Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

The WikiLeaks saga has given rise to some interesting analysis. Is Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, justified in leaking what has been classified as sensitive communication between the US State Department and its embassies and consulates around the world? Assange’s position is ‘the disclosures are purely an exercise in democracy, which is partly understood to include embarrassing government officials and exposing what is seen as hypocrisy in national and international politics.” US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has rebutted by stating “the publication of classified diplomatic cables constitutes an “attack on the international community. It is an attack on…the alliances and partnerships, the conversations and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity.”

Modernghanna.com used an interesting analogy to describe how a diminutive Australian by the name of Julian Assange has used the Internet to expose the demagogy of the world’s most powerful countries.

“An old African story teaches that the size of the elephant is no guarantee that it is safe from the machinations of small and lesser known animals in the forest. So the tiny ant could find its way into the elephant’s nose, and the elephant would spend days begging the little ant to stop biting.”

One of the WikiLeaks cables targets how the Chinese government orchestrated cyber attacks on search engine giant Google dating back to 2002. Although it has been reported  Google resolved the issue in July to prevent censorship of Chinese search traffic, there is a learning which BU and others have been highlighting for some time. There is a comfort level by mainstream media and others to quote government spokespersons and so-called reputable news services without question.  What should be evident from the WikiLeaks saga is the firm confirmation of how trusted ‘entities’ have abused positions of privilege in the name of maintaining democracy or stoking geopolitcal interest.

In the same way 911 has changed world travel so too WikiLeaks has changed how news and information is given credibility by ordinary citizens. What a mess humankind, the intelligent species of the world now finds itself.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

153 responses to “WikiLeaks Has Shown How Freedom Of Speech Can Be Manipulated By Trusted Sources”


  1. @ MME
    …so wait skippa, you back from the Gulf? The bushman was just here complaining ’bout missing you, and you had to come back with a hard question like that!!!

    ….now the bushman will have to step up to a slightly higher ontological level to address that (unfair) example…LOL

    The reason that your example is challenging lies in the basic ground-rules that we have to assumed. i.e. that we have accepted secrecy as a way of life. It therefore becomes an accepted tool to counter evil from time to time.

    Those of us pushing for transparency and openness are conceptualizing a different reality, namely positivism – where the focus is on openness, truth and justice. In such a reality, revealing a witness protection identity takes on a whole new meaning.

    To use an example, since we accept that guns have a place in modern society, it becomes necessary to arm the police, and for some law-abiding citizens to be armed. …as a result we suffer numerous shootings and killings.

    This does not detract from a completely different philosophical perspective that argues that it would be better for all concerned if there were no guns AT ALL. Would that disadvantage the police if achieved?

    So is the concept of openness and transparency different to one of secrecy and subterfuge.


  2. @BT: “…you back from the Gulf? The bushman was just here complaining ’bout missing you…

    After you two are finished hugging and kissing (and whatever), care to answer the questions before you?


  3. @Bush Tea
    You all talk about openess and transparency.How about you revealing your trueself and use yourreal name and a photo of yourself on BU. You so quick to judge but I dare you to be opening and revealing about yourself. I bet you won’t. Just like you Governments also find it essential at times to be not so transparent .

  4. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    @BT,
    I support openness and transparency and the ‘different reality’ you speak of (although your reference to ‘positivism’ confused me), but surely you appreciate that in the present reality there are circumstances where revealing confidential information is both reckless and immoral. Mr. Assange has claimed that he selectively reveals the information leaked to him… what standard of transparency is he following? Should he reveal his sources? How about BU… should it become Barbados Aboveground or should people be allowed to blog anonymously?

    @CH
    “However, do you know of anyone within a witness protection program here in Bim MME? (The correct answer is no.)”

    LOL… ok, if you say so.

    “So, beyond this then, is there any reason that those who do know the truth (beyond their legal responsibility to refuse to answer) shouldn’t answer honestly?”

    It depends on the moral law one subscribes to… if you are a consequentialist (locating morality in the consequences of an act) like Jeremy Benthem, your answer would be yes, there may be reasons not to answer honestly… if you subscribe to the categorical imperative (locating morality in duty and rights) like Immanuel Kant (and MME LOL), then your answer would be no… however, it is probably worth mentioning that misleading truths are acceptable in both circumstances.

