Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
US calls Assange 'enemy of state' [View all] AntiFascist Sep 2012 OP
meanwhile killing women and kids in the name of the USA gets a nobel peace prize. nt msongs Sep 2012 #1
Yes, we are well aware you hate Obama. But you need to put a cork in it until after the election. kestrel91316 Sep 2012 #3
Thats right we won't allow truthiness here . Don't forget to alert on me too. bahrbearian Sep 2012 #6
Your opposition to any dissenting viewpoint is censorship Fuddnik Sep 2012 #8
I haven't censored anyone. You don't know the meaning of the word. I've expressed my opinion. kestrel91316 Sep 2012 #86
You can't censor anyone. You might get a post hidden on DU but that will not sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #133
Well the questions are dipsydoodle Sep 2012 #12
Right..... DeSwiss Sep 2012 #16
Thank-you. robinlynne Sep 2012 #24
De nada DeSwiss Sep 2012 #69
You are free to criticize Dems at your nearest neighborhood Freeper hive Xipe Totec Sep 2012 #126
So you think we should be quiet about issues, until the time to talk about issues is past? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #131
My response is to the Voltaire quote in your reply Xipe Totec Sep 2012 #267
So I was right. You believe that Corporate Lobbyists should be free to get the sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #271
You must learn to read more carefully Xipe Totec Sep 2012 #273
Interesting rant. Did you intend it for someone else btw? Not that I mind, I sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #274
I'm not critisizing any Dems. In fact I haven't spoken the name of a single one. DeSwiss Sep 2012 #152
+1 nt OnyxCollie Sep 2012 #153
We are all free to criticize Dems wherever we want. That is called democracy. robinlynne Sep 2012 #172
and that poster is free to say what that poster said here fascisthunter Sep 2012 #279
ooh. your sig gave me the shivers. robinlynne Sep 2012 #171
Thank you. DeSwiss Sep 2012 #184
and this sig is beautiful. especially right after the other. robinlynne Sep 2012 #185
So, I take it you prefer Rmoney? Because like it or not, that's the choice. kestrel91316 Sep 2012 #91
How truly pathetic. n/t DeSwiss Sep 2012 #94
my, that is so elegantly stated Capn Sunshine Sep 2012 #99
Thank you. I thought it best to be direct, succinct..... DeSwiss Sep 2012 #161
So if you opposed the War in Iraq I take it you loved Saddam Hussein? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #135
It's like debating seven-year olds. OnyxCollie Sep 2012 #151
Thanks for the heads up. ;-) n/t DeSwiss Sep 2012 #155
Lol, you're right. Although that is an insult to seven year olds. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #156
So if you opposed the War in Iraq, you Loooooved Saddam Hussein? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #272
LOL! OnyxCollie Sep 2012 #25
I just posted the part of the TOS you refer to...........thanks for pointing it out as well George II Sep 2012 #55
And after the election will be different? Who do you think you are fooling. rhett o rick Sep 2012 #97
No, it's not a violation of TOS. Wanna put that to a test? leveymg Sep 2012 #109
"Your blatant opposition to our chosen presidential candidate is a violation of TOS." That sure is pam4water Sep 2012 #137
Once again, reread the TOS. George II Sep 2012 #164
We know what the TOS says, but we dont agree with your judgement that the post is in rhett o rick Sep 2012 #233
YES, I understand that people disagree.....unless of course one "side" criticizes Assange's cult... George II Sep 2012 #251
get another hobby fascisthunter Sep 2012 #278
to Siberia! to to the gulag! robinlynne Sep 2012 #175
Don't you realize you can't criticize "Saint" Julien or his supporters without recrimination? George II Sep 2012 #163
Actually he makes a fair point Scootaloo Sep 2012 #201
Criticizing A Bad Policy Of The US Government And The Inexplicable Nobel Selection Rules cantbeserious Sep 2012 #205
Exactly, save it for sometime between May and July of 2013 hughee99 Sep 2012 #239
Are you kidding? n/t bitchkitty Sep 2012 #254
Exactly. DeSwiss Sep 2012 #9
Terms of Service: George II Sep 2012 #52
So which one of those..... DeSwiss Sep 2012 #79
You skipped over the FIRST part of my quote of the TOS: George II Sep 2012 #143
We all understand it is important to elect more Democrats dflprincess Sep 2012 #154
Then why criticize them during an important election campaign? George II Sep 2012 #159
Because when they're looking for our votes is the only time they may listen dflprincess Sep 2012 #166
So you're not supporting "D"emocratic candidates...as we said, a violation of the TOS around here! George II Sep 2012 #170
constitution..first amendment. Every elected official has sworn an oath to uphold it. Citizens are xiamiam Sep 2012 #187
You can defend "D"s, "R"s, and "I"s if you like, but........... George II Sep 2012 #218
I sent money to Bernie Sanders dflprincess Sep 2012 #190
You're completely missing the point. George II Sep 2012 #219
I don't see the part about not criticizing leadership or policy. GliderGuider Sep 2012 #157
Well... George II Sep 2012 #162
You may not like it, but it's still not a TOS violation. GliderGuider Sep 2012 #165
It's not "Saint" anything, bitchkitty Sep 2012 #255
Harping on spelling errors on the internet went out with the Atari computer........... George II Sep 2012 #262
I get what the statement says..... DeSwiss Sep 2012 #178
Who is "msong"? George II Sep 2012 #183
As for who is..... DeSwiss Sep 2012 #186
I always thought the line was advocacy against a Democratic candidate... David__77 Sep 2012 #192
Neither Lieberman nor Miller ran for office as Democrats after they "crossed over" George II Sep 2012 #195
True... there are others though. David__77 Sep 2012 #199
So where d you fit in if you think President Obama did not and does not deserve a Nobel Peace Prize? MotherPetrie Sep 2012 #83
Come and sit by me pscot Sep 2012 #90
No thanks........... George II Sep 2012 #146
George the first was often reckoned pscot Sep 2012 #194
See my response to the previous post above - ditto to you! George II Sep 2012 #145
Do I have your permission to start alerting on the Neo-cons prowling around posting war propaganda? leveymg Sep 2012 #116
What does that have to do with my post? George II Sep 2012 #147
You're the one who posted the TOS. leveymg Sep 2012 #210
And which one of those applies to anyone in this thread? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #139
Why did you skip over the first part of my post and zero in on the last part? George II Sep 2012 #148
Okay, since you haven't pointed any of them out I guess there are none here. So why sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #275
It's right in front of your eyes, if you choose to ignore it then so be it George II Sep 2012 #277
No shit! MotherPetrie Sep 2012 #81
Hope this ends all the silly posts about how the US doesn't want to get him! FiveGoodMen Sep 2012 #2
It should. TDale313 Sep 2012 #4
I wouldn't hold my breath on that. K&R anyway.... nt riderinthestorm Sep 2012 #5
Could you highlight the part in the article where it said the US did want him please as I am cstanleytech Sep 2012 #11
Really? FiveGoodMen Sep 2012 #101
"Enemy of the State" also isn't supported by the article. jeff47 Sep 2012 #108
You're right. How did I get that from this? FiveGoodMen Sep 2012 #200
How does that = "they want him arrested and extradited" ? cstanleytech Sep 2012 #111
They did not steal anything. They did what news organizations are supposed to do sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #149
Reread my post sabrina. cstanleytech Sep 2012 #160
you missed the part that classifies wikileaks with al queda. And the part that says that SPEAKING to robinlynne Sep 2012 #177
Nope, reread. cstanleytech Sep 2012 #188
Yes, (to your respondee), reread AND familiarize yourself with the UCMJ. George II Sep 2012 #229
And like I said reread because I covered it. cstanleytech Sep 2012 #242
That was a subjective interpretation of the article, not a statement of fact FROM the article! George II Sep 2012 #221
I'm bookmarking for later; greiner3 Sep 2012 #14
Hope Assange supporters will start actually reading the articles instead of just the headlines. jeff47 Sep 2012 #74
So you dont support Assange but do support WikiLeaks? Strange. nm rhett o rick Sep 2012 #103
Assange's ego is destroying any good WikiLeaks can do. (nt) jeff47 Sep 2012 #120
His "ego"? You are condeming him because of his ego? I hope you arent fooling yourself. nm rhett o rick Sep 2012 #142
I'm condemning him because he's putting himself above his cause. (nt) jeff47 Sep 2012 #252
What are you basing that on? nm rhett o rick Sep 2012 #257
"Excessive ego" - Sounds like the sort of denuniation made by Stalinists of the Old Comrades. leveymg Sep 2012 #220
Feel free to describe his attempts to avoid the consequences for rape in any other way. (nt) jeff47 Sep 2012 #253
It was consensual, so it wasn't rape. Next. leveymg Sep 2012 #261
I guess it was "legitimate rape"? George II Sep 2012 #264
