WikiLeaks website again offline after company cuts DNS service

[hammered]

Response to KhunAussie52

I hear what you are saying. A person has a moral responsibility to act morally. If a person thinks the US government is immoral then that person has a responsibility to bring the government down.

I think you think the US government is immoral and you would be in favor of bringing it down.

OK I see that.

But you are pissing in the wind.

All true but at elast wikileaks has been trying to redress the balance and it may even serve as a wake up call to the traditonal media that has been getting far to close to government agendas although a cursory examination of ownership may expose why so that hope may be false.

It isnt necessarily about bringing government down but making it more accountable and the more the information the more the accountability. In recent history government has had the upper hand in convincing media to self regulate and self censor arguably creating the conditions for the creation of wikileaks. The tradtional media if it can shake off consideration of the needs of its corporate ownrship for ten seconds needs to take a long hard look at itself and failings

[KhunAussie52]

Very interesting reading.

http://213.251.145.96/about.html

Principled leaking has changed the course of history for the better. It can alter the course of history in the present, and it can lead us to a better future.

Consider Daniel Ellsberg, working within the US government during the Vietnam War. He comes into contact with the Pentagon Papers, a meticulously kept record of military and strategic planning throughout the war. Those papers reveal the depths to which the US government has sunk in deceiving the American people about the war. Yet the public and the media know nothing of this urgent and shocking information. Indeed, secrecy laws are being used to keep the public ignorant of gross dishonesty practised by their own government. In spite of those secrecy laws and at great personal risk, Ellsberg manages to disseminate the Pentagon papers to journalists and to the world. Despite criminal charges against Ellsberg, eventually dropped, the release of the Pentagon Papers shocks the world, exposes the government lying and helps to shorten the war and save thousands of both American and Vietnamese lives.

The power of principled leaking to call governments, corporations and institutions to account is amply demonstrated through recent history. The public scrutiny of otherwise unaccountable and secretive institutions forces them to consider the ethical implications of their actions. Which official will chance a secret, corrupt transaction when the public is likely to find out? What repressive plan will be carried out when it is revealed to the citizenry, not just of its own country, but the world? When the risks of embarrassment and discovery increase, the tables are turned against conspiracy, corruption, exploitation and oppression. Open government answers injustice rather than causing it. Open government exposes and undoes corruption. Open governance is the most effective method of promoting good governance.

Edited December 6, 2010 by KhunAussie52

[Wallaby]

[i might remind you.The release of all these documents.Were as a direct result of an American citizen,wanting the world to see the Hypocrisy of the American government and military.

Now,who provided those documents to Wikileaks.

An American by the name of Private ?????????????????

Now incarcerated incommunicado.With no access to his legal team or family.

Justice American style!!!!!!

What laws has Wikileaks violated?

And,please provide a source!!!!

Do you know anything about this man? Do a bit of reading. According to people that know him, he was an immature brat given to temper tantrums. He is also a self admitted drug abuser. The guy was a mental basket case, and Julian Assange used him. That's the part of the story you and others are unaware of. Manning was troubled and Julian Assange exploited that.

The New York Times provided a revealing portrait. Read it and understand. The NYT is also one of the papers carrying the leaks, and it has been sharply critical of the US war in Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.c...=2&pagewanted=2

Private Manning worked as an administration clerk in the intelligence section for the 10th Mountain Division. Apparently, he was having social issues in his unit and had expressed anger/resentment on his facebook page. The pop psychologists are going to have a field day with this. It does explain why he might have cracked. The odd aspect of this story is that the U.S. military knew he was gay and didn't react. Members of his unit described him as immature and a jerk.

And if you think I am making this up, just google him. He wasn't closeted.

Private First Class Bradley Manning currently faces two charges and 12 counts of illegally providing classified information to an unauthorized source. As he voluntarily entered military service, voluntarily swore his oath as follows;

I, Bradley Manning, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

He violated his oath and he acted out of childish anger not out of any noble desire.

If Manning was such a basket case why then did he have access to such important documents. hmmm.

As for your comments on Assange, well they are just hearsay. We had quotes in the newspaper here in Brisbane on the weekend from his schoolmates, one who said he was brilliant at maths and a nice kid. So please read ALL reports about him before you decide to show just one sided comments.

However, what he is like as a person has nothing to do with the publishing of files. I couldn't care less if it was Charles Manson disclosing the documents, it is irrelevant. How about the US govt actually responds and exlpains things instead of the usual response of attacking the messenger with everything it has. Seems like the US govt has taken a page out of the Church of Scientology on how to react when someone blows the whislte.

[hammered]

Very interesting reading.

http://213.251.145.96/about.html

Principled leaking has changed the course of history for the better. It can alter the course of history in the present, and it can lead us to a better future.

Consider Daniel Ellsberg, working within the US government during the Vietnam War. He comes into contact with the Pentagon Papers, a meticulously kept record of military and strategic planning throughout the war. Those papers reveal the depths to which the US government has sunk in deceiving the American people about the war. Yet the public and the media know nothing of this urgent and shocking information. Indeed, secrecy laws are being used to keep the public ignorant of gross dishonesty practised by their own government. In spite of those secrecy laws and at great personal risk, Ellsberg manages to disseminate the Pentagon papers to journalists and to the world. Despite criminal charges against Ellsberg, eventually dropped, the release of the Pentagon Papers shocks the world, exposes the government lying and helps to shorten the war and save thousands of both American and Vietnamese lives.

The power of principled leaking to call governments, corporations and institutions to account is amply demonstrated through recent history. The public scrutiny of otherwise unaccountable and secretive institutions forces them to consider the ethical implications of their actions. Which official will chance a secret, corrupt transaction when the public is likely to find out? What repressive plan will be carried out when it is revealed to the citizenry, not just of its own country, but the world? When the risks of embarrassment and discovery increase, the tables are turned against conspiracy, corruption, exploitation and oppression. Open government answers injustice rather than causing it. Open government exposes and undoes corruption. Open governance is the most effective method of promoting good governance.

True. Ellsberg was a hero for the reasons you point out, but I think you'll get all the "we only lost because...." brigade come up with a few different and anti-free speech tirades.

[jayjay0]

"A whistleblower is a person who raises a concern about alleged wrongdoing occurring in an organization or body of people. Usually this person would be from that same organization. The alleged misconduct may be classified in many ways; for example, a violation of a law, rule, regulation and/or a direct threat to public interest, such as fraud, health/safety violations, and corruption. Whistleblowers may make their allegations internally (for example, to other people within the accused organization) or externally (to regulators, law enforcement agencies, to the media or to groups concerned with the issues).

Whistleblowers frequently face reprisal, sometimes at the hands of the organization or group which they have accused, sometimes from related organizations, and sometimes under law."

From wikipedia

Well that covers whistle blowers.

I am quite sure there are many items covered by that definition.

How ever it would imply that the whistle blower knew what he was saying.

I personally have a hard time believing that.

I believe he just posted blocks of communication not really knowing what was in them..Could have been posting codes. Is that OK.

[geriatrickid]

I might remind you.The release of all these documents.Were as a direct result of an American citizen,wanting the world to see the Hypocrisy of the American government and military.

Now,who provided those documents to Wikileaks. An American by the name of Private ?????????????????

Now incarcerated incommunicado.With no access to his legal team or family.Justice American style!!!!!!

What laws has Wikileaks violated?And,please provide a source!!!!

Where did you get your information that the petulant PFC is being held incommunicado without legal counsel?

According to his support group he has met with friends and legal counsel. The reason he has not met with some of his family may be due to the fact that his Welsh father threw him out of the house when he discovered that Bradley was a homosexual. Hello? Do you know anything about this guy? He's a textbook case of a kid suffering from a need to be important, to be wanted.

Pfc Manning selected David Coombs of Providence, Rhode Island, to lead his legal defense. Mr. Coombs has over a decade of experience as a military trial lawyer and is a former law professor at the Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School in Charlottesville, Virginia. A personal friend of Bradley’s verified the selection of legal counsel during a recent visit with him at the Marine Corps brig at Quantico, Virginia. Bradley was said to have appeared to be in good health and good spirits, considering the situation.

Why don't you read his lawyer's blog to find out what is going on? Your hero is apparently not all there in the head. I have previously provided a NYT link.

Now I'm telling you to go read what his lawyer has to say.

On his blog, Mr. Coombs stated:

"PFC Manning's unit documented a steady decline in his mental stability from early on in their deployment starting around December of 2009 to May of 2010. Consistent in this documentation was the behavior that they were concerned about intensified during the deployment. Due to this behavior and a concern about his personal safety, the command made the decision to remove the bolt from PFC Manning's weapon. For several weeks, he apparently walked around Forward Operating Base Hammer with his assigned weapon that was incapable of being used. During this time, however, he was still expected to perform his duties as an intelligence analyst."