  5. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    @CH,

    Prof. Michael Sandel has an excellent course on morality available online… http://www.justiceharvard.org/

    If you have not seen his presentations before you should check them out… I think you’d enjoy them.


  6. “”@kiki suddenly starts including videos.””
    =============================
    . ChristopherH, if you’re going to have an attitude i’ll tun it up

    . mr assnage just had his swiss bank account frozen


  7. The Bushman posits an interesting conundrum suggesting that – “the position that the US and other governments (and Amused) are taking is built around the belief that some of us are special – and are somehow entitled to restricted access to the REAL truth, while others are required to trust them completely while held in abject ignorance”…

    MME cites the pioneers of the philosophical school of utilitarianism with it authors like Rousseau, Bentham & Kant who emphasized that justice must be made public and open to scrutiny…

    The question is – HOW DO THESE ARGUMENTS STACK UP IN THE GRAND SCHEMA OF 21ST CENTURY POLITICS OF CLOAK ‘n’ DAGGER MANIPULATION?

    If we are going to be looking at the structural and sociological anomalies regarding the current debate on Wikileaks – Marx argues at the beginning of “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte” (1852), that human beings – “make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past…”

    THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO SEE HOW MACHIAVELLIAN POLITICS OF THE 14TH CENTURY IS STILL PERVASIVE EVEN TODAY!!!

    Sociologist Dominique Cardon has an interesting slant on this said issue, where he suggests that “the Wikileaks revelations contribute to rehabilitate Machiavellian politics and the need to protect everything the state does under the veil of classification.”

    Cardon argues beautifully that “Wikileaks also reveals very clearly the crisis of legitimacy faced by the power elite (in its political, corporate and media components). This crisis could be papered over but the Wikileaks revelations pulled the curtain once and for all. And at a time where hard political reporting is most needed, it has largely disappeared as everything is based on access and off-the-record leaks, and cognitive capture. At the same time, Cardon argues that what Wikileaks reveals is not the rise of the heroic citizen-journalist but rather the amateurization (if that’s a word) of informants and media organization (like Wikileaks itself).

    Read the arguments for yourself at:
    http://globalsociology.com/2010/12/04/dominique-cardon-on-wikileaks-and-raison-detat/comment-page-1/

    I know some folks hate to have Sir Edmund Burke cited but again I reiterate – “All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing”…

    It is 5:08AM GMT and Assange is about to met Scotland Yard detectives with his lawyer to answer questions and to look at the extradition request made by the Swedish prosecutor as we speak…

    What I find remarkable is that since August, Assange et al have been (literally) running down the said (FEMALE) Swedish prosecutor to get some kind of amelioration on this matter and has been hitting a brick wall not to mention, endless road-blocks.

    To many in the public domain, this was not based on evidence gathering or any fact finding missions but on a covertly, concerted effort to rope him in a manner that would maximize the greatest amount of public humiliation by making him appear to be PUBLIC ENEMY NO.1… (Hence a wanted poster on INTERPOL)…

    Thank God Wikileaks is not just Assange but it is a BORG* collective based on micro-cosmically placed individuals (in their 100’s if not 1000’s by now) who work behind the scenes for the public good…

    So whether PAYPAL*, The Swiss Post Office Bank, PostFinance (freezing the $50,000) or any other sinister interruption in the process – the leaks will continue unabated…

    Let’s face it folks – the world has changed and the world must change…

    Either we change for the better – or we march towards “DOOMSDAY WATCH”…


  8. Gregory House will lie to a patient, get his staff to break into houses, lie to his only friends, his supervisor who doubles as his trusting lover, embarrass and humiliate peers, subordinates, patients and strangers all for the sake of saving his patient’s life … WHICH HE ALWAYS DOES ….!


  9. @Chris

    You have asked the hardball questions. Not sure we have the answers.


  10. To be expected WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been arrested in London on sex charges.


  11. @David. It is a European arrest warrant originating in Sweden.

    @Chris. No matter how you try to slice and dice it, the revelations of privileged documents without the permission of the holders of that privilege, strikes at the very heart of protection of privacy. Nations have the right to protection of their privacy as against other nations. As indeed individuals have the right to the protection of their privacy. As for that argument about what a private was doing having access, people holding the rank of private have had access to secret documents after having been sworn and signed the various Official Secrets Acts for years. In a military organization, a secretary almost always holds the rank of private. It does not in any way affect their obligations under the Official Secrets Act. How would you feel if you went to a lawyer only to find that later his/her secretary had revealed all your information to the other side? Same thing here.

