dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
23612
share rss forum feed


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback

1 edit
reply to Link Logger

Re: Assange makes 1st public appearance in 2 months

said by Link Logger:

Who are we to fear the most when it comes to free speech, the evil government or the so called defenders of free speech? If the question even has to be asked, then perhaps the defenders have already failed.

Blake

I think the time is drawing closer when this will be. Outspoken is already frowned upon.

Just look at the link posted above on the affects of a prime minister. Our prime minister allegedly commented on Julian being guilty in 2010, and the subsequent shut down of all credit card blocking of donating to an 'illegal organisation" as well as other forms of donating. I'm sure it was discussed here in the topic earlier too.

She has basically used the power of her seat to thwart his cause. I can understand the want to hit back with a deformation suite of some sort.

»www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-08/a···/4300262
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



Ian
Premium
join:2002-06-18
ON
kudos:3

1 recommendation

said by norwegian:

She has basically used the power of her seat to thwart his cause. I can understand the want to hit back with a deformation suite of some sort.

Publicity stunt. Nothing more.

»www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi···ext-only

"Prominent defamation lawyer Stuart Littlemore, QC, has labelled attempts by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange to find ways of suing Prime Minister Julia Gillard for defamation as nothing more than a stunt.

Mr Littlemore and other legal experts have today said that defamation claims generally must be made within 12 months of the comments."

""For the life of me I cannot imagine that there is a cause of action that WikiLeaks could ever bring, least of all if it had done it within time."

So what exactly did Ms. Gillard say that was so "slanderous"?

"I absolutely condemn the placement of this information on the WikiLeaks website. It's a grossly irresponsible thing to do and an illegal thing to do.""

Yeah, good luck with that Mr. Assange. It might serve its purpose in deflecting conversation away from his ducking rape charges for a bit though.
--
“Any claim that the root of a problem is simple should be treated the same as a claim that the root of a problem is Bigfoot. Simplicity and Bigfoot are found in the real world with about the same frequency.” – David Wong


Name Game
Premium
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI
kudos:7
reply to The Snowman
Anonymous withdraws support for WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has lost another high-profile supporter as Anonymous, the hacking collective, said the whistleblowing site had been “ruined by egos”.
Anonymous, a loose group of internet “hacktivists”, has been one of WikiLeaks’ closest allies during the past two years, launching cyber attacks against the site’s opponents and, some claim, becoming a source of its material.

But leading Anonymous accounts on Twitter, which rallied behind WikiLeaks and Mr Assange despite his legal and financial woes, have now withdrawn their support, decrying the freedom-of-information project as a “One Man Julian Assange show”.
Calling the split “the end of an era”, Anonymous tweeted: “It was an awesome idea, ruined by egos.”

»www.ft.com/cms/s/0/17e6d936-1486···dc0.html
--
Gladiator Security Forum
»www.gladiator-antivirus.com/


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
reply to The Snowman
Assange's list of allies grows thin... (with apologies to Elrond)


Name Game
Premium
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI
kudos:7

When parts of WikiLeaks' website recently disappeared behind a banner asking that users make a donation — a tactic similar to the paywalls of some newspapers online — anger exploded across the Internet, with criticism coming from many who had backed the organization in the past.

"This, dear friends will lose you all allies you still had," said a statement posted by a heavily-followed, Anonymous-linked Twitter account.

The scale of the annoyance among Anonymous supporters was difficult to gauge because the leaderless movement is by its nature hard to get a handle on. But several closely watched Twitter accounts linked to Anonymous expressed anger and unhappiness with the move.

One released a full statement saying that the fundraising campaign was the final straw.

"We have been worried about the direction WikiLeaks is going for a while. In the recent month the focus moved away from actual leaks and the fight for freedom of information further and further while it concentrated more and more on Julian Assange," the statement said. It also expressed annoyance with the 41-year-old Australian's recent meeting with pop diva Lady Gaga at the embassy.

»www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/1···622.html
--
Gladiator Security Forum
»www.gladiator-antivirus.com/


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Blackbird
said by Blackbird:

Assange's list of allies grows thin...

It seems though there are 2 angles to this:

1. He is doing it to raise pocket money and possibly become rich.

2. He is trying to help cover funds for now and the future towards the campaign.

The problem here is what are the motives?

