WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange gestures as he appears at a window of Ecuadorian Embassy in central London to make a statement to the media and supporters, Sunday, Aug. 19, 2012. Julian Assange entered the embassy in June in an attempt to gain political asylum to prevent him from being extradited to Sweden, where he faces allegations of sex crimes, which he denies. Assange called on the United States to ‘end its witch hunt’ against the WikiLeaks organization. (AP Photo/Sang Tan)
One thing that I like to do here at the Sandpit is to welcome submissions from Guest authors and to day I have something by an occasional commentator who goes by the handle “Kman” its about that white haired Australian holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
I don’t know if you receive the email from GetUp, but it appears that Mary Kostakidos (ex SBS) is appealing through GetUp to “Save Assange” from the death penalty.
Death penalty? How and why would Mary Kostakidos who calls herself a “journalist” write such rubbish?
The only civilians ever executed for espionage in the US (and rightly so) were two Americans who were Communists and were convicted and executed on June 19, 1953, for conspiracy to commit espionage during a time of war. Their charges were related to the passing of information about the atomic bomb to the Soviet Union. This was the only execution of civilians for espionage in United States history. The ability of the Soviet Union to build atomic weapons could have ended the world as we know it in 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis. Also European law, and in particular Swedish law, it is illegal for a Court to agree an extradition to a country where the accused may face the death penalty.This absurd “death penalty” supposedly hanging over Assange’s head though is just another of the excuses and conspiracy hysteria surrounding Assange by his misguided faithful adherents. Some incidentally who are now out of pocket thanks to Assange breaching bail so they lost the bail money they had ponied up.In the GetUp letter Kostakidos refers to a letter in the New York Times but omitted from the quote , but hidden at the very bottom of her letter, was that the authors were Michael Moore and Oliver Stone, hardly the champions of capitalism or the American Government. Moore. The well fed 300lb. multi-millionaire Moore who lives in luxury, once said that the American system is so flawed that Germany should never consider trying to copy it but stay on their correct socialist path. And Oliver Stone like Moore, supports Castro and Communist Cuba .Now if this NYT quote is so important, why does Kostatinos hide the authors at the bottom of her letter? Kostakidos says ,,,”What they’re doing to Julian Assange should terrify us all” …Actually Assange is the head of a new breed of terrorist and what Assange is doing should terrify us all because he is undermining not only the U.S. Government but even our own Government.
Mr. Assange’s detractors accuse him of pursuing a vendetta against the United States. so to does the Leftist U.K. newspaper “The Guardian” .
Now it is not just governments that denounce him: some of his own comrades are abandoning him for what they see as erratic and imperious behavior, and a nearly delusional grandeur unmatched by an awareness that the digital secrets he reveals can have a price in flesh and blood.
The cunning of Julian Assange’s strategy is that he has made everyone complicit in his own private decision to try to sabotage U.S. foreign policy. By his own admission Assange has stated that he “gets immense pleasure in hurting the American Government” and he “wants to bring it down.” The very government that has ensured his freedom and that of the rest of the free world for nearly seventy years.
Yet Kostakidos says ,,,”What they’re doing to Julian Assange should terrify us all” Actually what Assange is doing should terrify us all because by undermining the U.S. Government, he is placing all of us at risk. And for those who may not be aware. Our defense is almost completely dependent on American military might. We live under the U.S.nuclear shield and behind the guns of the US Fleet, which ensures that our sea-lanes are free and able to carry traded goods and oil, which in turn allows you to keep your job, drive your car and pay your mortgage. Our submarine fleet is down to one and even that caught fire the other day. Our defense forces are so miniscule that the U.S.Army alone has more mechanics than we have personnel in our entire ADF. However thanks to Assange ,U.S. intelligence that can warn of attacks on our soil or our citizens overseas is now being compromised, and Kostakidos and GetUp actually want you to support this delusional egotist?
WikiLeaks / Anonymous logic.
