Glen has been unmerciful lately in continuing to expose the NYT as a house organ of the government. Over and over again they self censor stories if the government tells them to do so. The latest which he details is the CIA agentarrested in Pakistan recently which Obama publicly denied was an agent for a while. The NYT was told to sit on the story and finally released to report the truth once the Guardian and other newspapers broke the story.
I was paraphrasing what Greenwald was getting at, not my opinion on the NYT article (though I am of the same opinion as Greenwald, perhaps less eloquently). Speaking of Greenwald, he'll be speaking in Kingwood next Wednesday.
I don't think he is an anti-semite but I believe he is paranoid enough, not without good reason, to make such statements.
In other news, Bradley Manning has been charged now with "aiding the enemy", a dubious accusation and one that no better justifies his continual torture. "Aiding the enemy" carries with it a possibility of the death sentence, although prosecutors are supposedly only seeking life.
If you're bored, a HUGE piece that pretty much destroys the prosecution's case against Assange. BTW: Greenwald notes the interesting case of "high level Obama officials" releasing very damaging intel on Pakistan...will they be mercilessly hounded a la Assange and Manning? I doubt it.
Vaguely on topic re: Manning. Greenwald highlights the now rather obvious betrayal of Manning by Lamo via the (finally) released chat logs. He also points out what a massive liar Lamo is. Wired's credibility is all but destroyed.
Still not charged with any crimes, after almost a year of house arrest. Manning is in an even worse situation.
people get too hung up on the people, we are all crazy bags of ego and hormones. He may need to be in jail and the machine may be putting away a threat but the the transparency of information is a revolution and the man is a hero
Surprised this hasn't been posted. Here's the full article: The problem with pissing off the powerful: they control all the borders, for better or worse.
I doubt Ecuador will grant him asylum, but if they do he'll never make it out of the city and on to an airplane.
Won't matter much, but good for information. Here is the letter: http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/node/1257 >> list of signatories here
How do all the people who signed this letter know that he did not in fact commit criminal offenses which he should be tried for?
Not so sure a letter from Michael Moore et al is really a request from "leading US figures" But aside from that.....why wouldn't extradition from the UK be just as plausible? And I suspect neither the UK nor Sweden would agree to extradition if the death penalty was on the table. Sort of how things work. He should face these charges unless someone can reasonably show the Swedish legal system is hugely corrupt. Seems he's using his celebrity to shield himself from allegations unrelated Wiki.
Doubts about the merits of the charges, and the nature of the charges themselves have been raised. Is it sufficient to deny extradition? I dunno but it's really moot. He's not going to get away from anything...he's a threat to the system.
They can and probably will. Ecuador has granted "temporary protection" while they consider his request but I'm not sure what all that buys him. Just re-read this thread. Some fun stuffs.
I wonder if he can sneak out in the middle of the night to another hiding spot, maybe some ship that can wisk him away to a non-extradition country like Spain. EDD