Remember his funds ex Australia were shut down by a few well laid words. He then jumps bail. While the second was his own doing, the first would have had major impacts on any direction going forward, "ego" as quoted, or any other reason. But because the site is asking for donations it is automatically a bad thing. Where do Anon get their funds etc? Big corporation shifts in any direction can change the flow of money in an instant, it's a 101 of today's economics. We aren't bartering for sheep and cows anymore, last time I checked. (Excuse those few countries that still live a simple existence.)
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Name Game

We have been worried about the direction WikiLeaks is going for a while. In the recent month the focus moved away from actual leaks and the fight for freedom of information further and further while it concentrated more and more on Julian Assange," the statement said.



That does seem the case of late.

It also expressed annoyance with the 41-year-old Australian's recent meeting with pop diva Lady Gaga at the embassy.

So now he has to bow to the beliefs of Anon to still be on his life path? He has to pay the bills somehow, and business and friends sometimes cross those paths. We understand our enemies better than our friends sometimes.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

2 recommendations

reply to The Snowman
Someone else's motives can be a very difficult thing to judge, perhaps ultimately impossible. But the chain of events immediately leading to where Assange is today include fleeing judicial process for sexual accusations in Sweden, being sought for extradition from the UK for that by Sweden, promising to abide by bail terms in UK while that extradition was being appealed, and finally (thus far) jumping bail into the sanctuary of a 3rd World embassy in the UK. To a purely jurist mind, his ongoing word would now mean little or nothing. These are all holes he has dug by himself, for himself.

It seems to me that it's to defend against legal consequences of all these actions for which he wants financial assistance. Granted, he claims that such defence is against ultimate extradition to the US for ill-defined crimes for which he's never been charged, but at present that remains only a claim. Whatever his "life path" might be purported to be, his trajectory of late seems filled with very much of "Assange" and very little of "freedom of information."

Whatever happened to the courage of one's conviction? I'm disappointed that Assange entangled himself in whatever he did in Sweden, illegal or not, with so many more-significant things at stake. I'm disappointed that he's run from the immediate legal processes and consequences there. I'm disappointed that he broke his word in applying for bail in the UK and jumping it. I'm disappointed that his plaintive cry continues to be that the US bogey-man will "get him", rather than boldly rising up to look such a situation directly in the eye and to make a principled stand for freedom of speech or freedom of information or freedom of journalism or whatever other freedom he claims to be defending. Instead, he continues to duck and hide, spewing repetitious press releases at every turn. I suspect many others, some of them his past financial supporters, are increasingly disappointed for these and other reasons.
--
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!" -- P.Henry, 1775

Frodo

join:2006-05-05
kudos:1
reply to AVD
said by AVD:

nothing new here. I think the way it works is that Sweden should ask for extradition from equador directly. UK has no beef with Assuange.

I see a problem with trying to ask for extradition from Ecuador directly. According to this Wikipedia article, the Ecuadorian embassy is not soverign territory of Ecuador.
Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are not sovereign territory of the represented state.[5][6] Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Diplomats themselves still retain full diplomatic immunity, and (as an adherent to the Vienna Convention) the host country may not enter the premises of the mission without permission of the represented country. The term "extraterritoriality" is often applied to diplomatic missions, but only in this broader sense.

If this is true, then Assange is still on British soil. That could mean that Sweden needs to pursue extradition with GB. The stumbling block remains that Great Britain and Sweden decline to arrange the extradition in a way that would preclude any subsequent extradition to a 3rd country, such as the US. That would involve guarantees under article 28(4) of the Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States along with arrangements to eliminate ways to circumvent that agreement. According to update one there may be a way to circumvent the framework. If that stumbling block is removed, then it is my understanding that Ecuador will surrender Assange.

However, at this point, from what I've heard, Great Britain and Sweden have declined to handle this extradition in a way that would preclude a subsequent extradition to a 3rd country.


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback
reply to Blackbird
said by Blackbird:

I'm disappointed that his plaintive cry continues to be that the US bogey-man will "get him", rather than boldly rising up to look such a situation directly in the eye and to make a principled stand for freedom of speech or freedom of information or freedom of journalism or whatever other freedom he claims to be defending. Instead, he continues to duck and hide, spewing repetitious press releases at every turn. I suspect many others, some of them his past financial supporters, are increasingly disappointed for these and other reasons.

Well put - it could just be how some of his supporters are feeling, hence the articles posted directly above in regards to Anon. We are all outsiders in this story and they were closer to him than we will ever be.

I enjoyed reading your reply. Hopefully Julian has a minute to read it too.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke