Julian Assange is My Hero!

... I don't know the talking head I saw said he's a "loser" and couldn't "make it any other way."
How can one legally have a BoA exec's hard drive? If the current warrant from Interpol doesn't stick, then I am sure BoA will ruin the man's life.

And hear what alanhart has to say about wikileaks

http://www.alanhart.net/the-folly-of-the-israeli-and-arab-approach-to-iran-and-is-wikileaks-being-manipulated-by-an-intelligence-service/#more-1362
The folly of the Israeli AND Arab approach to Iran
December 1, 2010
Comments: 2
The Wikileaks revelation that some Persian Gulf Arab leaders wanted (and still want?) America to attack Iran is confirmation of what some of us thought we knew – that Arab leaders are not merely impotent but as dangerously deluded as their Israeli counterparts.

Netanyahu was absolutely correct when he told a group of editors in Tel Aviv that “Israel has not been damaged at all by the Wikileaks publications.” A senior Israeli government official went further in his response to questions from AFP. He said: “We have come out looking good.” The leaked documents, he added, “confirm that the whole Middle East is terrified by the prospect of a nuclear Iran… The Arab countries are pushing the United States towards military action more forcefully than Israel.”

Actually the assertion that “the whole Middle East is terrified by the prospect of a nuclear Iran” is nonsense. The Arab regimes which more or less do the bidding of America-and-Zionism are terrified, but the same cannot be said of many of their repressed subjects. As Noam Chomsky pointed out in a recent interview with Open Democracy’s Amy Goodman, a poll of Arab opinion indicates that 80% regard Israel as the major threat in the region. Iran is seen as a threat by only 10%. The poll also indicated that 57% believe the region would be a more safe place if Iran had nuclear weapons. (As with Israel/Palestine, the regimes are effectively on one side – that of America-and-Israel, and the Arab masses are on the other side – that of the Palestinians).

The only good news confirmed by the latest Wiki leaked documents is that President Obama has so far resisted pressure from both Israel and the Arabs. (In fairness it should not be forgotten that President George “Dubya” Bush also said “No” to an attack on Iran when Vice President Cheney wanted him to authorize it).

There is no mystery about why any U.S. president who is not completely nuts will refuse to authorize an American attack on Iran (and do his best to stop Israel going it alone, no doubt with clearance through Saudi airspace). An American attack on Iran would have huge and possibly incalculable consequences for American interests. It would set in motion an escalating and possibly unending counter offensive including unbridled terrorism against American forces and facilities (civilian and business as well as military) around the world. And while that was happening, what is left of the global economy could be wrecked by sustained rises in the price of oil.

If those Arab leaders who pressed America to attack Iran discount the catastrophe scenario indicated above, they are very, very irresponsible. But there is more to their folly.

I don’t believe Iran’s ruling mullahs want nuclear weapons, but under pressure from the Revolutionary Guards (the real power in the country when push comes to shove?), they may have agreed in principle a while ago that Iran should have at least the possibility of developing a nuclear bomb for deterrence.

Prior to the publication of Wiki’s latest leaks, the question of how far and how fast Iran should go to have the possibility of developing a nuclear bomb was still the subject of debate in the leadership in all of its manifestations. It may be that Wiki’s revelations will play into the hands of those in Tehran who are insisting that Iran must have a nuclear bomb for deterrence.

While I was absorbing what the Wiki leaks confirmed about the attitudes of Arab leaders, I asked myself this question: What would I want if I was an Iranian, even one who hated the present regime?

My answer?

I would want my government, whatever its composition, to crash ahead with developing a nuclear bomb for deterrence. I would tell myself that was the only way to keep Iran safe from Arab-backed Israeli threats. And when challenged in argument, I would say, “Do you think America and Britain would have invaded Iraq if Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons?”

My main point?

If Iran does becomes a nuclear-armed state, it will be because of Israeli threats and Arab leadership’s endorsement of them.

Now to a most controversial question, one at least as controversial as the various 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Is Wikileaks being manipulated by intelligence services – one or several?

There are a number of bloggers – some of them informed writers with credibility, some of them uninformed, anti-Semitic conspiracy theory nutters – who think the answer is “Yes”. More to the point is that no less a figure than Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter’s National Security Advisor, thinks the answer could be “Yes”. He said so in an interview with PBS’s Judy Woodruff and also in a subsequent BBC World Service (Radio) interview. To Judy Woodruff he said:

“The real issue is, who is feeding Wikileaks? They’re getting a lot of information which seems trivial, inconsequential, but some of it seems surprisingly pointed… The very pointed references to Arab leaders could have as their objective undermining their political credibility at home, because this kind of public identification of their hostility towards Iran could actually play against them at home…It’s a question of whether Wikileaks are being manipulated by interested parties that want to either complicate our relationship with other governments or want to undermine some governments… I have no doubt that Wikileaks is getting a lot of the stuff from sort of relatively unimportant sources, like the one that perhaps is identified on the air. But it may be getting stuff at the same time from interested intelligence parties who want to manipulate the process and achieve certain very specific objectives.”

Another way to look at the matter is to ask this question. If a visitor from Outer Space studied the first two days of Wikileak’s revelations, what preliminary conclusion would he (or she) come to?

I think it’s entirely possible that he (or she) would say: “The main message is clear. Iran is the biggest single threat to the peace of the region and the world and not only because the Israelis say so. Arab leaders agree with them. The secondary message is that apart from the Arab leaders who say they share Israel’s assessment, other Muslim leaders, those in Turkey and Pakistan especially, are not to be trusted.”

And here’s another question. Which party benefited most from the first two days of Wikileaks revelations? The obvious answer is the Zionist state of Israel.

I must also confess that I have a nagging worry (small but real) about the possibility that Julian Paul Assange, Wikileaks’ founder, has been compromised in some way and is open to manipulation. My concern on this account is the fact that he is a 9/11 conspiracy denier. He is firmly on the record as saying: “I’m constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”

As I have said on public platforms in America and written in a number of articles for the worldwide web, I think there is irrefutable evidence that the Twin Towers were not brought down by the planes and their burning fuel.

My own conclusion at the present time is that I don’t have a conclusion; but I think the question of whether or not Wikileaks is being manipulated, and if so by whom, is worthy of deep and serious investigation.

i think years from now we will learn that he was an agent of the us govmnt and made to be the public face of an info dump orchestrated by same. just a hunch. if he was legit, he would be dead. just my humble opinion.
Happy Hanukkah, Jews!

"i think years from now we will learn that he was an agent of the us govmnt and made to be the public face of an info dump orchestrated by same. just a hunch. if he was legit, he would be dead. just my humble opinion"

agreed.... He's working with the regime. Working from the inside to bring us down. The regime's leader is very proud of wikiboy.

I agree, lucillemissSE, and so do the media of most of the countries involved in the diplomatic cables.

And call me a party pooper, but the "miracle" of Hanukkah is believed to have been due to the superior lamp technology of the Greeks, and not to OreIda Tiny Taters. So Happy Hanukkah, Jews! to you, and bah humbug!

Is it a vast right wing tea party conspiracy?

The Greek oil lamps?

Maybe. Maybe.

but do you think it's really as simple as getting support for a strike on iran? just seems so heavy handed and obvious. i'd like to hold my shady tax funded government entities to a higher standard of evil scheming.

Probably some oil pipeline thing in the 'stans ... Iran as a decoy.

Stanley?

Blanche?

Rose?

You were supposed to say "Stella?"

No, that's Sophia

No. The play, not the sitcom.

Yes, yes, I remember, I had lasagna.

it will be interesting to see the difference in media coverage here and european sentiment vis a vis iraq. our limited national attention span notwithstanding, it's, like, too brazen. no? i don't know

Is it a plot to oust Sec. Clinton? Condi had state heads investigated and she didn't resign.

janejoey, if you're serious, that can't be it. it's pretty much in her job description to investigate heads of state and various power brokers. that's nothing.

I know but Assange has called for her resignation and there is a media murmur supporting it:
http://www.slate.com/id/2276190
If Assange thinks Clinton should resign over this, then I hope he never hears about Kissinger.

that assange is not dead already is a shock to me

my jury's not out on him yet, but he has sure ruffled some feathers--always a good thing

the "rape' charges are at risk of being totally trumped up, esp, given the details--google it--some crap about consensual that became rape because the condom broke???
for me, "no" means "no" at any stage in the game, but to put this guy on interpol's red or orange or whatever list for this? clearly about US pressure to get him into custody in sweden so we may quickly extradite
and the crap about putting a few cooperating afghani's at risk is most amusing--most of what wikileaks is about is that we are totally ok with putting innocents at risk--the issue is that politicians are being embarrassed, and want to be able to be disingenuous without beiing at risk of being accountable

and who was concerned about valerie plame, and anyone she had dealings with??

Obama will never force Hillary to resign - that would leave him vulnerable to a primary challenge in '12. Though now that Rahm is no longer pulling the strings, maybe his political acumen isn't so strong.

Assange is a little twirp, who deserves whatever is coming to him. Obama didn't care when the leaks were from the Bush admin, but this latest data dump embarrassed his administration, and if the Bank America leaks shed light on the Countrywide 'friends of Angelo' like Dodd and other Dems, watch out.

This person should not be anyone's hero, he's an enemy to the United States.

> the "rape' charges are at risk of being totally trumped up, esp, given the details--google it--some crap about consensual that became rape because the condom broke???

You could tell that those charges were BS from a mile away. I'm kind of looking forward to what they have to show on BAC or any other bank. It promises to be entertaining.

About "confidential" docs already released I don't think it's a big deal. International opinion cannot be worse regarding USA foreign policy, so I don't see a whole lot to lose from transparency and a lot of room for improvement from USA's part.

it could have to do with net neutrality and internet "security", ie look how vulnerable we (the entire world)are, we need someone to regulate

also, sticking with conspiracies, or rather these individual leaks being useful and serving all kinds of different purposes, we (with our frenemy china) have now through wikileaks effectively communicated to n korea that they're all alone.

is all of it just a new and awesome form of diplomacy in the internet age? enquiring minds want to know

How can our government say the "wikileaks" is bad, but the "Pentagon Papers" good.
Pure hypocrisy.

So Assange is still in the news. What do you think President, Wbottom?

Jimmy Carter thinks Snodwen did the country a service.

So do I.

He's one of the few PATRIOTS around anymore.

Snowden is a traitor and a disgrace. He is putting Americans at risk and he betrayed his word and his loyalty. You may not like the NSA's policies and programs, but they aren't illegal. Fight against them politically but to put people's safety at risk is despicable, and those supporting him are clueless.

You are not credible to attack these NSA programs if you don't propose another way for our government to keep Americans safe from a terrorist attack. Just asking terrorist groups to please leave us alone isn't really a security strategy.

Well said LICComment. Anyone who believes in absolute freedoms, rights and demands for complete transparency is naive and they ingnore the real (and dengerous) world we live in.

snowden is a real hero who protect americans' privacy

snowden should be awarded the nobel peace prize, he also save the world

Had Snowden limited his "theft" to domestic items, I could certainly see a forum for discussing whether or not he is simply a whistleblower and/or debate status of hero.
THe moment he took and divulged international evidence of snooping he became a traitor.

Jimmy Carter has had the most bizarre case of Stockholm Syndrome I've ever seen.

edit for my dislexic writing

"international evidence of snooping" to "evidence of international snooping"

"You are not credible to attack these NSA programs if you don't propose another way for our government to keep Americans safe from a terrorist attack."

Actually, Ron Paul has already laid out the most effective anti-terrorism plan: STOP PISSING OFF OTHER COUNTRIES!

Maybe if we stopped acting so much like an EMPIRE, and more like a state within a global community, there would be no worry about foreign terrorists.

But you know what? There's already no reason for worry about foreign terrorists! It's all smoke and mirrors. Al-Qaeda doesn't even really exist (at least, not the way the government and the corporate media portray it).

>STOP PISSING OFF OTHER COUNTRIES!

Terrorism is our fault?

NYCMatt just made my point. That is a non-credible, completely wacko view. To describe the U.S. as an empire is ridiculous. The U.S. does not rule over any other nation. Thanks for making a fool of yourself.

LICComment is a fool, and most likely a war criminal as well

"Terrorism is our fault?"

You know the CIA actually CREATED al-Qaeda, don't you?

True enough,just as Israel helped nurture Hamas. The law of unintended consequences..

riverside, that's totally different

the cia directly funded, recruited, and trained those "extemists" in the 60's to harm the socialism movement and their peaceful people. at a high level, they must be directly taking order from the cia still

thus, ron paul has his limitation. even if the gov stop harming other countries, the cia can still engineer/create similar events

Every day, it seems, brings disturbing new revelations about the National Security Agency’s program to collect phone and email metadata, raising serious questions for our country. Reports indicate that the NSA is gathering metadata on millions of people in the United States and around the world, targeting diplomatic missions of both friends and foes.

When the Congress and the courts work in secret; when massive amounts of data are collected from Americans and enterprises; when government’s power of intrusion into the lives of ordinary citizens, augmented by the awesome power of advanced technologies, is hugely expanded without public debate or discussion over seven years, then our sense of constitutional process and accountability is deeply offended.

When the government is exercising powers that may impinge on our rights, even when justified as measures essential for national security, we must be alert. Government, once granted authority, rarely relinquishes it and often expands it. Even if its actions are well intentioned, we must consider the precedent of expansive government power to be used 10, 20 or 50 years hence, when the justification may be less compelling than safeguarding lives

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/its-time-to-debate-nsa-programs-94634.html#ixzz2bea8YZuR