Do you not understand that the military had a mental deficient on its hands and was trying to deal with him in a caring and humane manner. It is incredible that none of you holier than thou crusaders can't see that. What the <deleted> is up with that? Are you so afraid of the truth that a mentally ill kid was exploited that you have to invent stories that he was some sort of hero whistleblower? He was an angry little twink that wanted to get back at the people he thought were persecuting him. Instead of going beserk with a weapon, he did it with stealing information. Why the <deleted> do you think he was disarmed if he wasn't deemed to be a threat to himself and others. By removing his bolt, he still had a weapon and would not stick out, but he would not pose a threat of violence. The US military acts approriately and with compassion and in return this is what it gets.

[Ulysses G.]

As for your comments on Assange, well they are just hearsay. We had quotes in the newspaper here in Brisbane on the weekend from his schoolmates, one who said he was brilliant at maths and a nice kid.

So what. Everyone loved Ted Bundy before he got caught.

[geriatrickid]

If Manning was such a basket case why then did he have access to such important documents. hmmm.

As for your comments on Assange, well they are just hearsay. We had quotes in the newspaper here in Brisbane on the weekend from his schoolmates, one who said he was brilliant at maths and a nice kid. So please read ALL reports about him before you decide to show just one sided comments.

However, what he is like as a person has nothing to do with the publishing of files. I couldn't care less if it was Charles Manson disclosing the documents, it is irrelevant. How about the US govt actually responds and exlpains things instead of the usual response of attacking the messenger with everything it has. Seems like the US govt has taken a page out of the Church of Scientology on how to react when someone blows the whislte.

It is very relevant how information is gathered. Would you have the same opinion if the local crown prosecutor used illegal surveillance methods or relied on a search without warrant in your home? The information was illegally removed and transferred. It was illegal because the information was protected, because Pfc Mannining was in a position of trust to guard the information and because the information was cleary designated as confidential.

In respect to the Pfc having emotional issues, the US military has made every effort to redress its past deficiencies in dealing with mental health. A tremendous effort is now made to reintegrate those personnel showing psychological distress. At the time, it was felt that the best place for Pfc. Manning was within a support network due to his issues of alienation. Obviously, his CO blew it. However, can he really be faulted by trying to help someone?A day doesn't go by when the US military doesn't take a hit in respect to its treatment of distressed personnel. What people forget is that if the organization does not act on a strict disciplinary basis, this is what happens. Because of Pfc Manning, alot of troubled soldiers are not going to get the support they need because people will fear a repeat of this tragedy.

If Pfc. manning's legal counsel acknowledges these issues, I think that is good enough for me. The kid was troubled.

You might want to read up on the current legal proceedings posted by the lead lawyer. He has a pretty good track record.

http://www.armycourt...aldefense.info/

Edited December 6, 2010 by geriatrickid

[Ulysses G.]

If Manning was such a basket case why then did he have access to such important documents. hmmm.

How many people are loony enough to do something for which they may very well spend the rest of their lives working at hard labor in a military prison? If he was not insane, he certainly better plead that way in the military court. .

[jayjay0]

Nice try but no soap

No where does it deny him communication with his legal team.

You are right his rights were reduced when he enlisted.

The operative word is reduced not taken away. BIG difference.

I posted my original post at 1032 hours and you posted your response within 8 minutes of mine.

I have to assume you are either a speed reader or an expert in Military Justice. Which of these two choices is it?

Do you have any links to support your allegation that he is being held incommunicado?

I was unable top find any reference to it on this link: http://www.bradleymanning.org/

I think you guys are arguing FOR the same point.

chuckd - "Do you have any links to support your allegation that he is being held incommunicado?"

jayjay0 - "No where does it deny him communication with his legal team."

They seem to be saying the same thing to me.

Not the same point. I say he is not being held incommunicado.

Not really sure what chuckd is saying.

My original post was in response to KhunAussie52 when he stated.

("Now incarcerated incommunicado.With no access to his legal team or family")

Really not sure what chuckd is trying to say.

[jayjay0]

Command responsibility

Human Rights Watch has claimed that the principle of "command responsibility" could make high-ranking officials within the Bush administration guilty of war crimes allegedly committed during the War on Terror, either with their knowledge or by persons under their control.^[24]

A presidential memorandum of September 7, 2002 authorized U.S. interrogators of prisoners captured in Afghanistan to deny the prisoners basic protections required by the Geneva Conventions, and thus according to Jordan J. Paust, professor of law and formerly a member of the faculty of the Judge Advocate General's School, "necessarily authorized and ordered violations of the Geneva Conventions, which are war crimes."^[25] Based on the president's memorandum, U.S. personnel carried out cruel and inhumane treatment on the prisoners,^[26] which necessarily means that the president's memorandum was a plan to violate the Geneva Convention, and such a plan constitutes a war crime under the Geneva Conventions, according to Professor Paust.^[27]

Alberto Gonzales and others argued that detainees should be considered "unlawful combatants" and as such not be protected by the Geneva Conventions in multiple memoranda regarding these perceived legal gray areas.^[28]

Gonzales' statement that denying coverage under the Geneva Conventions "substantially reduces the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act" suggests, to some authors, an awareness by those involved in crafting policies in this area that US officials are involved in acts that could be seen to be war crimes.^[29] The US Supreme Court challenged the premise on which this argument is based in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, in which it ruled that Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions applies to detainees in Guantanamo Bay and that the Military Tribunals used to try these suspects were in violation of US and international law.^[30]

On April 14, 2006, Human Rights Watch said that Secretary Rumsfeld could be criminally liable for his alleged involvement in the abuse of Mohammad al-Qahtani.^[31] On November 14, 2006, invoking universal jurisdiction, legal proceedings were started in Germany – for their alleged involvement of prisoner abuse – against Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, John Yoo, George Tenet and others.^[32]

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is seen as an amnesty law for crimes committed in the War on Terror by retroactively rewriting the War Crimes Act^[33] and by abolishing habeas corpus, effectively making it impossible for detainees to challenge crimes committed against them.^[34]

http://en.wikipedia....ican_war_crimes

Nigeria has called fo ran international aarrest warrant to be issued for Cheney although it is for bribery back in Haliburton days. Good to see an African country trying to clean up on bribery. Hope the US will assist them by not standing in the way of such a good example

Hope they get him.

But even more I hope they clean up there own country.

[hammered]

It is interesting to see so many fixate on the people, organizations and how information was found rather than what was in the releases. To date they have exposed a fair number of crimes including what can only be described as war crimes. Attack the messenger seems to be the order of the governments day. Guess they dont actually care about any of the allegations just in making sure they stay covered up. No beleif in freedom of information there

[hammered]

Command responsibility

Human Rights Watch has claimed that the principle of "command responsibility" could make high-ranking officials within the Bush administration guilty of war crimes allegedly committed during the War on Terror, either with their knowledge or by persons under their control.^[24]

A presidential memorandum of September 7, 2002 authorized U.S. interrogators of prisoners captured in Afghanistan to deny the prisoners basic protections required by the Geneva Conventions, and thus according to Jordan J. Paust, professor of law and formerly a member of the faculty of the Judge Advocate General's School, "necessarily authorized and ordered violations of the Geneva Conventions, which are war crimes."^[25] Based on the president's memorandum, U.S. personnel carried out cruel and inhumane treatment on the prisoners,^[26] which necessarily means that the president's memorandum was a plan to violate the Geneva Convention, and such a plan constitutes a war crime under the Geneva Conventions, according to Professor Paust.^[27]

Alberto Gonzales and others argued that detainees should be considered "unlawful combatants" and as such not be protected by the Geneva Conventions in multiple memoranda regarding these perceived legal gray areas.^[28]

Gonzales' statement that denying coverage under the Geneva Conventions "substantially reduces the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act" suggests, to some authors, an awareness by those involved in crafting policies in this area that US officials are involved in acts that could be seen to be war crimes.^[29] The US Supreme Court challenged the premise on which this argument is based in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, in which it ruled that Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions applies to detainees in Guantanamo Bay and that the Military Tribunals used to try these suspects were in violation of US and international law.^[30]

On April 14, 2006, Human Rights Watch said that Secretary Rumsfeld could be criminally liable for his alleged involvement in the abuse of Mohammad al-Qahtani.^[31] On November 14, 2006, invoking universal jurisdiction, legal proceedings were started in Germany – for their alleged involvement of prisoner abuse – against Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, John Yoo, George Tenet and others.^[32]

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is seen as an amnesty law for crimes committed in the War on Terror by retroactively rewriting the War Crimes Act^[33] and by abolishing habeas corpus, effectively making it impossible for detainees to challenge crimes committed against them.^[34]

http://en.wikipedia....ican_war_crimes

Nigeria has called fo ran international aarrest warrant to be issued for Cheney although it is for bribery back in Haliburton days. Good to see an African country trying to clean up on bribery. Hope the US will assist them by not standing in the way of such a good example

Hope they get him.

