PIC: Obama's transparency & Wikileaks

[yurbud]

[ProSense]

1. He's exercizing the rule of

law by persuing criminal mischief. Did you think that transparency meant the end of confidentiality?

This is transparency and this.

[polichick]

5. Was it "criminal mischief" when the prez decided to ignore the Constitution...

...and our treaties by trying to keep Spain from prosecuting our war criminals?

[ProSense]

12. WTH are you talking about?

What does Spain have to do with the U.S. Constitution?

[polichick]

13. Interesting spin - but it's our prez who is bound by the Constitution. Try again. nt

[yurbud]

21. nothing. But the Geneva Convention as a treaty we ratified does, and Bush unilaterally

abrogated it, and whether through cowardice or complicity or Congress failed to act and now the Justice Department is failing to act.

If Spain was willing to do the job we aren't, Obama could have at least done nothing instead of actively trying to kill it.

[tavalon]

27. Spain was attempting to prosecute our war criminals because we refused

Obama helped to stop them. We know this for sure now because of wikileaks. Many of us suspected that something like that happened and now we have proof. As far as what Spain has to do with the U.S. Constitution? Nothing that I know of. Do you?

[sudopod]

25. u mad? nt

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[midnight]

4. Phx isn't that profiling and isn't assinging guilt based on looks so republican?

Well I think so, and hence, the brilliance of the cartoon....

[Phx_Dem]

14. Not when he is wanted by the Swedish goverment for rape, and

refuses to submit to questions. It's the Swedes for God's sake! The Swedish government isn't the Gestapo. And I didn't pronounce him guilty of anything. I said he looked creepy, like a rapist. And he does.

Last time I checked Bush and Cheney hadn't been convicted of anything either, but that doesn't stop people on DU from calling them war criminals. I haven't seen you stick up for them. Is it only alleged rapists you stand up for?

[struggle4progress]

16. Actually, he's not wanted by the Swedish government for rape but for questioning, and he

hasn't been charged with anything now. Moreover, he apparently hasn't refused to submit to questions: he seems to have indicated he was perfectly willing to allow Swedish prosecutors to question him in the Swedish embassy in the UK

[Phx_Dem]

31. An international arrest warrant has been issued by the Swedish government

for the rape and assault of two women, in separate incidents.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/nov/18/interpol-arrest-warrant-julian-assange-wikileaks-rape

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange wanted by Interpol over rape case
Swedish prosecutors to issue international arrest warrant after Stockholm court rules he should be held for questioning

NOv. 18 - An international arrest warrant is being issued for the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, after Swedish prosecutors were today granted permission to detain him for questioning in a rape case.

<SNIP>
The Stockholm district court approved the request after hearing investigators had been unable to question the 39-year-old Australian on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. The allegations, which Assange has repeatedly denied, relate to two women he met while on a visit to Sweden in August.

<SNIP>

According to another source, the Swedish prosecutor had set a date for a formal interview with him, but Assange instead left for London, though did not commit any offence in doing so, where he appeared at a press conference when the Iraq war logs were published. He subsequently decided not to return to Sweden, telling friends he feared he would be arrested if he did so. Stephens denies this account.

Assange was accused of raping one woman and sexually assaulting another woman in separate encounters in Sweden in August. A warrant for his arrest was first issued in August, but dropped within 24 hours when prosecutors said the accusations against him lacked substance. The case was then reopened.

[struggle4progress]

33. But it's a warrant to detain him for questioning, right? If I understand correctly, there

are no current charges filed

[Phx_Dem]

35. No charges have been filed against Bush or Cheney either.

So does that means they didn't do anything wrong? You have no idea what evidence the Swedes have, but they obviously have something or they wouldn't issue a warrant for arrest. They don't arrest "witnesses." And most witnesses don't refuse to talk to the police.

If Assange is so innocent, why is he refusing to return for "questioning?" Especially since he knew that no returning would mean an international warrant for his arrest.

Defend him you want, but innocent people don't flee the country and refuse to return for questions.

[struggle4progress]

36. We do waaay too much reading between the lines here at DU

I have absolutely no opinion on the allegations about Assange's conduct in Sweden: I do not, for example, take the view that he is an innocent man being framed by an anti-semite, a man-hating radical feminist, a promiscuous CIA asset who is humping her way through Europe's embassies -- or whatever the latest shriek is; nor do I currently take any other view on it. But I do see an enormous amount of careless and intemperate discussion. My motto on this is: facts first, analysis second. What I think I know is: the top Swedish court has issued a warrant to detain him for questioning, and Interpol has issued a related alert

[asdjrocky]

6. Looks like a rapist?

Really? What does a rapist look like? You may want to consider taking that one back.

[VMI Dem]

8. Already edited out "child molester".

[asdjrocky]

11. You're kidding right?

Seriously? My gawd what hero worship does to some people.

[frylock]

24. just wow..

what a miserable piece of shit.

[tblue]

10. +1

[phleshdef]

9. He looks like he could be Bill Maher's little brother.

[frylock]

23. have you stopped beating your wife?

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Odin2005]

34. Bullshit!

[midnight]

3. Just perfect.... Due process does not apply when your really scared....

[phleshdef]

7. Sheesh. We've really lost our way in our own form of extremism.

When we attacked the Bush administration for its crimes and secrecy, I don't think we were intending to set a precedent that no administration is ever entitled to any confidentiality at all. We definately never intended to take away the right of an administration to punish ILLEGAL LEAKING. There is a huge difference between being pro-transparency and insisting that no one is even entitled to a private conversation. The government does have the right to protect itself against people on its own inside that are breaking the rules and doing things they are not allowed to do.

I am strongly against what they are trying to do to Assange. Best I can tell, he personally has yet to break any laws and the "stick it to the man" side of me is even cheering a little bit for what Wikileaks is doing. But the people that are leaking information they are legally bound to protect, some if not most of those people are fair game to have actions taken against them within the bounds of the law. I'm all for whistle blowing when its used to expose another crime. But this tabloid-esque "this diplomat called this President's mother a goat" BS is not helpful and benefits no one. If anything, its going to be a stumbling block for the entire diplomatic community and no one wins in that scenario. Not us, not Julian Assange, not Barack Obama, not the world.

[dionysus]

15. wow. the first sensible post in the thread!

[boppers]

17. I agree, goats are silly.

There's a lot more in there, though:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_diplomatic_cables_leak#Contents

[boppers]

18. I...

:rofl: then I :cry:

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. Transparency begins at home

...

[Catherina]

20. Rec'd. Sad but true. n/t

[Little Star]

22. lol! k&r

[Cali_Democrat]

26. This post makes no sense

So when Obama became President he should have made all diplomatic cables public at all times?

The Obama Admin should have no confidentiality whatsoever?

[yurbud]

28. when they cover for Wall Street and the Bush administration and lose the public trust

all bets are off.

[Cali_Democrat]

29. So the Obama Admin is not entitled to any confidentiality?

Is that your position?

[yurbud]

32. is it all or nothing? Though frankly at this point, I would be more comfortable with no

confidentiality than letting them decide.

They need the accountability to keep them from selling us out further, from pissing on us and telling us it's raining.

[Cali_Democrat]

37. Accountability for what?

Have any of the cables proven illegal activity?

[Exilednight]

38. Define illegal. What about carrying out a secret war and bombing Yemen? n/t