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
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: US calls Assange 'enemy of state' [View all]George II
(67,782 posts)229. Yes, (to your respondee), reread AND familiarize yourself with the UCMJ.
It's a document that was written to imply that a ridiculous number of crimes "could" subject a person in the military to the death penalty.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
285 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
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
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
So you think we should be quiet about issues, until the time to talk about issues is past?
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#131
So I was right. You believe that Corporate Lobbyists should be free to get the
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#271
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
We are all free to criticize Dems wherever we want. That is called democracy.
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#172
So, I take it you prefer Rmoney? Because like it or not, that's the choice.
kestrel91316
Sep 2012
#91
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
"Your blatant opposition to our chosen presidential candidate is a violation of TOS." That sure is
pam4water
Sep 2012
#137
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
Don't you realize you can't criticize "Saint" Julien or his supporters without recrimination?
George II
Sep 2012
#163
Criticizing A Bad Policy Of The US Government And The Inexplicable Nobel Selection Rules
cantbeserious
Sep 2012
#205
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
Harping on spelling errors on the internet went out with the Atari computer...........
George II
Sep 2012
#262
Neither Lieberman nor Miller ran for office as Democrats after they "crossed over"
George II
Sep 2012
#195
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
Do I have your permission to start alerting on the Neo-cons prowling around posting war propaganda?
leveymg
Sep 2012
#116
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
Hope this ends all the silly posts about how the US doesn't want to get him!
FiveGoodMen
Sep 2012
#2
Could you highlight the part in the article where it said the US did want him please as I am
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#11
They did not steal anything. They did what news organizations are supposed to do
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#149
you missed the part that classifies wikileaks with al queda. And the part that says that SPEAKING to
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#177
That was a subjective interpretation of the article, not a statement of fact FROM the article!
George II
Sep 2012
#221
Hope Assange supporters will start actually reading the articles instead of just the headlines.
jeff47
Sep 2012
#74
His "ego"? You are condeming him because of his ego? I hope you arent fooling yourself. nm
rhett o rick
Sep 2012
#142
"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
Well then, I am now an enemy. I follow them on Twitter, I read their blog, I
sabrina 1
Sep 2012
#141
yes. beyond any doubt. Anyone who speaks with him can be prosecuted? insane.
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#27
If the death sentence is on the table for mlitary personnle speaking with assange, that means Bradle
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#32
Gee, his concerns about US intentions toward him appear to be well founded.
GliderGuider
Sep 2012
#22
Yes, The Patriot Act Killed Democracy - Any Dissent Of That Law Makes One A Terrorist
cantbeserious
Sep 2012
#206
Under The Patriot Act One Is Only To Expose The Approved Types Of Crimes
cantbeserious
Sep 2012
#207
I have defended him numerous times here on DU, but my opinion is changing...
Comrade_McKenzie
Sep 2012
#38
While I want to see him back in Sweden, I think this is a worrying development
muriel_volestrangler
Sep 2012
#50
If the USA is a force for global stability, the Force is not with us is it?
Proletariatprincess
Sep 2012
#138
I would agree with you that some things need to be kept confidential -- others, not.
gateley
Sep 2012
#193
Well, where are the people that kept saying Sweden wasn't going to extradite him and
hobbit709
Sep 2012
#47
Lack of evidence of leaking classified information. There's ample evidence for communication
jeff47
Sep 2012
#92
You are still conflating two different charges, which is probably part of why you're wrong.
jeff47
Sep 2012
#119
Designed to strike fear into the hearts of anyone who dare expose the truth about US policy.
marmar
Sep 2012
#59
That's fucking disturbing. What does that make me.... if I decide to send him $$$. n/t
Smarmie Doofus
Sep 2012
#62
Nothing you weren't yesterday. Because the headline doesn't match the contents of the article (nt)
jeff47
Sep 2012
#68
One of the potental charges against him is rape, you refusing to accept that dosn't change anything
Bodhi BloodWave
Sep 2012
#216
... The position with offence 4 is different. This is an allegation of rape. The framework list
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#284
It would be nice to see the actual declassified documents, rather than Dorling's interpretation
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#80
I don't read it the same way as the headlines imply. The context is that wikileaks is the conduit
24601
Sep 2012
#96
You're doing plenty of jumping to conclusions as to why there was an investigation
jeff47
Sep 2012
#115
Vice Presidents preside over the Senate and run nothing but their personal staffs. They are not
24601
Sep 2012
#144
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
Anyone want to lie to us and still pretend that the US Gov't has "no interest" in Assange?
leveymg
Sep 2012
#107
Hey, Jeff - the article supports my comment. What happens to an analyst who loses his clearance?
leveymg
Sep 2012
#121
*scratches head in wonder* Are you arguing that they should allow someone who
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#124
My apologies but I wasnt responding to that part but rather the part where you said
cstanleytech
Sep 2012
#217
even worse, she read about assange and wikileaks on the web. She read about them.
robinlynne
Sep 2012
#245
"THE US military has designated Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as enemies of the United States "...
George II
Sep 2012
#222
this breaks my heart..Its humiliating and a violation of everything I thought my country was about
xiamiam
Sep 2012
#189
Describe the tyranny Assange has exposed, aside from his own assistance of the Taliban?
mzmolly
Sep 2012
#236
Uh huh. You let me know when you figure out what Assange's great contribution to humanity is.
mzmolly
Sep 2012
#270
Scoop has a link to pdf of the actual FOIA release: it doesn't seem to show what Dorling claims:
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#223
People may not understand what the UCMJ "communicating with the enemy" offense
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#228
Aiding the Enemy (UCMJ art. 104). Five separate acts are made punishable by this article ...
struggle4progress
Sep 2012
#283
Personally speaking, I was put on many "lists" of political enemies of (fill in the blank) about 49
bobthedrummer
Sep 2012
#230