But even more I hope they clean up there own country.

In this case the two seem very connected

[hammered]

If Manning was such a basket case why then did he have access to such important documents. hmmm.

How many people are loony enough to do something for which they may very well spend the rest of their lives working at hard labor in a military prison? If he was not insane, he certainly better plead that way in the military court. .

A number of people in the history of the world have put their necks on the line to expose governmental excess. They usually face severe allegations or sanctions

[jayjay0]

I might remind you.The release of all these documents.Were as a direct result of an American citizen,wanting the world to see the Hypocrisy of the American government and military.

Now,who provided those documents to Wikileaks. An American by the name of Private ?????????????????

Now incarcerated incommunicado.With no access to his legal team or family.Justice American style!!!!!!

What laws has Wikileaks violated?And,please provide a source!!!!

Where did you get your information that the petulant PFC is being held incommunicado without legal counsel?

According to his support group he has met with friends and legal counsel. The reason he has not met with some of his family may be due to the fact that his Welsh father threw him out of the house when he discovered that Bradley was a homosexual. Hello? Do you know anything about this guy? He's a textbook case of a kid suffering from a need to be important, to be wanted.

Pfc Manning selected David Coombs of Providence, Rhode Island, to lead his legal defense. Mr. Coombs has over a decade of experience as a military trial lawyer and is a former law professor at the Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School in Charlottesville, Virginia. A personal friend of Bradley's verified the selection of legal counsel during a recent visit with him at the Marine Corps brig at Quantico, Virginia. Bradley was said to have appeared to be in good health and good spirits, considering the situation.

Why don't you read his lawyer's blog to find out what is going on? Your hero is apparently not all there in the head. I have previously provided a NYT link.

Now I'm telling you to go read what his lawyer has to say.

On his blog, Mr. Coombs stated:

"PFC Manning's unit documented a steady decline in his mental stability from early on in their deployment starting around December of 2009 to May of 2010. Consistent in this documentation was the behavior that they were concerned about intensified during the deployment. Due to this behavior and a concern about his personal safety, the command made the decision to remove the bolt from PFC Manning's weapon. For several weeks, he apparently walked around Forward Operating Base Hammer with his assigned weapon that was incapable of being used. During this time, however, he was still expected to perform his duties as an intelligence analyst."

Do you not understand that the military had a mental deficient on its hands and was trying to deal with him in a caring and humane manner. It is incredible that none of you holier than thou crusaders can't see that. What the <deleted> is up with that? Are you so afraid of the truth that a mentally ill kid was exploited that you have to invent stories that he was some sort of hero whistleblower? He was an angry little twink that wanted to get back at the people he thought were persecuting him. Instead of going beserk with a weapon, he did it with stealing information. Why the <deleted> do you think he was disarmed if he wasn't deemed to be a threat to himself and others. By removing his bolt, he still had a weapon and would not stick out, but he would not pose a threat of violence. The US military acts approriately and with compassion and in return this is what it gets.

There you go again ruining a good story with truth and facts.

[chuckd]

Let us start your reeducation here.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/03/13/winter_soldier

Six US soldiers have been charged with gang raping a 14 year old Iraqi girl then murdering her, and her 5-year old sister and her parents. Accused include Pcf. Steven Green of Midland Texas, Spc. James Barker, Sgt. Paul Cortez, Pfc. Jesse Spielman, Pfc. Bryan Howard and Sgt. Anthony Yribe. If these men are convicted, it would be fitting if they were treated for the rest of their lives as dangerous sex offenders and driven out of every town they try to live.

The US admitted to using banned white phosphorus bombs “for illumination” in the levelling of Fallujah.

American soldiers tortured prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay detention centre. The FBI corroborated. The story was carried by UPI, The New York Times (which did dozens of front page stories). Other papers carried it, but have since withdrawn their stories.

Do you have a point buried in here somewhere?

What has it to do with the UCMJ and with PFC Manning allegedly being held incommunicado?

