Metal Sludge Gossip Board

Lawyers for Julian Assange are "angry" and "concerned" that someone leaked confidential Swedish police files detailing the rape allegations against the WikiLeaks founder, according to a report citing conversations with his legal team, and the team intends to launch a formal complaint with the Swedish authorities.

It's unclear whether they see the irony.

The confidential police files were leaked to The Guardian, which detailed the previously sketchy allegations against Assange in a story that appeared late Friday evening UK time. There's a wonderful symmetry to it all. When WikiLeaks leaked thousands of confidential US military documents detailing the Iraq War and thousands of confidential US State Department cables describing all sorts of global gossip, it leaked them to The Guardian, among other big name news outlets.

According to The Australian, Assange's Swedish lawyer, Bjorn Hurtig, said he would file a formal complaint with the Swedish authorities over the leaked police files and request an investigation into how the leak happened. "It is with great concern that I hear about this because it puts Julian and his defence in a bad position," Hurtig told a colleague, according to the paper.

"I do not like the idea that Julian may be forced into a trial in the media. And I feel especially concerned that he will be presented with the evidence in his own language for the first time when reading the newspaper. I do not know who has given these documents to the media, but the purpose can only be one thing - trying to make Julian look bad."

Assange is accused to sexually assaulting two women during a trip to Sweden earlier this year. But he has not been formally charged. He was recently arrested in the UK following an extradition request from Sweden, but has been released on bail while the courts consider the request. A hearing is set for January 11. He's now under house arrest in a mansion owned by a UK journalist. ®

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/20 ... ice_files/

Imagine that.

Are people really so mentally challenged that they cannot see that the leaking of information about public figures/politicians, who are paid for by the taxpayers, or banks, which are insured by taxpayers and rule every minute of their lives, is completely different from leaking information about an individual? What my government and multinational corporations who are have the government in their pockets thanks to donations, astroturfing and corruption do is a concern to me, and the rest of the public. What you or anyone else does in private is none of my business. There is a clear distinction between personal privacy and knowing what your government is up to.

Julian is angered because the leaked documents on himself compromise his legal battle on bogus rape charges in Sweden, and these leaks were made by a bought off authoritative figure. His biggest beef is that the Guardian engaged in selective reporting, showing only one side of the coin, thereby making him look guilty before he has had a chance to defend himself in court. America is angry because the leaks reveal that is a corrupt banana republic running wild in the world and on the brink of collapse. Very different situations here. This is media spin to take the focus off the devastating leaks and onto Assange. If you don't see this for what it is, you're a fool. Stop buying into the media spin and do your own research. The ignorance could be cut with a butter knife in our 1st world countries.

People who compare the Guardian's releasing details of criminal allegations to Wikileaks release of cables should reconsider. Do they expect Assange to conduct his legal defense to criminal charges in a public forum? Wow... the government BS machine didn't take long to start working and turning people against Assange. "Oh, now you know what it feels like to have your info leaked hahahaha" or "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". etc. I thought people were smarter than this, it's not going to take as much propaganda as I thought to bring public sentiment against Wikileaks and Assange, who according to Biden is a "high tech terrorist" but somehow the Fort Hood Allah Akbah shooter is not a terrorist, just a misunderstood peace campaigner who didn't want to go to war. Wake up and smell the bullshit.

That's a whole lot of word salad. It's the same thing, slappy. Private documents were released against the wishes of the communicants. Doesn't the Government have the same right to defend themselves against any alleged wrongdoing? Or does that not fall under the tin foil hat manifesto?

WhiteHouseSubsAC wrote:That's a whole lot of word salad. It's the same thing, slappy. Private documents were released against the wishes of the communicants. Doesn't the Government have the same right to defend themselves against any alleged wrongdoing? Or does that not fall under the tin foil hat manifesto?

Sure the government has the right to defend itself. It also has the virtually unlimited means and the resources to do so, YOUR money.

And no, it's not the same thing, at all. Private data on individuals is entirely different from data on the government. One should be open and transparent (the essence of democracy), and the other should be protected at all costs (the essence of privacy). Do you really not grasp the huge difference between the two?

One could argue that the leaked documents are government documents.

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:One could argue that the leaked documents are government documents.

Police files = government documents that were not intended to be viewed by the public. Irony much?

SmokingGun wrote:Are people really so mentally challenged that they cannot see that the leaking of information about public figures/politicians, who are paid for by the taxpayers, or banks, which are insured by taxpayers and rule every minute of their lives, is completely different from leaking information about an individual? What my government and multinational corporations who are have the government in their pockets thanks to donations, astroturfing and corruption do is a concern to me, and the rest of the public. What you or anyone else does in private is none of my business. There is a clear distinction between personal privacy and knowing what your government is up to.

Julian is angered because the leaked documents on himself compromise his legal battle on bogus rape charges in Sweden, and these leaks were made by a bought off authoritative figure. His biggest beef is that the Guardian engaged in selective reporting, showing only one side of the coin, thereby making him look guilty before he has had a chance to defend himself in court. America is angry because the leaks reveal that is a corrupt banana republic running wild in the world and on the brink of collapse. Very different situations here. This is media spin to take the focus off the devastating leaks and onto Assange. If you don't see this for what it is, you're a fool. Stop buying into the media spin and do your own research. The ignorance could be cut with a butter knife in our 1st world countries.

People who compare the Guardian's releasing details of criminal allegations to Wikileaks release of cables should reconsider. Do they expect Assange to conduct his legal defense to criminal charges in a public forum? Wow... the government BS machine didn't take long to start working and turning people against Assange. "Oh, now you know what it feels like to have your info leaked hahahaha" or "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". etc. I thought people were smarter than this, it's not going to take as much propaganda as I thought to bring public sentiment against Wikileaks and Assange, who according to Biden is a "high tech terrorist" but somehow the Fort Hood Allah Akbah shooter is not a terrorist, just a misunderstood peace campaigner who didn't want to go to war. Wake up and smell the bullshit.

Many of those Wiileaks documents had to do with personal information in that things that individual diplomats said were leaked. So it IS the same thing, leaking info that can harm individuals as well as governments.

It's funny as fuck that they are claiming outrage, although as his attorneys of course they are obligated to take this approach and it might indeed help him. Still, live by the sword, die by the sword.

bane wrote:

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:One could argue that the leaked documents are government documents.

Police files = government documents that were not intended to be viewed by the public. Irony much?

Wikileaks, along with the press, have consistently removed information regarding non-government employed individuals from any leaks published. Your argument would hold water if Assange's details had been removed from the police files.

lerxstcat wrote: Many of those Wiileaks documents had to do with personal information in that things that individual diplomats said were leaked. So it IS the same thing, leaking info that can harm individuals as well as governments.

It's funny as fuck that they are claiming outrage, although as his attorneys of course they are obligated to take this approach and it might indeed help him. Still, live by the sword, die by the sword.

Which leaks were published that concerned people's private lives? None that I'm aware of. Government business should be open to scrutiny, as should government employees with regards to their jobs. The private lives of government employees has not been compromised in any way, their work for the people who pay their salaries has been exposed. That is fair.

People's private lives should not be open to the same scrutiny by the public, as they have do not represent the public, nor do they take a large salary from them. Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?

SmokingGun wrote:

bane wrote:

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:One could argue that the leaked documents are government documents.

Police files = government documents that were not intended to be viewed by the public. Irony much?

Wikileaks, along with the press, have consistently removed information regarding non-government employed individuals from any leaks published. Your argument would hold water if Assange's details had been removed from the police files.

I'm not sure how it is in Sweden but in the US, police reports are public information with limited exceptions.

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:

SmokingGun wrote:

bane wrote:
Police files = government documents that were not intended to be viewed by the public. Irony much?

Wikileaks, along with the press, have consistently removed information regarding non-government employed individuals from any leaks published. Your argument would hold water if Assange's details had been removed from the police files.

I'm not sure how it is in Sweden but in the US, police reports are public information with limited exceptions.

In this case the police report was confidential and not public record.

SmokingGun wrote:
In this case the police report was confidential and not public record.

So was everything he released. That's where the irony comes in.

SmokingGun wrote:Julian is angered because the leaked documents on himself compromise his legal battle on bogus rape charges in Sweden, and these leaks were made by a bought off authoritative figure.

Proof, please?

I'll wait.

SmokingGun wrote: Which leaks were published that concerned people's private lives? None that I'm aware of. Government business should be open to scrutiny, as should government employees with regards to their jobs. The private lives of government employees has not been compromised in any way, their work for the people who pay their salaries has been exposed. That is fair.

People's private lives should not be open to the same scrutiny by the public, as they have do not represent the public, nor do they take a large salary from them. Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?

If they said something that was not mean for public consumption, then it IS part of their private lives. There are plenty of times that I have privately said some things about certain asshole customers that were definitely not meant for public consumption, but that coworkers heard and in fact laughed at. Remember the comedian who had the routine about what he said on the inside versus what he said on the outside? Kind of like that, and I imagine most people do exactly ther same thing.

This guy leaked documents that could start wars and send thousands to their deaths. While I will admit that there are both good and bad aspects to what he did, I have to laugh that he is parsing the difference between what he did and what has been done to him. Quit your sniveling, Julian!
(Although again I understand the lawyers' strategy)

OK, you guys are right, it is ironic. And Julian is one arrogant, self righteous bastard.. he wouldn't get far if he wasn't. But it's not the same thing in terms of 'rights'. The cornerstone of democracy is the transparency and accountability of it's leaders, without those you have China or Noth Korea. A person not living off the public is not accountable to the public unless they commit a crime. But Lerx, how many people have died in Bush's oil wars? How many have died from Wikileaks? And your talking about a customer should be protected, you are speaking in your capacity as a private citizen, not a government employee. I do still maintain that all public figures should be fully accountable to the public. Secrecy begets collusion, corruption and removes the masses one step further from their say carrying any weight, because not knowing what's really going on negatively impacts the decision making process.

Isn't anyone on this thread glad that wikileaks is happening? Aren't you sick of the bullshit from both sides, fuck.. from ALL sides of the political spectrum? Do you think the pigs with their snouts in the trough will clean up their act on their own accord? Do you think it will get better? Or is it more plausible that government will become even bigger and fucked up and in bed with mega-corporations, aka quasi-leaderships, that the average person on the street will pretty much have zilch to do with any real decision making? We've seen it get progressively worse, why keep going down that road?

Ideally, every public servant would be open to scrutiny from detailed logs available on the internet. Everything from their performance, salary, expense accounts and governmental correspondence should be made publicly available online. They don't like it? No problem, there's about 100 people in line who would do it for the generous benefits (all the way into and including retirement) one receives from working for the government. The internet gives the opportunity for this, but the politicians would never allow it. But as long as it doesn't endanger national security, there is no reasonable argument against it. Politicans have gotten away with too much for too long, yet even in the information age, where there is more potential than ever for true transparency (or as close as we can get), we're largely still in the dark. That has never made any sense to me, all non-security related stuff should be out there for all to see and scrutinize.

/under the influence rant

I'm not too worked up about it. The only ones to whom this was truly secret were us and a few leaders of countries too poor to have decent spy agencies. There are some things which should be kept under the hat but the specter of national security has been conjured too many times to cover acts shameful and/or illegal.

I don't know if anyone has died from Wikileaks yet, but it's more than conceivable that they could - and Assange is unconcerned because he is looking at what his agenda is. I'm sure he doesn't intend for that to happen, but if it did he would likely disclaim responsibility.

Still, live by the sword, die by the sword. He leaked confidential info on countless individuals, now info on him has been leaked. It's hard to cry for him when the very tactic he has used has been used against him. Parsing the differences is kind of silly. If you are a partisan of Assange, you should pray that someone doesn't decide to off him in a covert op.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that happens. And by saying that I am NOT advocating it - just speculating that he has pissed off MANY governments worldwide, and all have secret police forces.

SmokingGun wrote:
Isn't anyone on this thread glad that wikileaks is happening? Aren't you sick of the bullshit from both sides, fuck.. from ALL sides of the political spectrum?

This thread hasn't been about the pros and cons of Wikileaks.
It's just an observation about the irony of the situation. I don't think Assange is an evil genius, terrorist or any of the other more spectacular bad guy labels that some would lay on him, nor do I think he's a hero. He's just an arrogant opportunist. I place him in the same category as I do the publishers of the National Enquirer, albeit with a more serious subject matter.

lerxstcat wrote:I don't know if anyone has died from Wikileaks yet, but it's more than conceivable that they could - and Assange is unconcerned because he is looking at what his agenda is. I'm sure he doesn't intend for that to happen, but if it did he would likely disclaim responsibility.

Still, live by the sword, die by the sword. He leaked confidential info on countless individuals, now info on him has been leaked. It's hard to cry for him when the very tactic he has used has been used against him. Parsing the differences is kind of silly. If you are a partisan of Assange, you should pray that someone doesn't decide to off him in a covert op.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that happens. And by saying that I am NOT advocating it - just speculating that he has pissed off MANY governments worldwide, and all have secret police forces.

They won't make him a martyr.

SmokingGun wrote: ...I thought people were smarter than this,"...

I thought you were smarter than that.

vanitybinge wrote:

SmokingGun wrote: ...I thought people were smarter than this,"...

I thought you were smarter than that.

You did?

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:

vanitybinge wrote:

SmokingGun wrote: ...I thought people were smarter than this,"...

I thought you were smarter than that.

You did?

ZINGER!