“We will fight for rights to privacy by exposing people’s confidentiality”
“We will fight for property rights by attacking people’s property”
“We will fight against greed and corruption by stealing credit card information”
“We will fight for freedom of speech by hacking the sites of people who disagree with us”
“We will fight for the rights of customers by knocking down the online service, which they all use, for a month”
In its self-contradictory maintenance of its own untraceable operations, it effectively declares itself to be the only agency in the world that is entitled to secrecy. Some find it absurd that the United States should have a larger military than the next 10 nations combined. But that gap in military power has probably been the greatest factor in upholding an international system that, in historical terms, is unique” …Robert Kagan.
The left’s hero Assange is compromising the security of your family and country- and as Cicero said “A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within…
Cheers Kman
Iain Hall's SANDPIT 
When and where did he say this, “kman”? Provide a reputable link or citation please so that I can check it. I’ve already googled the exact phrase. The only times it appears are in blog comment threads, some of which (possibly all of which) have been written by you.
Citation here Brian
Really Ian, that is an unverified comment on a blog left by someone whose name doesn’t appear anywhere else on the net. I expect much better than that, and so should you.
OK Brian
I’ll admit that (oh the curse of not reading things thoroughly :roll:) However I have seen nothing in Assange’s uttering or that of his enablers that contradict the statement.
Why do you think that its wrong to suggest that about Assange?
The comment that “K” man cited was made by someone who signed off thus:
Would that be Ken the “K” man?
Above all else, it is utterly wrong to make up quotations and claim they were said by someone else. Particularly when those quotations contain some specific and hateful views. There is nothing wrong with having right wing political views. But there is something very wrong about lying to support them.
Personally, I have never seen Assange voice that kind of extreme view. He is obviously very critical of America, or rather the American government. That does not mean he hates it and wants to “bring it down”. If you think otherwise, the case is yours to make, with argument and evidence. Real evidence, not “kman evidence”.
The same comment that “kman” cited appears on a half dozen different blogs. The wording is slightly different but the structure and arguments are the same. I don’t think Iain’s “guest post” is either original or exclusive!
The Australian Passport is not worth the paper it is written on, where America is concerned, just ask David Hicks.
Ray said:
The comment that “K” man cited was made by someone who signed off thus:
Posted by: ken saloz
Would that be Ken the “K” man?
………………………..
google the name and read some of the commentary, and you will be left in NO doubt.
opinion is one thing, crapola another.
Kman certainly has an unhealthy dose of Neo-Conservatism, I favour the internet reformation, it’s rather refreshing then the standard propaganda of MSM and paper journalism. Though I do find Assange rather disappointing, as he has managed to be a tool for the power elite in the end anyway.
@Kman, How do you feel about China? Interesting how China is already pumping oil out of Afghanistan is it not? Israel will betray the USA to China in whole eventually, just read the Israelis foreign policy from 10 years ago to today, it’s blindingly obvious.
The following is not posted for the benefit of Brian who refused despite repeated requests to back up just one of his many absurd statements in a previous thread. If he won’t respond to me,I sure as hell am not going to bother responding to him.
“Assange interviews Hezbollah leader in TV premiere – Yahoo! TV
tv.yahoo.com/news/assange-interviews-hezbollah-leader-tv-premiere…
Assange said before the broadcast that he anticipated criticism along the … Assange himself stated that he hates the US and is clearly biased. ..
He praised the leader of Hezbollah for “fighting against the hegemony of the United States.”
He also mentione tha the took great pleasure in hurting the US Government in a TV interview in the U.K.
I will be back on Wednesday to take it up with Dixon and Craig.
In the meantime you can read little more about your hero…
” Assange was eventually persuaded to redact some of the material he received prior to publication, but as Declan Walsh of the Guardian reported, his initial attitude toward those who might lose their lives at the hands of the Taliban or others for cooperating with the U.S. was brutal. “‘Well, they’re informants,’ he said. ‘So, if they get killed, they’ve got it coming to them. They deserve it.’”
Ah what a genuine human being! Must make you proud to be an Australian.eh?
I told you then, “kman” or “ken saloz” or whoever you are, that I am not in the habit of debating with frantic blowhards. In this case I am not responding to any of your hoo-hah, only one specific quotation that you attribute to Julian Assange.
And speaking of that, I’ve googled those quotes and links you provide. None leads to a credible source that proves Assange said what you attribute to him. It’s just more babble from blowhard bloggers like you. Stop making shit up. Post something that can be substantiated or you’re just another lying tool.
Well, since you’ll get back to us on Wednesday KMan I thought I’d throw this at you to then, since you are so worried about USA global hegemonic supremacy.
“Thirty years from now, historians will mark the assassination of America’s Ambassador to Libya on September 11, 2012 as a more important event than the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. On “911”, the United States’ self-appointed role to provide relative peace in the Western World as the only military super-power was challenged for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union in the mid-1980s. Eleven years later, on “911 Squared”, that role was terminated. As television cameras recorded an overwhelmed America under siege throughout the Middle East, the real action moved to the Pacific where Russia, China and Japan took advantage of the American power vacuum to mobilize their militaries to enforce their own strategic ambitions in the Pacific.”
Read the rest it’s quit interesting
http://www.testosteronepit.com/home/2012/10/2/global-militarization-follows-911-squared.html
Welcome to the beginning of the multi-polar hegemonic world, which will NOT be based on US dollars, but a combination of currencies and commodity swaps.
This is why China was asking straight up “Would Australia now be distancing itself from the USA.”, when Australia was granted the UN temporary seat. Ahh the UN.
” I am not in the habit of debating with frantic blowhards. ”
Here is a flash Brian-you have never debated me or anyone else on this blog -you make as statement and then when queried you don’t back it up-see the last time I posted on a thread.
You present yourself as someone who is superior and actually important, but the truth is you are just like a blowfly who hangs around for the meat at a barbecue to land on and plant your maggot eggs, and thankfully you will be not “debating ” me any longer .Gotta say I have never heard a more condescending egotistical twit in my life. You actually believe that I care to listen to your moronic leftist crap.
The amazing thing is it appears that the left have absolutely no problem with someone who is undermining the security of their country and of the country that is responsible for our security.
Oh and Brian read below -someone want’s to say hello…/
Hello Brian my name is Theodore John Kaczynski and I am going to sum up your leftist motives.
“Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist’s real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.
More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist’s feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual’s ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is “inferior” it is not his fault, but society’s, because he has not been brought up properly.
Words like “self-confidence,” “self-reliance,” “initiative”, “enterprise,” “optimism,” etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone’s needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser” And Brian you are a loser, believe me..
Cheers,Ted.
.
wow, this site certainly is magnet for fruit loops, and basket cases.
wow, this site certainly is magnet for fruit loops, and basket cases.
Well that would explain you presence then wouldn’t it Alan? 😉
BTW I’m still waiting for you to name who it is you believe that can’t respond to my criticism here at the Sandpit
i’m lower case remember!
gd is basket case.
kman is proving to be beyond comprehension.
what has the unabomber got to do with the price of milk?
and kman ‘Ted’ is addressing brian in the first person too!
positively loopy
and for your last sentence, YOU already know.
honestly alan i don’t know who you are talking about
“kman”, I asked for one simple piece of information, i.e. hard evidence that Assange said those quotes you attributed to him. You couldn’t do so, except to say “oh they were on some UK TV show”. Conclusion: you made them up.
Then you said you’d be back here Wednesday to respond to several other commenters. Yet all you have produced is another strawman rant about the “Left”, full of abuse and insults. Claiming to be from none other than Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. That’s a measure of how cracked you are.
There is a danger in having a weak government, because it exposes you to military action and commercial market manipulation coming from the governments of other nearby countries. There is also a danger in having a strong government because history has proven that now and then governments go off the rails and start massacring their own citizens… statistically speaking, the greatest danger to any citizen is (sadly) their own police force.
Thus, we are stuck with finding a balance by which government has enough power to represent a viable deterrent to invasion, but not so much power that it takes over our lives and destroys our valuable freedom (which is what it was created to defend in the first place). We have various mechanisms to ensure that government does not overstep the bound and one of those mechanisms is people willing to blow the whistle on unconscionable activity of those in power. Another of those mechanisms is our Democratic election process; but the voters have no power when the media is censored and visibility of what happens in government is simply not available.
Well written indeed, and it’s so nice to see someone attack the message instead of the messenger.. Be careful of what you wish for though, it may come back to haunt you.
From the “Australian”…
“All you need to know about Assange is contained in the profile of him by the great John F. Burns and Ravi Somaiya, and in his shockingly thuggish response to it.
The man is plainly a micro-megalomaniac with few if any scruples and an undisguised agenda. As I wrote before, when he says his aim is “to end two wars”, one knows at once what he means by the “ending”.
In his fantasies he is probably some kind of guerilla warrior, but in the real world he is a middleman and peddler who resents the civilisation that nurtured him.”
If this individual does not represent a threat to world commerce and stable functioning governments, let alone the greatest threat to western security I don’t know what will.
“WikiLeaks must be counted among the enemies of open society because it does not respect the rule of law, nor does it honor the rights of individuals.”
WikiLeaks says that it is dedicated to fighting censorship, so a casual observer might assume that it is more or less a conventional liberal enterprise committed to enlightened democratic policies. But on closer inspection that is not quite the case. In fact, WikiLeaks must be counted among the enemies of open society because it does not respect the rule of law nor does it honor the rights of individuals. ”
Last year, for example, WikiLeaks published the secret ritual of a college women’s sorority called Alpha Sigma Tau. Now Alpha Sigma Tau (like several other sororities “exposed” by WikiLeaks) is not known to have engaged in any form of misconduct, and WikiLeaks does not allege that it has. Rather, WikiLeaks chose to publish the group’s confidential ritual just because it could. This is not whistle blowing and it is not journalism. It is a kind of information vandalism.
WikiLeaks routinely tramples on the privacy of non-governmental, non-corporate groups for no valid public policy reason. It has published private rites of Masons,Mormons and other groups that cultivate confidential relations among their members. Most or all of these groups are defenceless against WikiLeaks’ intrusions. The only weapon they have is public contempt for WikiLeaks’ ruthless violation of their freedom of association, and even that has mostly been swept away in a wave of uncritical and even adulatory reporting about the brave “open government,” “whistleblower” site.
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2010/06/wikileaks_review.html
Some people are saying there is no law against what he does. The reason there is no law as we know as yet is, because this cyber posting of leaked classified information is a first.
Wikileaks is about to post damaging stuff re the Bank of America- (where else?) now this bank could suffer catastrophic financial losses which in turn could see innocent peoples life savings wiped out, the stock market in free fall and people lose their jobs, businesses and homes…is this fair? Should there be a law? Why should this particular bank be selected as opposed to any other bank? Does the suffering of innocent people justify this freedom to leak? Of course if they are American people that would justify it in most of your minds I am sure.
Now lets say two companies are bidding on a huge contract and Wiki Leaks decides to forward the bids of one competitor to another. This info having been sent by an a disgruntled anonymous employee – do we need a law for this? if you say yes, then why are you supporting WikiLeaks because that’s exactly what they are about to do with some major (American of course ) companies.
And how about more leaks from our disgruntled military personnel posting leaks about troop movements and strategy, because maybe they were looked over for promotion or whatever? As I posted.There is absolutely no doubt that WikiLeaks and Assange represents not just a threat to our security,but international relationships and commerce.
You state that “We have various mechanisms to ensure that government does not overstep the bound and one of those mechanisms is people willing to blow the whistle on unconscionable activity of those in power”
Yes on an individual basis that’s fine if that whistleblower reveals all to the media to expose the problem, but allowing one “micro-megalomaniac” with an obvious agenda to
determine our foreign policy and undermine and expose informants and other U.S.and allied secrets which help to keep our freedoms safe,or put allied troops and others in harms way by selecting what classified documents he can lease to expose to our enemies what “he might consider to be injustices is absolutely insane.
Reposted.
Sorry Ian for getting off topic but I am tired of this twit Brian on and on re Assange.
I advised him that I saw that Assange wanted to bring down the U.S.Government it on a TV program and as unbelievingly TV programs are not all on the internet I did not have,and couldn’t be bothered frankly looking it up.Anyhow as I said this might shut him up and then he can reply to the four or five questions I previously challenged him on.
WikiLeaks’ Internal E-Mails Revealed: Show Intent To Bring Down The U.S. Government And Possible Connections to George Soros
http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/12/01/wikileaks-internal-e-mails-revealed-show-intent-to-bring-down-the-u-s-government-and-possible-connections-to-george-soros/2/
Sufficient leaking will bring down many administrations that rely on concealing reality – including the US administration. Ellsberg calls for it. Everyone knows it. We’re doing it…”
…………………………………………………………………………………
Four years later, a great deal can be said about Assange, much of it unpleasant. He is inclined to the grandiose. Contempt for nearly every authority drives his work, and unguarded e-mails — leaked, naturally — reveal hopes that transparency will bring “total annihilation of the current U.S. regime.” In London, he is fighting extradition to face allegations in Sweden that he sexually assaulted two WikiLeaks supporters.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2036683_2037118_2037146,00.html #ixzz2BtLNz5Vt
………………………………………
There’s a number of things that come up in your writings that cause people to sit back and say: “What’s this guy talking about? Governments are conspiracies?” [PDF] Tell me whether this is true, that in an e-mail you said, “The total annihilation of the current U.S. regime or any other regime that holds its authority through mendacity alone could be accelerated or advanced by several years if WikiLeaks does its job right.”
http://wikileaks.org/WikiSecrets-Julian-Assange-Full.html
Also…http://books.google.com.au/books?id=1sxMNhXv80UC&pg=PA223&lpg=PA223&dq=The+total+annihilation+of+the+current+U.S.+regime&source=bl&ots=oydS322JIQ&sig=t9vIZsku5WI2l-juxEkw21McV9I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mECfUL-kNIqpiAeekoHYAw&sqi=2&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
In June, the New Yorker reported that Mr. Assange has asserted that a “social movement” set on revealing secrets could “bring down many administrations that rely on concealing reality—including the U.S. administration.” The same piece revealed Mr. Assange’s stunning disregard for the grave harm his actions could bring to innocent people, which he dismisses as “collateral damage.”
• “Place at risk the lives of countless innocent individuals—from journalists to human rights activists and bloggers to soldiers to individuals providing information to further peace and security;
• “Place at risk on-going military operations, including operations to stop terrorists, traffickers in human beings and illicit arms, violent criminal enterprises and other actors that threaten global security; and,
• “Place at risk on-going cooperation between countries—partners, allies and common stakeholders—to confront common challenges from terrorism to pandem
….
This latest WikiLeaks release demonstrates Mr. Assange’s willingness to disseminate plans, comments, discussions and other communications that compromise our country. And let there be no doubt about the depth of the harm. Consider the sobering assessment, delivered in an email to employees of U.S. intelligence agencies late last month, by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper: “The actions taken by WikiLeaks are not only deplorable, irresponsible, and reprehensible—they could have major impacts on our national security. The disclosure of classified documents puts at risk our troops, law enforcement, diplomats, and especially the American people.”
Mrs. Feinstein, a Democrat, is a U.S. senator from California and chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
…http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703989004575653280626335258.html
Watch the Fly squirm out of answering my challenges!
Thanks for that kman I tried to do it but I can’t without it appearing under my name 😎
What things are proved or suggested by these links? That there is at least one anti-American involved in the Wikileaks group (go figure) and that many in the US think Assange is out to get them (again, go figure).
You attributed to Assange a specific quote, claiming he said that he “hates America and wants to bring it down”. I asked you to provide a source for this could and you could not. You still have not, other to claim that it was on some British TV show or another, which you of course can’t name. If he had said such a thing, it would have been widely reported and we’d probably all know about it. But it hasn’t, of course, because he did not.
Since you’ve been called out on this lie, you’ve been bellowing like fury and coughing up whatever you can find that sounds like your invented Assange quote. But this doesn’t cut the mustard. It wouldn’t stand in a court of law and it doesn’t stand here. I make my judgements on public and political figures based on what I know has come out of their mouth. Not what fulminating blowhards tell me they have thought or said.