That is what Snowden has exposed, with official, secret documents. The NSA, FBI and CIA have, with the new digital technology, surveillance powers over our own citizens that the Stasi – the secret police in the former "democratic republic" of East Germany – could scarcely have dreamed of. Snowden reveals that the so-called intelligence community has become the United Stasi of America.
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him..
NSA IS the government of the United States.
How do democratically elected officials (the president, congressmen or senators) get control of a stand-alone secret government bureaucracy that was operating long before they arrived and will survive them after they've gone? A bureaucracy that knows everything there is to know about them, too?
They don't. They can't. So the surreptitious, illicit actions of a US spy agency can undermine the diplomatic work of months and years. And the president - the elected official chosen to lead the country - is so hamstrung by the NSA that he cannot stop the interceptions and order an immediate investigation.
No, France, Germany, Mexico, Brazil, and Britain aren't the enemies of the US. But some of the people in those countries are.
Interesting spin. So how does monitoring 35 world leaders fall into that "the bad guys are amougst us" line.
There are many reasons that nations spy on each other besides being an enemy. Although all of our nations are basically open, they are not necessarily completely transparent. Being able to understand your allies, the pressures they face, the practical considerations is important if you are going to engaged in coalition diplomacy
In other words, the NSA Surveillance Destroys Diplomacy and Democracy:
How do democratically elected officials (the president, congressmen or senators) get control of a stand-alone secret government bureaucracy that was operating long before they arrived and will survive them after they've gone? A bureaucracy that knows everything there is to know about them, too? They don't. They can't. So the surreptitious, illicit actions of a US spy agency can undermine the diplomatic work of months and years. And the president - the elected official chosen to lead the country - is so hamstrung by the NSA that he cannot stop the interceptions and order an immediate investigation.
A reporter worried that Assange would risk killing Afghans who had co-operated with American forces if he put US secrets online without taking the basic precaution of removing their names. "Well, they're informants," Assange replied. "So, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it."
The reporter that attributed those words to Assange is David Leigh. A well known liar, the type of person that breaks contract then lies about it, David Leigh also has been called out out by an independent third party journalist for fabricating those words:
"However, an independent witness – John Goetz, a journalist with Der Spiegel – states that the events related above are simply not true:"
"“I was at dinner at the Moro restaurant in London, along with Marcel Rosenbach from Der Spiegel, David Leigh and Declan Walsh of the Guardian, and Julian Assange of WikiLeaks. Patrick Forbes asked me specifically if Julian Assange had made the remark “They’re informants, they deserve to die” at the dinner, as has been alleged by David Leigh, and I told him that Julian did not say that at the dinner.”"
David Leigh' s systematic pattern of dishonesty.
But you know all this already, don't you Cold Fjord. By calling out your FUD with some facts and counter examples you will feebly defend as you have done in your last post by accusing any detractors from your message of being "fans" or part of some cult. Anything other than, you know, actually addressing the facts or providing solid counter evidence.
So now you have been informed that David Leighs account is highly questionably including credible independent third party witnesses, and that David Leigh has a long history of dishonesty on other non Assange related areas - yet I can guarantee you will be back here with the same ferver like agenda, the same libel Assange quote on the next Wikileaks story. No matter how many times we demonstrate some of your more crazy ideas to be false, you persist on repeating over and again the same falehoods - damn the facts and eternally ignore any counter evidence presented. One can see this clearly time and again across many topics only by browsing your post history and the subsequent replies. Rinse, repeat. This is the classical modus operandi of a troll, a shill and a astroturfer. Facts do not matter.
that the water will only be returned to the Pacific after treatment.
What treatment are you talking about?! If you call the plan for dilution a "treatment" then yeah. other than that how exactly to they plan to "treat" irradiated water before dumping it in the ocean?
Gottfrid Svartholm (amongst others) was held in solitary for months, without charge, despite the ruling of Stockholm's Tingsr. So it is hardly a red herring, we have a clear example of solitary being used without charge. If you dispute this or wish to claim you would have to prove beyond doubt that they cannot apply the same treatment to Assange, and empty promises will not suffice.
I read your other comment. The facts we have on hand don't support it. If we look at what Swedens justice system has done in similar cases we see that they are fully capable and willing to interview suspected murderers in Serbia, so they are perfectly capable of interviewing a "minor rape" accusation in London if they really cared about resolving the case for the girls. Claiming it is a translation issue ignores this fact and is indeed just a red herring, but I am sure you know that already.
One google and we see that Borgström was fired by Wilén, and he even said so himself so I am not sure what lie your referring to. Also you provide no evidence that there WAS DNA found - all reports show that there was none found and the forensics on the condom show that it was cut with a knife/scissors. If your claiming all these reports are lies you had better come up with some references.
It is just a matter of weighing up the facts we have on hand and calling out the bullshit when we see it, and this case reeks to high heaven from the moment Marianne Ny reopened the case after it had been dropped. You may very well be right about the charges not being dropped and that the case is in a holding pattern despite the enormous damage it is doing to Swedens reputation and credibility as each month passes. Too many powerful vested interests here.