    @ROK. Let us say that everyone accepts that you are right and that complete governmentS transparency will erradicate terrorism. So all governments worlwide hearken to the word of ROK (the new messiah) and lay bare their secrets. But what happens when (notice I do not say “if”) all nations do not accept your views. How many innocent lives may be lost? Personally, I think that given human nature and national cultural and creed difference, you are talking absolute crap, but that is just my opinion.


  12. it is understood this morning that The Dept. of Justice in cahoot with the Swedish prosecutor is part of a conspiracy to hand over Assange on the United States based on The Espionage Act of 1917 (USC 18, Pt 1, Ch 37)[1] is a United States federal law passed on June 15, 1917, shortly after the U.S. entry into World War I…

    Of the 9 Clauses within that Act, they intend to prosecute him on Clauses (section 2 & 3) which states:

    Section 2

    Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury or the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicated, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to, or aids, or induces another to, communicate, deliver or transmit, to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly and document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue print, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defence, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than twenty years: Provided, That whoever shall violate the provisions of subsection:

    (a) of this section in time of war shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for not more than thirty years; and

    (b) whoever, in time of war, with intent that the same shall be communicated to the enemy, shall collect, record, publish or communicate, or attempt to elicit any information with respect to the movement, numbers, description, condition, or disposition of any of the armed forces, ships, aircraft, or war materials of the United States, or with respect to the plans or conduct, or supposed plans or conduct of any naval of military operations, or with respect to any works or measures undertaken for or connected with, or intended for the fortification of any place, or any other information relating to the public defence, which might be useful to the enemy, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for not more than thirty years.

    Section 3

    Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall wilfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies and whoever when the United States is at war, shall wilfully cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall wilfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or of the United States, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both.


  13. Nothing much in these releases shocks anyone who attempts to be informed at how the world is run.

    Pakistan is a nuclear leak risk. WOW ..not.
    Saudi Arabia sees Iran as a threat. WOW.. not.
    US spies on UN. WOW..not.

    Unless some blockbuster comes out of these thousands of emails I remain very suspicious of the source of these leaks.

    Assange gets arrested for sleeping with two women. WOW…not.

    Internet gets compromised and regulated. WOW.

    Let’s wait and see how this game plays out before proclaiming a triumph or an abuse of citizen journalism.


  14. T.B.
    Assange will not be extradited to Sweden if there is a chance of him being re-extradited to a country where he may be subject to capital punishment.
    It is contrary to British law.


  15. @Amused
    The problem with people like you is that you are comfortable with the world as it is with all the corruption in it. You come here to justify the human rights abuses which continue to happen; from police brutality to terrorism and you will tell the world that these are the realities.

    The world according to ROK should be without human rights abuses and the fact that secrecy leads to human rights abuses means it should be eliminated.

    But only to show you how you condoning what is illegal, even the Cabinet of Barbados is not supposed to hold secrets and after a period of time, the deliberations of Cabinet can be made public. On the other hand, the world according to you should allow countries to hold secrets; do as they like with citizens. I could just imagine what you would be like as Prime Minister.


  16. Just went though a few of the lectures on justice with Michael Sandel … his comments on supreme court opinions and so on, and am still convinced that lawyers/philosophers are not the brains that are required to solve anything in this world… If nothing else they serve only to add complexity to subjects that they are unable to grasp. Jack asses as usual. Today a girl at a lecture in the Grande Salle could carry on a conversation with her mother in Canada by texting on her cell phone. Is this marvel in human accomplishment achieved by the genius delivered by Harvard trained Jack Asses?

    Science is bottom up, where you start from the basic, atomic and definable and build. These jack asses spend time grappling with concepts that start out there in the stratosphere somewhere and expect to pick sense of it all… Justice and morals, right and wrong … shit and shite …!


  17. Looking at what Terrence posted, it is obvious that the citizens has now become chattel. We gone back to the days of “Divine Rule”.


  18. That should be “divine rule of the monarch”.


  19. HUGO CHAVEZ has offered political sanctuary to Assange in the event that the good ‘ole BRITISH justice system genuflect to American demands for extradition from Swedish…

    What is being said in legal and academic circles is that the next 10 weeks will be frothed with HUMAN RIGHTS arguments possibly reaching ECHR over Sweden contravening Assange’s rite to a fair trial in the USA – so the battle has just started…

    Meantime, a motion has gone ahead for BAIL* in the Magistrates’ Court in Westminster, London…

    So the plot continues…


  20. @ ST

    I appreciate your argument on Assange’s extradition however, it must be acknowledged that we are NOT* talking about some IMMIGRANT* being deported back to their home country or someone in a British jail facing extradition to face charge in their domiciled origin…

    We are talking about Assange – a special asset to the American government in a TIME OF WAR* and based on the BRITISH SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP with the US – this current government will break the rules through subterfuge to please its special partner…

    However, before we jump the fence – let’s not preempt the outcome!!!

    Meantime you may find this helpful:

    http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/files/Information%20for%20prisoners/Extradition.pdf


  21. Funny thing when the US wanted to put their hands on Dudas Coke, the Jamaican Government served him up on a platter and claimed that he voluntarily waved his right to an extradition process. IT LIED, and they killed seventy odd Jamaicans in the process. Incidentally for some reason he was not able to make his last trial date two weeks ago.


  22. One of Assange’s legal team – Jennifer Robinson on the issue of extradition…

    http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/2/attorney_confirms_wikileaks_founder_julian_assange


  23. TB:

    Then let that be the test.
    Government interest over legal process.
    Much more interesting emails, I suspect, from this manipulation than those revealed already.

    I eagerly await the Tel Aviv downloads, that will be the test for me whether this is a selective leak with a pre-planned agenda or a genuine hack of all diplomatic communications.


  24. In AUGUST, the Swedish authorities cited that Assange was not a suspect in the RAPE case and suddenly a reversal of that citation and a systematic campaign of S.M.E.A.R…

    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/rape_accusation_against_wikileaks_founder_dropped_20100821/


  25. @ ST
    Good idea…

    The Jewish cables has already been leaked in some quarters and in the hands of certain individuals with some rather disturbing info…

    Public decimation is imminent anyway…


  26. Interesting piece from BBC:

    Justification for secrecy

    The problem for officials like Mr Koh is proving direct links between the information released and any loss of life.

    After the release of an enormous haul of US defence department documents in August, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell told the Washington Post: “We have yet to see any harm come to anyone in Afghanistan that we can directly tie to exposure in the Wikileaks documents.” Daniel Ellsberg Pentagon Papers whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg says silence puts lives at risk.

    But, he added: “There is in all likelihood a lag between exposure of these documents and jeopardy in the field.”

    After this latest release a Pentagon official, who wished to remain anonymous due to the sensitive nature of the material involved, told the McClatchy newspaper group that even three months later the US military still had no evidence that people had died or been harmed because of information gleaned from Wikileaks documents.

    Daniel Ellsberg, the former military analyst who in 1971 released the Pentagon Papers which detailed government lies and cover-ups in the Vietnam War, is sceptical of whether the government really believes that lives are at stake.

    He told the BBC’s World Today programme that US officials made that same argument every time there was a potentially embarrassing leak.

    “The best justification they can find for secrecy is that lives are at stake. Actually, lives are at stake as a result of the silences and lies which a lot of these leaks reveal,” he said.

    “The same charges were made against the Pentagon Papers and turned out to be quite invalid.”
    Unknowable effects

    Mr Ellsberg noted that with this release, the newspapers involved co-operated with the US government to ensure that the information they published did not imperil lives.
    Continue reading the main story
    “Start Quote

    I don’t think it has been proven that this is dangerous to US troops, for instance. I haven’t seen that case made very clearly”

    End Quote Carne Ross Former UK ambassador to the UN

    New York Times executive editor Bill Keller told the BBC that although his newspaper did not always agree with the advice of US authorities, it had carefully redacted the published documents to remove identifying information.

    “Our hope is that we’ve done everything in our power to minimise actual damage,” he said.

    Carne Ross, a former UK diplomat at the United Nations, told the BBC that the effects of Wikileaks were largely unknowable at this point.

    “I don’t think it has been proven that this is dangerous to US troops, for instance. I haven’t seen that case made very clearly,” he said. “What I think this means is that we need to look at our own mechanisms for democratic accountability and foreign policy. We need to be much, much better.”

    One thing the experts appear to agree on is that the leaks will make it more difficult for US diplomats and human intelligence operatives to do their jobs. Although that does not present an immediate threat to American lives, strained international relations may create a more dangerous world.

    “They embarrass governments with which the US co-operates,” Max Boot, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said of the leaks on the BBC’s World Today programme.

    “At the very least, they will make governments like Pakistan and Yemen and others, which are collaborating with the US in the battle against terrorism, more reluctant to co-operate.

    “It’s harming some of the vital activities that the US government, the UK government or others engage in, which are protecting us against terrorism.”


  27. The SWEDISH* law on the RAPE…

    The crimes that occur through sexual intercourse or sexual act is taken up in 1-7, 9, 11 § §, and those of different sexual meaning of 8 and 10 § §. Procuring Breach of § 12, and a subjective realization requirement in § 13, a rule of liability in § 14 and finally the non-independent violations of § 15.

    § 1 A person who, by assault or otherwise by force or by threat of criminal offense, forcing a person to sexual intercourse or to carry or endure a sexual act which by virtue of the violation and the circumstances are otherwise comparable to sexual intercourse, convicted of rape to imprisonment of between two and six years.

    The same applies to a person carrying out a sexual intercourse or a sexual act under the first paragraph is comparable to sexual intercourse by improperly exploit that person by reason of unconsciousness, sleep, intoxication or other drug abuse, illness, physical injury or mental disorder or otherwise in view the circumstances are in a helpless state.

    Is a crime referred to in the first or second paragraph with regard to the circumstances of the crime is considered less serious, be sentenced for rape to imprisonment for up to four years.

    Are the crimes referred to in the first or second paragraph is considered gross, convicted of aggravated rape to imprisonment for at least four and no more than ten years. In assessing whether the crime is gross special consideration shall be, if violence or the threat of a particularly serious nature or if more than one person assaulted the victim, or otherwise participated in the assault or the perpetrator in the light of the approach or otherwise exhibited particular ruthlessness or brutality . Lag (2005:90).

    Comment

    The term sex is used somewhat differently from common parlance. Sexual intercourse under this chapter is when a man and a woman’s genitals come in contact with each other. That someone sticking a couple fingers in a drunk and sleeping woman’s vagina has been considered a sexual act comparable to sexual intercourse, see RH 2010:37. Sexual acts between persons of the same sex may not constitute sexual intercourse under this chapter, however, treated them with sexual intercourse in most instruments.

    The first paragraph refers to cases where the offender uses violence. The second paragraph when the victim is in a helpless or unable to defend herself. That nag to have sex can not ever be regarded as rape.

    If an offender is mistaken on the victim’s age can cause it to punishment under § 1 of the mistake is Unintentional. If the offender has, however deliberate mistaken for age can be estimated as rape or sexual abuse of children under § § 4-5.
    European Court (25)
    NJA 1981 p. 253: Rape or violating? Chapter 6, § 1 Penal Code.
    NJA 1986 p. 127: Rape under Chapter 6, Article 1 § 1 st or 2 Penal Code?
    NJA 1986 p. 414: Rape under Chapter 6, Article 1 § 1 st or 2 Penal Code?
    NJA 1988 p. 40: Rape as Chapter 6, Article 1 § 1 st or 2 Penal Code?
    NJA 1990 p. 370: In Case of responsibility for murder or aggravated assault and the causing of another …
    NJA 1991 p. 83: Questions of evidence requirements and assessment of evidence in cases of rape and assault.
    NJA 1992 p. 446: Questions of evidence requirements and assessment of evidence in cases concerning sexual offenses, and on the use …
    NJA 1993 p. 610: Sexual abuse of a eight year old girl has been assessed as rape crimes.
    NJA 1993 p. 616: Question regarding proof and evaluation of evidence in matters of sex. In addition, questions about …
    NJA 1994 p. 268: In Case of responsibility for rape arises concerns the evidential value of information …
    NJA 1996 p. 176: The requirement of proof in cases of rape. Who is also concerned about protecting criminals. Chapter 6 …
    NJA 1996 p. 687: Compensation for pain and suffering and violation of kidnapping and aggravated rape …
    NJA 1997 p. 538: A woman is due to the influence of alcohol in conjunction with other factors …
    NJA 2005 p. 712: Question of responsibility for serious woman, rape, aggravated fridskränkning …
    NJA 2008 p. 482: Rape or sexual assault? (I and II) The respect of the conduct regarded as …
    RH 1995:26: Assault Rape in a public place has been assessed as serious crime. Another person has …
    RH 2002:70: A man committed for several years in the 1980s a large number of rapes …
    RH 2004:58: Rape has been regarded as a so-called self crimes but …
    RH 2005:45: Question of responsibility for rape and complicity to commit rape under Chapter 6. 1 § …
    RH 2006:53: Prosecutor claims responsibility for the rape of a mentally retarded woman in the …
    RH 2008:41: A man has been improperly used the fact that a woman because of sleep remained in. ..
    RH 2008:6: rape involving vaginal intercourse were considered normally involve a so …
    RH 2008:84: Ask to review the prosecution of rape on the victim remained in a …
    RH 2010:37: In cases where the defendant is convicted of rape under Chapter 6. 1 § third paragraph …
    RH 2010:6: Court of Appeal has ruled that a man who penetrated a sleeping woman’s vagina with his …
    Legal means references to this (4)

    * Chapter 2. 2 § 4, 35 Chap. 4 § 2 x 2 p
    * 138 § 1 x 2 p Aviation Regulation (1986:171)
    * Chapter 13. 3 § 1 x 2 p Aviation Regulation (2010:770)

    Changes / Preliminary work (2)
    Changed: SFS 1992:147, 1998:393

    § 2 A person who, otherwise than as provided in § 1 first paragraph, forcibly compel a person to carry or endure a sexual act, is convicted of sexual assault to imprisonment not exceeding two years.

    The same applies to the carrying out a sexual act other than as provided in § 1 second paragraph with a person under the circumstances otherwise shown.

    Are the crimes referred to in the first or second paragraph is considered gross, convicted of aggravated sexual assault to imprisonment of between six months and a maximum of six years. In assessing whether the crime is gross special consideration shall be whether more than one person assaulted the victim, or otherwise participated in the assault or the perpetrator otherwise exhibited particular ruthlessness or brutality. Lag (2005:90).

    Comment

    In this section, they end up situations where one sex is in contact with the person’s body, as opposed to a § which refers to cases in which sex is in contact with the person’s sex.
    European Court (2)
    NJA 1997 p. 538: A woman is due to the influence of alcohol in conjunction with other factors …
    NJA 2008 p. 482: Rape or sexual assault? (I and II) The respect of the conduct regarded as …
    Changes / Preliminary work (1)
    Changed: SFS 1992:147

    3 § who induces a person to carry or endure a sexual act by serious abuse that person is independent of the offender is convicted of sexual exploitation of a person in position of dependence on imprisonment up to two years.

    If the offense is serious, be sentenced for aggravated sexual abuse of a person in position of dependence on imprisonment of between six months and a maximum of four years. In assessing whether the crime is gross special consideration shall be whether more than one person assaulted the victim, or otherwise participated in the assault or the perpetrator otherwise exhibited particular ruthlessness. Lag (2005:90).


  28. So for all intent and purposes, having consensual sexual intercourse in SWEDEN* (without a condom) can be punishable by imprisonment for 2 years on this notional concept of rape.

    So the Swedish prosecutor’s office since AUGUST* has now flip-flopped on this rape allegation against Assange making Sweden and its poorly administered justice system the proverbially laughing stock of Europe and in the process seeks to create a legal CIRCUS* which will ultimately become a hotbed for further social disintegration, unrest and chaos…

    As we have all seen the mood in Europe (plastered all over the media) is in serious social FLUX and heading down the pan creating increasingly more and more fragmentation and social destabilization because frankly people have had enough of the SHITE!!!


  29. ASSANGE WANTED DEAD OR ALIVE…

    Welcome to the politics of the WILD, WILD WEST…

    http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn12032010.html


  30. @ ST

    Came across this information –

    Euro Parliament ruling means Britons could be convicted in absence…

    http://www.openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/article.aspx?newsid=2195


  31. How one man is changing the world.

    Interesting times indeed!


