Will Robinson wrote:Like I said, we have Judges and courts to sort it out...
So, if you knew that what was the purpose of your The Espionage Act is falling from the sky post there Mr. Little?
Posted before I thought of the Supreme Court case. Think I should blank it?
Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2010 12:33 pm
by Heretic
There is a secret grand jury in Virgina looking into wikileaks. Wikileaks already leaked it
I find myself curious as to the legal argument the US would use to get Assange shipped to the US to face trial.
Lothar made the (IMO accurate) observation that Wikileaks don't seem to follow US law at all. But is Wikileaks even bound by US law if it's not based or registered in the US and the crimes were committed elsewhere?
IIRC, many US organisations have cut tied with Wikileaks, which is understandable as they ARE bound by US law and are committing illegal acts by aiding or associating with Wikileaks. But what about Wikileaks themselves? What are the legal grounds for extradition of Assange from the UK / Sweden to the US if the crimes were not committed on US soil and the actions themselves were not illegal in the country of their origin?
(I am not a lawyer BTW and am far from an expert in these matters - I'm merely curious how they the US would go about it.)
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:40 am
by CUDA
IMO Wiki is with-in it's rights to publish those documents. even though thay are not based in this country our Constitution guarantee's the freedom of the press. that being said if I was Assange I would probably be in Hiding myself, because there are many countries out there that do not have that same stance as we do and have probably been embarrassed about the leaks and might not be as forgiving about it.
HOWEVER, the Army private that gave Wiki the information should be executed for treason.
Re:
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 12:26 pm
by null0010
CUDA, I agreed with everything you said until this point:
CUDA wrote:HOWEVER, the Army private that gave Wiki the information should be executed for treason.
(added emphasis, obviously.)
We should exile him to France instead, I think that would be worse.
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:52 pm
by Spidey
France…noooo anywhere but France!
Re:
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 11:14 am
by Mjolnir
CUDA wrote:IMO Wiki is with-in it's rights to publish those documents. even though thay are not based in this country our Constitution guarantee's the freedom of the press. that being said if I was Assange I would probably be in Hiding myself, because there are many countries out there that do not have that same stance as we do and have probably been embarrassed about the leaks and might not be as forgiving about it.
HOWEVER, the Army private that gave Wiki the information should be executed for treason.
That goes explicitly against the reasoning of the Nuremburg Trials and supposed moral foundations of this country, we are already torturing the private as we speak, who saw illegal activity and with accordance of those decisions back in the 40s/50s sent information to Wikileaks as a whistleblower. That's not treason, that's being a hero.
Posted: Mon Jan 03, 2011 10:08 am
by Gekko71
Bump.
Wikileaks entire collection of leaked diplomatic cables has been acquired by a Norwegian newspaper. They do not say where they sourced the files from. They *do* say that in effect they will release these documents when, as, and if it suits them (Wikileaks has only released 2,000 or so of the 250,000 cables on offer so far. (Link)
I wonder if the US government will lean equally hard on this new source of leaks as it has on Wikileaks and Julian Assange.
Posted: Mon Jan 03, 2011 10:22 am
by Heretic
I don't know if they will be, but they have already raided ISPs and took servers and hard drives in response to the DDoS attack on Visa.com, PayPal.com, and Mastercard.com but they can't find the ones doing the attack on Wikileaks.
