REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

U.S. military declares Assange 'enemy of the state'

POSTED BY: CANTTAKESKY
UPDATED: Saturday, September 29, 2012 06:35
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 936
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, September 28, 2012 2:46 AM

CANTTAKESKY


http://times247.com/articles/military-declares-assange-enemy-of-state

Quote:



The U.S. military has designated Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as enemies of the United States — the same legal category as the al-Qaeda terrorist network and the Taliban insurgency.

Declassified US Air Force counter-intelligence documents, released under US freedom-of-information laws, reveal that military personnel who contact WikiLeaks or WikiLeaks supporters may be at risk of being charged with "communicating with the enemy", a military crime that carries a maximum sentence of death.

The documents, some originally classified "Secret/NoForn" — not releasable to non-US nationals — record a probe by the air force's Office of Special Investigations into a cyber systems analyst based in Britain who allegedly expressed support for WikiLeaks and attended pro-Assange demonstrations in London.





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 28, 2012 3:03 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


The original article has more information.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/us-calls-assange-enemy-of
-state-20120927-26m7s.html


Seems like the "enemy of the state" label comes from Mr. Assange's US lawyer, who uses quite a twisted trail of assumptions to develop it based on information about a separate case.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 28, 2012 6:53 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Speaking of "enemies of the state"...





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 28, 2012 7:05 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Um, no. The US Military used the word "enemy." Ratner may have elaborated, but he didn't invent it.

http://www.wikileaks.org/US-Military-Refers-to-Julian.html

Quote:

This document is an official internal document from the US Military that refers to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks as the "enemy". The document is from an internal investigation in the US Air Force, released under the Freedom of Information Act. The document adds to the large store of proof of the persecution of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks by the United States government.

The investigation began after a US Air Force analyst, who was based in the UK at the time, started to attend the London court hearings of Julian Assange. After her superiors became aware of her interest in WikiLeaks and Julian Assange they launched an Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) investigation. The document discloses the level of investigation into the subject where her activities were monitored and herself and her colleagues questioned. The document presents her conscientious association with pro-WikiLeaks activists in London as an illicit activity giving rise to criminal suspicion carrying the death penalty.

Under “MATTERS ALLEGED” on the Complaint Report the file lists “Communicating with the Enemy” and the United States Code of Military Justice citation for that crime. This offense carries the death penalty.

Under “VICTIM” the file lists “Society”

Under “MISSION AREA” the file lists “Counterintelligence”

The allegation of “Communicating with the Enemy” indicates the extremely serious threat Julian Assange and WikiLeaks face from the United States. The investigation was into the subjects support and interactions with WikiLeaks and its supporters ie her communications (or attempted communications) with Mr Assange and WikiLeaks. Therefore the term “Communicating with the Enemy” would appear to show that the US government term Mr Assange and WikiLeaks the "enemy". By deeming them the "enemy" they can be treated under the laws of war which could include killing, capturing, detaining without trial etc.

There is one other possible interpretation of this term and that is that is that Mr Assange and WikiLeaks are not themselves the "enemy" but are a conduit to the "enemy". This too opens up an array of possible attacks on WikiLeaks by the US government and means that all media organizations now risk having suspected sources being executed because communicating with media would mean communicating with the public which is communicating with the enemy in this interpretation.

These potential charges are in addition to the conspiracy to commit espionage charges the the US government is currently trying to raise through a grand jury sitting in Alexandria, Virginia.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 29, 2012 3:16 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Okay.

I looked at the files released under the FOIA. The Article 104 'Aiding the Enemy' reference was found in a "Summary Complaint Report" that was apparently filed by the analyst's commanding officer after she had been found to be associating with, and possibly disclosing classified data to, what were described in the report as "an anti-US and/or anti-military group". These were pro-Wikileaks and Pro-Assange groups. Nowhere in the body of the report that I can find are they mentioned as "the enemy".

Looking at the Uniform Code of Military Justice, I can't find any articles relating to "aiding the press" or "unauthorized disclosure of information". Could be that "aiding the enemy" is about as close as the commanding officer could get.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj2.htm#SUBCHAPTER X. PUNITIVE ARTICLES

I also note that the report filed by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, which followed up the C.O.'s complaint, did not list violation or Article 104 as the reason for the investigation, but instead showed Article 92, Failure to Obey. The AFOSI investigation was administratively closed with no action.

So I'm suspecting that the unit C.O., who probably isn't a lawyer, found that the "...gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly." section of Article 104 was closest to what he saw as a member of his unit possibly providing classified information to Wikileaks that, if they published it, end up in the hands of ,say, al Qaeda.

When the investigators at AFOSI got the complaint, they dropped the ' Aiding the Enemy' charge and downgraded it to 'Failure to Obey', apparently because the subject may have browsed the Wikileaks site in violation of this directive from the DOD.

http://www.smdc.army.mil/2008/CAMO/UnderSecDoDforIntelligenceMemo.pdf

So it doesn't appear that the Air Force identified Julian Assange or Wikileaks as "the enemy". It was just an officer trying to fit actions he thought illegal into the strictures of the UCMJ. When the trained investigators got to the complaint, they corrected this to Failure to Obey.

On another note, nowhere in the investigation files is there any mention of an investigation of Julian Assange or Wikileaks. It's mostly interviews with other Air Force personnel who came in contact with the subject.

I stand by my assertion that the article cited is just a ploy by Mr. Assange's lawyers to obtain sympathy and probably contributions to a defense fund. It's based on a tenuous chain of assumptions, mis-readings, and half truths.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 29, 2012 6:35 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

I stand by my assertion that the article cited is just a ploy by Mr. Assange's lawyers to obtain sympathy and probably contributions to a defense fund. It's based on a tenuous chain of assumptions, mis-readings, and half truths.




In that case, they should have sent it to you in a chain e-mail. You'd have been here for days defending it if that were the case!



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Tue, November 5, 2024 21:58 - 4537 posts
With apologies to JSF: Favorite songs (3)
Tue, November 5, 2024 18:25 - 68 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Tue, November 5, 2024 17:35 - 4677 posts
Election fraud.
Tue, November 5, 2024 17:19 - 39 posts
Multiculturalism
Tue, November 5, 2024 17:16 - 53 posts
Funny Cartoon sparks Islamic Jihad !
Tue, November 5, 2024 17:12 - 248 posts
Elon Musk
Tue, November 5, 2024 16:57 - 32 posts
Electoral College, ReSteal 2024 Edition
Tue, November 5, 2024 16:55 - 40 posts
What kind of superpower could China be?
Tue, November 5, 2024 16:02 - 54 posts
End of the Democratic Party (not kidding)
Tue, November 5, 2024 14:18 - 56 posts
Disgruntled Tepublicans vow to move to Australia
Tue, November 5, 2024 13:53 - 76 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Tue, November 5, 2024 13:47 - 639 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL