My inbox is slammed with every author I follow's take on Assange today, so I can't read all of them all the way through. Please keep that in mind when I pose the following question:
As Ken excerpted, the operable quote appears to be "illegally obtaining..." which - to me, having followed this case from the beginning, seems to be specific to how he went about getting the materials from Bradley (at the time) Manning. So they are apparently focusing in on what they originally tried to call "hacking" - i.e., the bullshit about the password and him being in real time communication with Manning while the latter was actively at work on a US military base. It all ties back to the "Collateral Murder" leak.
Hence, I wasn't under the impression that this plea was related to mere "possession" of NatSec information, but more in the way in which it was obtained. IOW, Assange guiding Manning through some sort of chat program as he actively searched for files to leak rather than Manning getting them himself and then anonymously uploading them to Wikileaks' server. I could be completely wrong about my interpretation, and I could also be making a distinction without a (n effective) difference.
All that said, if the "Intelligence" Community is celebrating this guilty plea, then yeah, there's probably more to the story and something to be worried about.
Interesting point. One could argue that the only effect of this precedent "should" be that journalists working with inside sources will be (even) more careful not to assist them in obtaining or exfiltrating documents; that it shouldn't affect what they publish out of the documents they do receive. Alas, what "should" happen and what "will" happen may not be the same.
"And it’s not like we have an abundance of hard-hitting national security as it is."
I think you are missing the word "reporting" here.
Good piece. I think the intelligence community wants the precedent set here which they got.
One measure of whether or not they are successful will be if Assange resumes reporting through WikiLeaks or if he decides he's had enough and disappears from public view.
Someone at Moon of Alabama said that part of his plea deal was that he has to stop doing Wikileaks and turn over any information that he might still have to the US authorities. So far I haven't seen any proof of this, but that's one rumor floating around.
The truth is that the US and its vassals, weather they realize it or not, are more gravely wounded than Julian. He left the field of battle with his head high. The forces of evil and/or wickedness were unable to steal his soul but he exposed them for the frauds they are. They make a mockery of the concept of justice and I doubt many are fooled by the legalistic rhetoric. I would suggest that this has all the hallmarks of a Pyrrhic victory for the US.
The National Security arm of the United States is as corrupt a power as it gets. They have no taste for citizens of the country. It's like they live in their own little country while ruling over ours. And, no one seems to want to hold them accountable for anything.
My inbox is slammed with every author I follow's take on Assange today, so I can't read all of them all the way through. Please keep that in mind when I pose the following question:
As Ken excerpted, the operable quote appears to be "illegally obtaining..." which - to me, having followed this case from the beginning, seems to be specific to how he went about getting the materials from Bradley (at the time) Manning. So they are apparently focusing in on what they originally tried to call "hacking" - i.e., the bullshit about the password and him being in real time communication with Manning while the latter was actively at work on a US military base. It all ties back to the "Collateral Murder" leak.
Hence, I wasn't under the impression that this plea was related to mere "possession" of NatSec information, but more in the way in which it was obtained. IOW, Assange guiding Manning through some sort of chat program as he actively searched for files to leak rather than Manning getting them himself and then anonymously uploading them to Wikileaks' server. I could be completely wrong about my interpretation, and I could also be making a distinction without a (n effective) difference.
All that said, if the "Intelligence" Community is celebrating this guilty plea, then yeah, there's probably more to the story and something to be worried about.
Interesting point. One could argue that the only effect of this precedent "should" be that journalists working with inside sources will be (even) more careful not to assist them in obtaining or exfiltrating documents; that it shouldn't affect what they publish out of the documents they do receive. Alas, what "should" happen and what "will" happen may not be the same.
I mean I still think it's a really bad precedent but that appears to be how some are spinning it.
"And it’s not like we have an abundance of hard-hitting national security as it is."
I think you are missing the word "reporting" here.
Good piece. I think the intelligence community wants the precedent set here which they got.
One measure of whether or not they are successful will be if Assange resumes reporting through WikiLeaks or if he decides he's had enough and disappears from public view.
Someone at Moon of Alabama said that part of his plea deal was that he has to stop doing Wikileaks and turn over any information that he might still have to the US authorities. So far I haven't seen any proof of this, but that's one rumor floating around.
Julian must embrace his freedom and Wikileak pictures of Hunter’s massive hog.
I always look forward to your obligatory comment now lol
That's as clear and concise an assessment I've read. Good job Ken.
What I would like to see are harsher punishments for rapists like Assange. Because he raped a woman. And one cares.
The truth is that the US and its vassals, weather they realize it or not, are more gravely wounded than Julian. He left the field of battle with his head high. The forces of evil and/or wickedness were unable to steal his soul but he exposed them for the frauds they are. They make a mockery of the concept of justice and I doubt many are fooled by the legalistic rhetoric. I would suggest that this has all the hallmarks of a Pyrrhic victory for the US.
The National Security arm of the United States is as corrupt a power as it gets. They have no taste for citizens of the country. It's like they live in their own little country while ruling over ours. And, no one seems to want to hold them accountable for anything.