Reeducation is often useful for everybody.

[Wallaby]

If Manning was such a basket case why then did he have access to such important documents. hmmm.

As for your comments on Assange, well they are just hearsay. We had quotes in the newspaper here in Brisbane on the weekend from his schoolmates, one who said he was brilliant at maths and a nice kid. So please read ALL reports about him before you decide to show just one sided comments.

However, what he is like as a person has nothing to do with the publishing of files. I couldn't care less if it was Charles Manson disclosing the documents, it is irrelevant. How about the US govt actually responds and exlpains things instead of the usual response of attacking the messenger with everything it has. Seems like the US govt has taken a page out of the Church of Scientology on how to react when someone blows the whislte.

It is very relevant how information is gathered. Would you have the same opinion if the local crown prosecutor used illegal surveillance methods or relied on a search without warrant in your home? The information was illegally removed and transferred. It was illegal because the information was protected, because Pfc Mannining was in a position of trust to guard the information and because the information was cleary designated as confidential.

In respect to the Pfc having emotional issues, the US military has made every effort to redress its past deficiencies in dealing with mental health. A tremendous effort is now made to reintegrate those personnel showing psychological distress. At the time, it was felt that the best place for Pfc. Manning was within a support network due to his issues of alienation. Obviously, his CO blew it. However, can he really be faulted by trying to help someone?A day doesn't go by when the US military doesn't take a hit in respect to its treatment of distressed personnel. What people forget is that if the organization does not act on a strict disciplinary basis, this is what happens. Because of Pfc Manning, alot of troubled soldiers are not going to get the support they need because people will fear a repeat of this tragedy.

If Pfc. manning's legal counsel acknowledges these issues, I think that is good enough for me. The kid was troubled.

You might want to read up on the current legal proceedings posted by the lead lawyer. He has a pretty good track record.

http://www.armycourt...aldefense.info/

You certainly have different legal procedures in the US than we do in Australia, that's for sure. I had worked for the prosecution here in Qld for a number of years and instructed counsel in numerous murder trials and hundreds of 'lesser' trials.

Here, the prosecution has nothing to do with the case until it gets to court. It is the job of the police to gather evidence and the police alone. I have never had any access or knowledge as to how the information was gathered. All we do is take the information that is provided and prosecute the matter in court.

You may not be aware of this but there are many many instances where search warrants are actually not needed in my country, a suspicion is all that is required and 'in they go'. As for what I would think if my personal information was published? Well that happens every day with the normal media, they will say what they want and use what they want without recourse, all they have to prove is that it is true and it is ok. If I wish to sue them then the onus is on ME to prove the information false.

I would be most upset at the person who stole it, but certainly not with the people that published it. If what they publish is untrue then I have a right to sue them for defamation. If the information is true then what's the problem?

So go to it US govt, prove it is false, clean up your own in house employee issues and stop attacking the messenger for no other reason that you don't like him.

[Wallaby]

As for your comments on Assange, well they are just hearsay. We had quotes in the newspaper here in Brisbane on the weekend from his schoolmates, one who said he was brilliant at maths and a nice kid.

So what. Everyone loved Ted Bundy before he got caught.

Everyone??

Everyone loved Mother Theresa too.

A nonsense post you make.

Edited December 6, 2010 by Wallaby

[hammered]

If Manning was such a basket case why then did he have access to such important documents. hmmm.

As for your comments on Assange, well they are just hearsay. We had quotes in the newspaper here in Brisbane on the weekend from his schoolmates, one who said he was brilliant at maths and a nice kid. So please read ALL reports about him before you decide to show just one sided comments.

However, what he is like as a person has nothing to do with the publishing of files. I couldn't care less if it was Charles Manson disclosing the documents, it is irrelevant. How about the US govt actually responds and exlpains things instead of the usual response of attacking the messenger with everything it has. Seems like the US govt has taken a page out of the Church of Scientology on how to react when someone blows the whislte.

It is very relevant how information is gathered. Would you have the same opinion if the local crown prosecutor used illegal surveillance methods or relied on a search without warrant in your home? The information was illegally removed and transferred. It was illegal because the information was protected, because Pfc Mannining was in a position of trust to guard the information and because the information was cleary designated as confidential.

In respect to the Pfc having emotional issues, the US military has made every effort to redress its past deficiencies in dealing with mental health. A tremendous effort is now made to reintegrate those personnel showing psychological distress. At the time, it was felt that the best place for Pfc. Manning was within a support network due to his issues of alienation. Obviously, his CO blew it. However, can he really be faulted by trying to help someone?A day doesn't go by when the US military doesn't take a hit in respect to its treatment of distressed personnel. What people forget is that if the organization does not act on a strict disciplinary basis, this is what happens. Because of Pfc Manning, alot of troubled soldiers are not going to get the support they need because people will fear a repeat of this tragedy.

If Pfc. manning's legal counsel acknowledges these issues, I think that is good enough for me. The kid was troubled.

You might want to read up on the current legal proceedings posted by the lead lawyer. He has a pretty good track record.

http://www.armycourt...aldefense.info/

You certainly have different legal procedures in the US than we do in Australia, that's for sure. I had worked for the prosecution here in Qld for a number of years and instructed counsel in numerous murder trials and hundreds of 'lesser' trials.

Here, the prosecution has nothing to do with the case until it gets to court. It is the job of the police to gather evidence and the police alone. I have never had any access or knowledge as to how the information was gathered. All we do is take the information that is provided and prosecute the matter in court.

You may not be aware of this but there are many many instances where search warrants are actually not needed in my country, a suspicion is all that is required and 'in they go'. As for what I would think if my personal information was published? Well that happens every day with the normal media, they will say what they want and use what they want without recourse, all they have to prove is that it is true and it is ok. If I wish to sue them then the onus is on ME to prove the information false.

I would be most upset at the person who stole it, but certainly not with the people that published it. If what they publish is untrue then I have a right to sue them for defamation. If the information is true then what's the problem?

So go to it US govt, prove it is false, clean up your own in house employee issues and stop attacking the messenger for no other reason that you don't like him.

Attacking the messenger is de rigeur. Somewhere in one or some of those cables is something someone in power really doesnt want people to know about. It obviously hasnt come out yet but this time there must be a bomb or two as even a video of troops killing civilians didnt warrant this official reaction. Be interesting to see what it is

[chuckd]

Nice try but no soap

No where does it deny him communication with his legal team.

You are right his rights were reduced when he enlisted.

The operative word is reduced not taken away. BIG difference.

I posted my original post at 1032 hours and you posted your response within 8 minutes of mine.

I have to assume you are either a speed reader or an expert in Military Justice. Which of these two choices is it?

Do you have any links to support your allegation that he is being held incommunicado?

I was unable top find any reference to it on this link: http://www.bradleymanning.org/

I think you guys are arguing FOR the same point.

chuckd - "Do you have any links to support your allegation that he is being held incommunicado?"

jayjay0 - "No where does it deny him communication with his legal team."

They seem to be saying the same thing to me.

Not the same point. I say he is not being held incommunicado.

Not really sure what chuckd is saying.

My original post was in response to KhunAussie52 when he stated.

("Now incarcerated incommunicado.With no access to his legal team or family")

Really not sure what chuckd is trying to say.

It would seem we have a case of who said what first.

I do believe it was KhunAussie52 that first stated in his post number 104 that PFC Manning was being held incommunicado.

You then responded in post number 110 with this statement, "I would be more interested in your source for no communication with his legal team or family."

I mistakenly then took your statement and read it to mean you were looking for a source that the US military could hold someone incommunicado if they so wished. That's when I posted the UCMJ reference.

We are, in fact, arguing the same point and still have received no response from KhunAussie52 relating to his original comment.

My bad, along with an apology.

Edited December 6, 2010 by chuckd

[TAWP]

One 'funny' thing is that this issue cut straight through the normal red vs yellow-camps or 'Pro-Thaksin vs Anti-Thaksin'-camps, making former 'friends' argue with vile attacks against each-other, aligning up with previous foes...

This time the division goes in 'Authoritarian vs Anti-Authoritarian'-camps...

Edited December 6, 2010 by TAWP

[hammered]

One 'funny' thing is that this issue cut straight through the normal red vs yellow-camps or 'Pro-Thaksin vs Anti-Thaksin'-camps, making former 'friends' argue with vile attacks against each-other, aligning up with previous foes...

This time the division goes in 'Authoritarian vs Anti-Authoritarian'-camps...

Good observation

[mark45y]

Interesting that this US State Dept info which is revealing secrets and discussions regarding heads of state, diplomats, VIPs, rich individuals, etc., seems to be causing much more grief/problems for WikiLeaks than the US Defense Dept info/secrets released several months ago. I guess heads of state, diplomats, VIPs, rich folks, etc., have more more pull/capability in "trying" to silent WikiLeaks than the Defense Dept.

That's exactly whats happening at this time, according to some independant news agencies. The man has tarnished the reputations of many heads of state in several countries including the U.S. War on Terror program. So, Wikileaks is being silenced. Truth hurts.

Mass-mirroring Wikileaks

Wikileaks is currently under heavy attack.

In order to make it impossible to ever fully remove Wikileaks from the Internet, we need your help.

if you have a unix-based server which is hosting a website on the Internet and you want to give wikileaks some of your hosting resources, you can help!

Anybody?

Very clever and I don't think they can ever stop Wikileaks wirh such a fast growing number of Mirror-Sites in so many countries. Now over 80 I believe.

Keep up the good work!

LaoPo

Now you will have a chance to really cheer. Wiki leaks is releasing locations that are critical to the United States and it's allies. Kind of a terrorist wish list for targets. A grocery shopping list of places to bomb as it were. This time the enemies of the UK and US have a tangible target list to kill people and disrupt both the US and UK governments.

“No wonder then that the Times newspaper in London has published the story under the headline "Wikileaks lists 'targets for terror' against the US".

Former UK Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind condemned the move. "This is further evidence that they have been generally irresponsible, bordering on criminal," Sir Malcolm said. "This is the kind of information terrorists are interested in knowing."

This is the blood stuff. This the stuff that will get Americans and Brits killed. This is the kind of stuff you wanted.

[TAWP]

You are saying no-one knows of sites or people to target unless the Americans first list them?

[Ulysses G.]

As for your comments on Assange, well they are just hearsay. We had quotes in the newspaper here in Brisbane on the weekend from his schoolmates, one who said he was brilliant at maths and a nice kid.

So what. Everyone loved Ted Bundy before he got caught.

Everyone??

Everyone loved Mother Theresa too.

nonsense post you make.

That is about as accurate as your other assertions.

Yes, I think that Mother Teresa was a deeply unpleasant, immoral human being and I can think of no ways in which she added anything to the world, except perhaps as an example of what not to do, how not to live. I find it frightening that so many people – even otherwise sane people – think that she was a good person, or dare not say otherwise. There appears to be a taboo against speaking out against people like Mother Teresa. Perhaps it is the taboo against criticising religious ideas?

Stop reading now if you'll be offended by strong criticism of this “saint”. http://www.fitz-claridge.com/Articles/MotherTeresa.html

[TAWP]

Abusing poor people in India to push her catholic idea on them when they are at deaths door is horrible.

And your post that *everybody* loved Ted Bundy is ofcourse not true. Or should we call it a lie...?

Edited December 6, 2010 by TAWP

[Ulysses G.]

Ted Bundy was well liked by many people who know him, until he was revealed to be a serial killer, so saying that one person said that Assange was a swell guy proves almost nothing.

Edited December 6, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[mark45y]

You are saying no-one knows of sites or people to target unless the Americans first list them?

The Times newspaper in London has published the story under the headline "Wikileaks lists 'targets for terror' against the US". If you read the list you will find that the targets list is just that. Easy targets that are critical to the US and UK but not before identified as such.

That is why. Former UK Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind condemned the move. "This is further evidence that they have been generally irresponsible, bordering on criminal," Sir Malcolm said. "This is the kind of information terrorists are interested in knowing."

This is the kind of thing that LaoPo was looking for by supporting the mirror sites so WikiLeaks could publish information that would aid terror groups in killing Americans, Brits and others.

This has nothing to do with freedom of information this is a list of targets. Just like the Japanese living in Hawaii sent back home to assist in the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Rejoice, this is what you wanted. Solid information to aid in killing Americans. There is no other purpose in listing it. Many joint American UK defense projects dealing with submarines and aircraft. Don't worry Brits will be killed too. Like I said this is what you all wanted.

[KhunAussie52]

If Manning was such a basket case why then did he have access to such important documents. hmmm.

How many people are loony enough to do something for which they may very well spend the rest of their lives working at hard labor in a military prison? If he was not insane, he certainly better plead that way in the military court. .

Very brave!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mark45y]

Reply to Hammered,

So are you saying that WikiLeaks should be stopped? Or allowed to continue providing terror target lists? I would imaging it would be OK to kill Americans in your point of view. But I could be wrong.