RAW, IB, CBI are often used by politicians to keep surveillance and dig up dirt on rivals. The Intelligence reforms legislation seeks to curb that.Why is he worried about RAW's Surveillance?It's for India's security.
Assange can not be described as a whistleblower based on what he did with Manning's leaks of classified information! That term is inaccurate here.I did not vote, because to be considered a whistleblower, Assange needed to have been an employee of the US government, at least for legal purposes in relation to protection under US law. Was Bradley Manning a whistleblower? That could be a poll question, but he signed an oath not to reveal secrets, so we know what he is.
What is lost on me is the reason you fail to understand the definition of the word whistleblower, and your insistance on misusing the term.At the end of the day, the US played its hand very well. Whether realization dawned on foreign intelligence or not, swaying public opinion was the objective and that was met. However, your denial doesnt change anything : the smart guys here understand the whole Assange bullcrap and thats that.
Of course there is points 5, 6 and further. But the point obviously is lost on you.
In presenting their case that WikiLeaks' alleged U.S. Army leaker Bradley Manning should face a court martial, military prosecutors this week revealed new evidence purporting to link Manning to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
But there is heated debate inside the U.S. government on the wisdom and legality of any move by U.S. authorities to bring criminal charges against the Australian-born Assange.
WikiLeaks supporters believe that, by presenting evidence of apparent contacts between Manning and Assange, the Obama administration is laying groundwork for a Justice Department filing of U.S. charges against Assange.
A federal grand jury in Virginia has been investigating Assange for months.
Assange and his supporters claim U.S. authorities are intent on prosecuting him under the Espionage Act and that one of their hidden objectives in bringing harsh charges against Manning - he could be imprisoned for life if convicted - is to convince the former Army intelligence analyst to testify against Assange.
But current and former U.S. officials close to the case, who asked for anonymity, said there have been intense discussions inside the U.S. government about the wisdom of prosecuting Assange and about the difficulties of bringing him to trial and convicting him.
The Obama administration has been more aggressive than its recent predecessors, including President George W. Bush's administration, in using the law against alleged leakers of government secrets.
A government digital forensic expert examing the computer of accused WikiLeaks source Bradley Manning retrieved communications between Manning and an online chat user identified on Manning's computer as "Julian Assange," the name of the founder of the secret-spilling site that published hundreds of thousands of U.S. diplomatic cables.
Investigators also found an Icelandic phone number for Assange, and a chat with a hacker located in the U.S., in which Manning says he's responsible for the leaking of the "Collateral Murder" Apache helicopter video released by WikiLeaks in spring 2010.
Until Monday's revelation, there have been no reports that the government had evidence linking Manning and Assange, other than chat logs provided to the FBI by hacker Adrian Lamo last year. Assange is being investigated by a federal grand jury, but has not been charged with any crime, since publishing classified information is not generally considered a crime in the U.S. But if prosecutors could show that Assange directed Manning in leaking government documents that he then published, this could complicate Assange's defense that WikiLeaks is simply a journalistic endeavor.
The news of the chat logs between Manning and Assange came on the fourth day of Manning's pre-trial hearing being held to determine whether he'll face court martial on 22 charges of violating military law for allegedly abusing his position as an intelligence analyst in Iraq in order to feed a treasure trove of classified and sensitive documents to WikiLeaks.
It has been more than 17 months since Private Bradley Manning was arrested for allegedly leaking classified US military documents to Julian Assange and his whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. Since his detention, there has been news of torture, solitary confinement and mistreatment by prison guards. The information leaked by Manning to WikiLeaks made front page news around the world. But Manning's case and the grim conditions of his detention have not attracted as much press.
In this week's News Divide, we look at the case of Bradley Manning and the implications it could have on whistleblowers in the US.
We have not heard too much about WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange of late. This is quite a change from the volleys of support and praise that he received from various quarters when his website was regularly publishing classified diplomatic cables.
At the height of his fame, Assange was a hero to the left. But matters got more complicated - and his hero-halo dimmed - when it was alleged he committed sexual improprieties against two women in Sweden. At about the same time, some of the arrangements he had made to distribute WikiLeaks documents began to fall apart. Friends dropped off, donations declined, and even the Guardian newspaper, his earliest mainstream backer, took to writing critical appraisals.
But now that the alleged source of many of the most explosive WikiLeaks documents, U.S. Army soldier Bradley Manning, is being prosecuted, the Wikileaks-Assange saga has returned to the world stage, although at lower intensity. From the very beginning of this cyberleak story, the question that interested me was: Who was Julian Assange and what gave him the moral authority to do what he did?
(Requires login.)JULIAN Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, could face espionage charges in the United States.
The development comes after prosecutors revealed evidence of his apparent role in the theft of secret military documents.
The WikiLeaks founder took refuge in the Ecuadorean embassy in London on June 19 after losing his appeal against extradition to Sweden where he is wanted over allegations of sexual offences.
After formally applying for political asylum, a decision was due this week. In the meantime, a warrant for his arrest for breaching his bail conditions means he is likely to be rearrested if he steps outside the embassy.
According to an official close to the government, Correa has already decided to approve Assange's application.
"Ecuador will grant asylum to Julian Assange," a source told the Guardian.
"We see Assange's request as a humanitarian issue. The contact between the Ecuadorean government and WikiLeaks goes back to May 2011, when we became the first country to see the leaked US embassy cables completely declassified
The diplomatic row between the UK and Ecuador over WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has deepened and looks set to turn into an international row.
The Foreign Office have said the Government would seek to extradite him even if he is granted political asylum by the South American nation.
The Ecuadorian authorities have accused the Government of threatening to raid its embassy in London to seize Mr Assange, who faces sexual assault charges in Sweden.