what exactly is so strange about that? Bodhi BloodWave Sep 2012 #215
That's the way I feel, too. Unfortunately...... George II Sep 2012 #268
It would behoove his detractors to do the same. The Doctor. Sep 2012 #132
Well then, I am now an enemy. I follow them on Twitter, I read their blog, I sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #141
Sabrina you are rocking tonight! robinlynne Sep 2012 #179
oh sabrina..you mean " i solemnly swear to uphold the constitution" part xiamiam Sep 2012 #191
Again, it would behoove you to read and understand the article. The Doctor. Sep 2012 #204
It won't. There are none so blind as those who will not see. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #136
lol... well, many who don't know him will believe it fascisthunter Sep 2012 #7
Am I mistaken, or... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #13
Put it this way dipsydoodle Sep 2012 #18
I guess anyone who seeded a WikiLeaks bittorrent OnyxCollie Sep 2012 #134
yes. beyond any doubt. Anyone who speaks with him can be prosecuted? insane. robinlynne Sep 2012 #27
Same concept as excommunication, nyet? malthaussen Sep 2012 #29
If the death sentence is on the table for mlitary personnle speaking with assange, that means Bradle robinlynne Sep 2012 #32
Yes, you are mistaken. jeff47 Sep 2012 #77
Absolutely. DeSwiss Sep 2012 #88
Assange live at the UN in a few minutes. Luminous Animal Sep 2012 #10
Their on air dipsydoodle Sep 2012 #17
I'm keeping it on my screen while I wait. I wonder if Assange's Luminous Animal Sep 2012 #20
http://rt.com/on-air/un-general-assembly-live/ reorg Sep 2012 #21
That just defaults back to the news. I can't find a way to listen. Gregorian Sep 2012 #23
cnn.com/live1 n/t AntiFascist Sep 2012 #28
CNN's feed seems to f'd up, rt.com is much better n/t AntiFascist Sep 2012 #35
Sorry, works fine for me reorg Sep 2012 #61
On now here: http://rt.com/on-air/rt-america-air/ Luminous Animal Sep 2012 #34
Shit, I missed it. Gregorian Sep 2012 #43
This is wrong. defacto7 Sep 2012 #15
Huh. Imagine that. Nt xchrom Sep 2012 #19
Gee, his concerns about US intentions toward him appear to be well founded. GliderGuider Sep 2012 #22
Who would have thought? How would anyone be expected to know? byeya Sep 2012 #26
So basically, the minute he sets foot in Sweden, KamaAina Sep 2012 #30
We don't do that. OnyxCollie Sep 2012 #33
And if you believe that, I've got a bridge I'd like to show you KamaAina Sep 2012 #39
No, because the article completely contradicts the headline. jeff47 Sep 2012 #82
I really hate to say this, but most of us are considered enemies of the State Demeter Sep 2012 #31
I proudly wear my "I AM AN ENEMY OF THE STATE" button every time I vote. hobbit709 Sep 2012 #57
Yes, The Patriot Act Killed Democracy - Any Dissent Of That Law Makes One A Terrorist cantbeserious Sep 2012 #206
WTF - this is an outrage! Exposing crimes is not a crime. grahamhgreen Sep 2012 #36
Under The Patriot Act One Is Only To Expose The Approved Types Of Crimes cantbeserious Sep 2012 #207
Freedom of information, is there such a thing? n/t AlphaCentauri Sep 2012 #37
I have defended him numerous times here on DU, but my opinion is changing... Comrade_McKenzie Sep 2012 #38
Maybe he committed a crime... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #42
While I want to see him back in Sweden, I think this is a worrying development muriel_volestrangler Sep 2012 #50
It chills into the marrow, doesn't it? I worry Mnemosyne Sep 2012 #58
Fortunately, the development didn't happen. jeff47 Sep 2012 #66
Quit spreading lies in my thread!! AntiFascist Sep 2012 #75
Keep desperately trying to make an issue from the opposite result jeff47 Sep 2012 #87
Keep desperately trying to make an issue from the opposite result... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #93
Apparently I'm going to have to explain sarcasm to you. jeff47 Sep 2012 #102
I have to disagree with that assesment. Arctic Dave Sep 2012 #63
If the USA is a force for global stability, the Force is not with us is it? Proletariatprincess Sep 2012 #138
whoah. robinlynne Sep 2012 #182
I would agree with you that some things need to be kept confidential -- others, not. gateley Sep 2012 #193
So this means any journalist who challenges the state is a terrorist? nt valerief Sep 2012 #40
That is the message I'm getting out of this. They_Live Sep 2012 #85
Enemies of the state.. they mean Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Gonzo, Rice jerseyjack Sep 2012 #41
This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #44
Good ol' hope and change. villager Sep 2012 #45
good krawhitham Sep 2012 #46
Well, where are the people that kept saying Sweden wasn't going to extradite him and hobbit709 Sep 2012 #47
Thery're all celebrating the news Spirochete Sep 2012 #54
Nah, we're busy trying to get people to actually read the article jeff47 Sep 2012 #65
Absolutely wrong... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #71
Lack of evidence of leaking classified information. There's ample evidence for communication jeff47 Sep 2012 #92
Nope, see my posts above... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #100
Keep trying jeff47 Sep 2012 #106
See post #140 and answer it, if you dare n/t AntiFascist Sep 2012 #168
Correct me if I'm wrong, but defacto7 Sep 2012 #48
I'll correct myself defacto7 Sep 2012 #95
Unconscionable bread_and_roses Sep 2012 #49
Here we go again!! George II Sep 2012 #51
only heaven05 Sep 2012 #53
The sad part is, nothing he released has caused any change. Socal31 Sep 2012 #64
WikiLeaks arguably druidity33 Sep 2012 #209
true heaven05 Sep 2012 #224
Except, it didn't. This seems to be much ado, etc. Robb Sep 2012 #56
Pure speculation... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #70
Leaking the information is irrelevant jeff47 Sep 2012 #73
So, according to your logic... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #84
You hypothetical isn't the situation at hand. jeff47 Sep 2012 #98
Then by your very own logic... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #117
You are still conflating two different charges, which is probably part of why you're wrong. jeff47 Sep 2012 #119
Your argument is now clear as mud... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #125
You've explained this quite well, I think. Robb Sep 2012 #127
Designed to strike fear into the hearts of anyone who dare expose the truth about US policy. marmar Sep 2012 #59
Actually, the article doesn't say what you claim. jeff47 Sep 2012 #60
Overstating MY case? AntiFascist Sep 2012 #89
That's fucking disturbing. What does that make me.... if I decide to send him $$$. n/t Smarmie Doofus Sep 2012 #62
Someone who cares about their country. n/t jtuck004 Sep 2012 #67
Nothing you weren't yesterday. Because the headline doesn't match the contents of the article (nt) jeff47 Sep 2012 #68
Quick, you'd better notify the Sydney Morning Herald... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #72
Why? I can read their article and recognize the headline is click-bait. (nt) jeff47 Sep 2012 #110
Julian Assange SamKnause Sep 2012 #76
You forgot free the Walkers and whistler162 Sep 2012 #105
not rape. consensual sex. a condom broke. stop calling it rape. robinlynne Sep 2012 #181
One of the potental charges against him is rape, you refusing to accept that dosn't change anything Bodhi BloodWave Sep 2012 #216
The charge on the EAW is rape. How does a sleeping woman consent msanthrope Sep 2012 #263
... The position with offence 4 is different. This is an allegation of rape. The framework list struggle4progress Sep 2012 #284
Oh for god's fucking sake - that is insane. MotherPetrie Sep 2012 #78
It would be nice to see the actual declassified documents, rather than Dorling's interpretation struggle4progress Sep 2012 #80
Nah. You should know by now only the headline is enough. randome Sep 2012 #114
I don't read it the same way as the headlines imply. The context is that wikileaks is the conduit 24601 Sep 2012 #96
Ok, now that's something that can be discussed... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #113
You're doing plenty of jumping to conclusions as to why there was an investigation jeff47 Sep 2012 #115
More lies... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #118
The FOIA document does not provide any such evidence. jeff47 Sep 2012 #123
The article provides the context... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #128
Vice Presidents preside over the Senate and run nothing but their personal staffs. They are not 24601 Sep 2012 #144
Oh really? AntiFascist Sep 2012 #167
The power to recommend is the power to express an opinion. Executive authority runs from 24601 Sep 2012 #248
Reuters has reported that the Obama Admin. is divided on the wisdom of prosecuting Assange... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #260
Here's the actual FOI document if you'd care to read it... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #203
goodbye right wing spook fascisthunter Sep 2012 #276
This will make the Republicans and the Conserva-Dems jump with joy. nm rhett o rick Sep 2012 #104
Anyone want to lie to us and still pretend that the US Gov't has "no interest" in Assange? leveymg Sep 2012 #107
How 'bout actually reading the article? jeff47 Sep 2012 #112
Hey, Jeff - the article supports my comment. What happens to an analyst who loses his clearance? leveymg Sep 2012 #121
This analyst's clearance wasn't lost. jeff47 Sep 2012 #122
You're reading that into it. That point is ambiguous. leveymg Sep 2012 #212
*scratches head in wonder* Are you arguing that they should allow someone who cstanleytech Sep 2012 #124
She (the analyst) didn't leak anything. Read the article. leveymg Sep 2012 #211
My apologies but I wasnt responding to that part but rather the part where you said cstanleytech Sep 2012 #217
A little fascism to go with dinner. 20score Sep 2012 #129
not all of us xiamiam Sep 2012 #197
Wikileaks has released the document reorg Sep 2012 #130
So, where is jeff47 to look at this? AntiFascist Sep 2012 #140
State terror nt tama Sep 2012 #213
even worse, she read about assange and wikileaks on the web. She read about them. robinlynne Sep 2012 #245
Time to call in the drones? GeorgeGist Sep 2012 #150
"Enemy of state"? George II Sep 2012 #158
TOS! OnyxCollie Sep 2012 #169
In case you missed it... George II Sep 2012 #173
Post removed Post removed Sep 2012 #174
Must've struck a nerve. Robb Sep 2012 #180
Try this then : US calls Assange 'enemy of state' dipsydoodle Sep 2012 #208
"THE US military has designated Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as enemies of the United States "... George II Sep 2012 #222
US calls Assange 'enemy of the police state' ZombieHorde Sep 2012 #176
..enemy of our domestic enemies as per our Constitution. Festivito Sep 2012 #202
Enemy of state terrorism tama Sep 2012 #214
"Enemy of the Corporate State(s)" would also be more accurate. Zorra Sep 2012 #280
this breaks my heart..Its humiliating and a violation of everything I thought my country was about xiamiam Sep 2012 #189
Lauded for leaking classified information? mzmolly Sep 2012 #227
lauded for being an extraordinary journalist and truth teller xiamiam Sep 2012 #231
Kept in the dark about what, exactly? mzmolly Sep 2012 #232
Nothing good tama Sep 2012 #234
This message was self-deleted by its author mzmolly Sep 2012 #235
Describe the tyranny Assange has exposed, aside from his own assistance of the Taliban? mzmolly Sep 2012 #236
Nah tama Sep 2012 #238
Thought so. mzmolly Sep 2012 #240
Short for: tama Sep 2012 #241
Short for .. mzmolly Sep 2012 #258
Dear, tama Sep 2012 #259
Uh huh. You let me know when you figure out what Assange's great contribution to humanity is. mzmolly Sep 2012 #270
an interview with Assange today should clear up this article xiamiam Sep 2012 #196
+1 KoKo Sep 2012 #265
what the what!? n/t iamthebandfanman Sep 2012 #198
Scoop has a link to pdf of the actual FOIA release: it doesn't seem to show what Dorling claims: struggle4progress Sep 2012 #223
The dates actually sink Dorling's notion. Robb Sep 2012 #225
People may not understand what the UCMJ "communicating with the enemy" offense struggle4progress Sep 2012 #228
Please provide links as to how the offense is so broadly construed... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #282
Aiding the Enemy (UCMJ art. 104). Five separate acts are made punishable by this article ... struggle4progress Sep 2012 #283
So, in the context of this sub-thread.. AntiFascist Sep 2012 #285
You seem to be glossing over much of the relevent information... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #237
Nonsense. Look at the charges, and the dates. Robb Sep 2012 #243
Two errors in your theory reorg Sep 2012 #246
Here is Truthdig's and Glenn Greenwald's take on it... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #266
Which is accurate. mzmolly Sep 2012 #226
Personally speaking, I was put on many "lists" of political enemies of (fill in the blank) about 49 bobthedrummer Sep 2012 #230
I'm very sad about the news lovuian Sep 2012 #244
Biden likely made the statement a couple of years ago... AntiFascist Sep 2012 #247
The article does not cite or link to anything treestar Sep 2012 #249
Well, then... the "US" must be full of shit... MrMickeysMom Sep 2012 #250
Eisenhower warned us about those military-industrial complex FUCKS. Fire Walk With Me Sep 2012 #256
K&R n/t rachel1 Sep 2012 #269
Outrageous and indefensible. Wake the hell up, America. woo me with science Sep 2012 #281
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»US calls Assange 'enemy o...»Reply #51