attorney, which of course is not the case.

Edited December 25, 2010 by venturalaw

[Ulysses G.]

The extradition is for questioning in allegations of sex crimes that are being brought against him. Why the nitpicking?

[chuckd]

He closes his article thusly:

"Freedom in Britain is not today threatened by law or official ­censorship, but by an oppressive liberalism which is almost equally pernicious."

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz191Kzi7nA

Exactly.......exactly in that last sentence lies the danger of a further limitation of Freedom of Speech.....not by liberal people but by the ones who oppose liberalism.

*** คริสมาสต์มีความสุข * Merry Christmas * Bon Natal *גליקלעך ניטל * Bon Nadal * Frohe Weihnachten * Joyeux Noël * God jul * חג מולד שמח * Zalig Kerstmis * Buon Natale * 圣诞快乐 * Navidad Feliz * счастливое рождество * Natal Feliz * ハッピークリスマス * Nollaig Shona * Selamat Natal * Glædelig Jul * Hyvää Joulua * Καλά Χριστούγεννα * 메리 크리스마스 * Wesołych Świąt ***

:jap:

LaoPo

You must be spinning like a top after making the last post.

That's one of the silliest comments I have heard this year.

[Wallaby]

The extradition is for questioning in allegations of sex crimes that are being brought against him. Why the nitpicking?

Is it nitpicking to say the guy hasn't been charged? There is a big difference between being questioned and being charged. Would you think it ok if police asked you to come in for questioning and have others say you were actually charged?

I suppose with your view it may as well be said that he has been charged with espionage simply because the US govt is 'considering' it.

[Wallaby]

[He is wanted for questioning. Regarding the appeal, we are debating criminal procedure. A statement by an attorney that his or her client plans to appeal if said client is unsuccessful in a lower court is not necessarily a breach of confidentiality.

Publishing statements that emanated from an attorney's confidential communication(s) with a client is not necessarily violative of an attorney's duty of confidentiality. Actually, it is quite common if agreed to by the client, particularly if it assists the client's case. Regarding the selectivity of the release of said information, the word 'selectivity' suggests that it is at the whim of the attorney, which of course is not the case.

Publishing statements that emanated from an attorney's confidential communication(s) with a client is not necessarily violative of an attorney's duty of confidentiality. Actually, it is quite common if agreed to by the client, particularly if it assists the client's case.

Agreed, I didn't say it violated confidentiality.

Actually, it is quite common if agreed to by the client, particularly if it assists the client's case. Regarding the selectivity of the release of said information, the word 'selectivity' suggests that it is at the whim of the attorney, which of course is not the case.

Agreed again, you are making my point for me. I didn't mean it was at the whim of the attorney, but the attorney will of course tell the client it may be in their best interests so the client will usually just agree.

So 'selectively' they are releasing information that is self serving, but when questioned over something that is not good for their case the attorney will cite client confidentiality. Therefore, it is selective as to when they wish to use client confidentiality.

I didn't say it was wrong, I'm just saying that it is convenient and selective to use the confidentiality when it suits.

And yes, it is quite common, I did say it happens all the time.

Edited December 25, 2010 by Wallaby

[Ulysses G.]

The extradition is for questioning in allegations of sex crimes that are being brought against him. Why the nitpicking?

Is it nitpicking to say the guy hasn't been charged? There is a big difference between being questioned and being charged. Would you think it ok if police asked you to come in for questioning and have others say you were actually charged?

If I had been arrested for questioning in allegations of sex crimes against me and was actively trying to avoid extradition, I do not think that I would much care about semantics.

[animatic]

The charges from these ladies are given credence by most posters and pundits,

in levels that appear to be directly related to:

a ) how much they support Wikileaks in general.

b ) how much they yearn for USA to get a shellacking.

c ) their nationalist emotional investment in b ).

d ) Inversely to general legal knowledge in too many cases.

e ) in ratios reflecting capitalist / socialist feelings.

The emotional component for 'supporting Assange' is much greater than it aught to be.

He chose to play with the big boys without thinking through all the variables, and now he is starting to pay the price. Maybe he chose to become a martyr, but I doubt it, I think the man is saddled with a massive ego, and that may well explain why he could, as alleged, treat these two wikileak fan ladies, as he has, enough so that they will now charge him, wile professing to still support Wikileaks..

I think his ego and hatred of USA and all governments has lead him to this path. I just wonder what turning point in his past will arise to show where he made this turn to think this was 'a great idea who's time has come'.

I wonder how the sadly and stupidly idealistic Prvt. Manning will feel about Julian Assange in 10 years.

Edited December 25, 2010 by animatic

[animatic]

"I'm sure the girls can sue him if he is lying," - or perhaps bring charges against Assange for rape? Oh, wait a minute - they already did!

I don't know of any charges against Assange. My understanding is that the warrant is for questioning. If I am wrong I apologise.

He was called back for more questioning, and he says himself he skipped.

The warrant is for skipping the country to avoid legal proceedings.

And like most cases where a suspect does a runner, it ups the presumption

that there WAS something to run from. The fact the girls who are charging him,

are still professing support for Wikileaks work, but not him speaks volumes.

Two nice Swedish girls liked the 'image' he'd made of himself,

but when confronted with him as a reality, they were not best pleased.

And it is entirely possible it took several days before their Rose Colored view of him wore off.

[animatic]

The extradition is for questioning in allegations of sex crimes that are being brought against him. Why the nitpicking?

Is it nitpicking to say the guy hasn't been charged? There is a big difference between being questioned and being charged. Would you think it ok if police asked you to come in for questioning and have others say you were actually charged?

I suppose with your view it may as well be said that he has been charged with espionage simply because the US govt is 'considering' it.

You can't get extradition without being charged for something.

It may not be the final charges for his actions,

but when he skipped out of the country in these circumstances,

he is likely to have broken a law and that is sufficient.

[Wallaby]

The extradition is for questioning in allegations of sex crimes that are being brought against him. Why the nitpicking?

Is it nitpicking to say the guy hasn't been charged? There is a big difference between being questioned and being charged. Would you think it ok if police asked you to come in for questioning and have others say you were actually charged?

If I had been arrested for questioning in allegations of sex crimes against me and was actively trying to avoid extradition, I do not think that I would much care about semantics.

Actively trying to avoid extradition may not have anything to do with going there to be questioned for the allegations in Sweden. It could be the fear of something else occuring whist there. Did that thought cross your mind? I doubt it.

Perhaps you may want to re read what has actually occured. He was available for questioning whilst he was in Sweden. He asked them if he could leave Sweden. He told them where he was going and said he would give a statement or they could come and question him at any time.

My understanding is that he will accede to being questioned, just not in Sweden. So if they want to question him, why don't they. What is so special about them wanting him in Sweden to question him. Are there some sort of questions they can ask him there that they couldn't do in the UK? I doubt it. Perhaps he has other concerns as to what will happen if he goes to Sweden.

I don't think Pte Manning is having a particularly fun time at the moment and he too hasn't been charged. If one was a cynic one could think there is a certain amount of pressure to get him to say things about Assange with the promise of a plea bargain. I for one wouldn't be surprised. I would only question the veracity of anything Manning said about Assange after the treatment he has been receiving. I wouldn't blame him for saying whatever it is the govt wants him to say in order to lessen the ordeal he is currently going through. Perhaps people could draw such inferences, perhaps not, up to you.

The sad part is that I actually believe that you believe some of the things you post.

[Wallaby]

The extradition is for questioning in allegations of sex crimes that are being brought against him. Why the nitpicking?

Is it nitpicking to say the guy hasn't been charged? There is a big difference between being questioned and being charged. Would you think it ok if police asked you to come in for questioning and have others say you were actually charged?

I suppose with your view it may as well be said that he has been charged with espionage simply because the US govt is 'considering' it.

You can't get extradition without being charged for something.

It may not be the final charges for his actions,

but when he skipped out of the country in these circumstances,

he is likely to have broken a law and that is sufficient.

You certainly can.

Could you provide a link to indicate anything he is charge with? The interpol warrant is solely for questioning. I'm sure once he gets of the plane he'll be charged. But as of yet, nothing.

[Wallaby]

"I'm sure the girls can sue him if he is lying," - or perhaps bring charges against Assange for rape? Oh, wait a minute - they already did!

I don't know of any charges against Assange. My understanding is that the warrant is for questioning. If I am wrong I apologise.

He was called back for more questioning, and he says himself he skipped.

The warrant is for skipping the country to avoid legal proceedings.

And like most cases where a suspect does a runner, it ups the presumption

that there WAS something to run from. The fact the girls who are charging him,

are still professing support for Wikileaks work, but not him speaks volumes.

Two nice Swedish girls liked the 'image' he'd made of himself,

but when confronted with him as a reality, they were not best pleased.

And it is entirely possible it took several days before their Rose Colored view of him wore off.

Either I am totally confusing what has occured or you are.

As far as I know, the girls made a complaint. The prosecutor dropped it. Assange asked if there is any reason he could not leave. He was told there was no reason he could not leave. The girls appealed the prosecutor's decision and a warrent was issued by interpol for his arrest for questioning only. This was after he was already in the UK.

That is basically the abbreviated version as far as I know. If you know of something different etc I'll of course apologise.

[Wallaby]

Regardless of the varied views of the many it is time I ventured to my Christmas Day rituals and I sincerely wish you all a Merry Christmas or Happy Holiday etc.

Keep safe.