  32. @ DAVID

    Do I sense a tinge of religion there somewhere? LOL


  33. WHERE IS JUSTICE? Read >>> “The court has inherent jurisdiction to stay an action which must fail; as, for instance, an action brought in respect of an act of State”
    ==============================
    If a Court deems your action as against the State
    => You can not win


  34. (i guess)
    wikiman could be done for reckless endangerment or chucked into some terrorist category type of crime but that is incidental and unrelated to rape charges which was a fix up. They probably see the dirty tricks as a military arrest / type action and not illegal intimidation and bullying.


  35. Trivial revelations, being suckered by an obviously engineered honeytrap with a phoney rape charge, being remanded for his own protection whilst the website is cyber-attacked and his funding sources are withdrawn.

    This whole episode doesn’t smell right.

    To my mind Assange is either a CIA patsy for whatever purpose or a well meaning crusader for accountability.

    Up to now the former proposition is the best bet.


  36. Sometimes it is best, regardless of a personal position, to be aware of the Law with regard to the UK.
    BAIL
    The starting point is the general presumption that the defendant has a right to bail without conditions.

    (1) Unconditional bail imposes an obligation on the defendant to attend court on the correct date and time, it does not impose any further restrictions on them.

    (2) Does the court have any concerns? what are the risks in granting unconditional bail?

    Is Conditional bail appropriate?

    Conditions may be added to the defendants bail only if necessary.
    (a) to ensure attendance at court
    (b) to prevent offending on bail
    (c) to prevent interference with witnesses or obstruction of the course of justice
    (d) for their own protection
    (e) to ensure they are available for enquiries or reports ( in specific circumstances)
    (f) to ensure they attend an appointment with their legal representative before the next hearing.

    What are the reasons for finding an exception to the right to bail?

    In deciding whether or not to grant the defendant bail the court is required to have regard to the following:
    (a) the nature and seriousness of the offence
    (b) the likely sentence
    (c) how the defendant has responded to bail in the past
    (d) the strength of the prosecution evidence
    (e) the defendant’s character, antecedents, associations and community ties
    (f) any other relevant considerations

    Where bail is withheld, the court must announce the statutory exceptions to bail that have been found and give specific reasons for finding each exception.


  37. @Amused: “Nations have the right to protection of their privacy as against other nations. As indeed individuals have the right to the protection of their privacy.

    I would argue it somewhat differently.

    1. Everyone should only say (and do) privately what they are prepared for the world to see. More than one diplomat I’ve read has said “never say anything you’re not prepared to read on the front page of tomorrows newspaper”.

    2. The leaders of “Democratic Nations”, being servants to their Peoples, should be especially prepared to have their actions known, and to speak to same.

    @Amused: “As for that argument about what a private was doing having access…

    But my argument/question stands.

    Why did the “great” US of A’s infosec systems not pick up this private accessing a *great* deal of information he did not “need to know”?

    Why did he have access to a computer where he could access this massive volume of data, and could then transfer it to a CDR and/or a memory stick?

    Please forgive me for being cynical here Amused, but I believe we’re not being told the whole truth in this matter.


  38. @kiki: “…if you’re going to have an attitude i’ll tun it up

    I love it when you’re angry….


  39. Jesus Christ Terrance … Ah mean how much time you think people got to read contribs… Man you getting like the PDC.


  40. Are we reaching a point where John Citizen will not trust his government?

    Did anybody expect Assange to be granted bail?


  41. @BU.David: “Did anybody expect Assange to be granted bail?

    Did anyone expect Assange to be charged with a crime?


  42. From an IT legal point of view
    (1) Data should be protected from unauthorised use with custodians liable for misuse or access by anyone else. (include locking terminal etc)
    (2) The person who took/copied data had no legal ownership of data
    (3) Even if assigned data for a specific task they cn only perform that assigned task
    (4) I don’t think wikiman did anything illegal by picking up data
    (5) Newspapers would have published same info too


  43. To that Punk hal sall


  44. it would be interesting to find out who or if the soldier / thief / spy was working for anyone else
    eg republican’s knew how to access data if same systems were used


  45. @kiki: “To that Punk hal sall

    Does this mean we’re officially flirting?

    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_drEFOaPaK8&fs=1&hl=en_US]

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading