Fester,

I'm a work in progress.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

You don’t have to regret your reaction. It is perfectly understandable and I really do appreciate it.

Allow me to add on this occasion that I admire your courage, stamina and perseverance despite the frequent attacks and insults you receive from all the big brave machos here on OLO who feel they can flex their mussels against the sole representative of the “weaker sex” with impunity.

Your unwavering presence no doubt gratifies their ego and provides a welcome contribution to the badly needed maintenance of their illusion of superiority, knowledge, wisdom and power.

I hope the cross is not too much of a burden to bear and that there will always be a Simon of Cyrene around to relay your message if things get out of hand.

That said, I'm sure I am not the only one who appreciates the pertinence of your comments as well as many of the topics you propose for debate on this forum.

.

.

Dear Fester,

.

I read your comments with interest but did not see any evidence that contradicts the consequences I indicated as having reportedly been identified.

In particular, there is no evidence, still to this day, of anybody having been killed, harmed, tortured etc. as a result of the Wikileaks revelations. Naturally, it is theoretically possible, but it is not possible to condemn somebody based solely on a theoretical possibility.

What has been identified is, as I indicated :

• Disruption of the US spy and informant networks

As you say, “No organisation is immune from security breaches”, but this is not just any organisation, it is the CIA that prides itself …

« As the world’s premier foreign intelligence agency, the work we do at CIA is vital to U.S. national security. We accomplish what others cannot accomplish and go where others cannot go » ( http://www.cia.gov/)

The consequences of the failure of the CIA to protect its classified records are extremely important :

• Disruption of the US spy and informant networks,

• Strained international relations and lack of confidence due to US security failure,

• Negative impact on the US anti-terrorist effort

• Necessity to revise US intelligence strategy, operational methods and procedures

You compare the Wikileaks revelations of Chelsea Manning, a US Army intelligence agent based in Iraq with “IRA members who engaged in terrorism”. I’m afraid the comparison is unsustainable.

A whistleblower is defined as :

« Any person who reports or discloses information of a threat or harm to the public interest in the context of their work-based relationship »

International law provides no clear definition for the term terrorism. It has political and ideological connotations. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.

.

(Continued ...)

.

.

(Continued ...)

.

The United Nations Security Council, in its resolution 1566 of October 2004, elaborates this definition, stating that terrorists acts are “criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.”

As for Julian Assange, his principal mentor, figuratively speaking, seems to have been Noam Chomsky which I think explains everything. It is evident that in creating Wikileaks Assange was largely inspired by the ideas and political activism of Noam Chomsky.

Perhaps Assange is a narcissist to boot, but the source of his inspiration and motivation is clear.

As a final remark, I should add that, as I am sure you are aware, the death penalty is applicable at the federal level in the US and represents another reason why Assange should not be extradited, in addition to the fact that extradition does not apply to political offences.

.

Dear Banjo,

Thank you for your kind words. I have learned a great deal
from you and so many others on this forum. I've been
accused by some of so many things, which has undermined
my confidence rather badly at times and I have made some
dreadful mistakes by reacting. However, even at the worst
times - it's made me re-think things and try to understand.

In any case - it is a learning process for me, and one I
don't regret. Also, I do tend to try to see the positive
in most situations - and of course it is made easier by
people such as yourself - your encouragement helps a great
deal.

Once again - Thank You

Hi Banjo,

You reminded me of Scott Rush. That was very sad for his parents seeking help to prevent him from committing a crime, only to see their action cause his death as a result of the conduct of law enforcement officers, all acting lawfully. The difference for Mr Shipton is that he would not face the death penalty were he convicted.

"there is no evidence, still to this day, of anybody having been killed, harmed, tortured etc. as a result of the Wikileaks revelations"

But there are missing persons, so you don't know their fate. It is a misrepresentation to say that nothing happened to them, just as it would be a misrepresentation to say that all the missing persons in Australia had suffered no harm because no one knew where they were.

At Chelsea Manning's trial it was determined that she was aware that her actions could result in people suffering harm. In camera evidence was presented, perhaps demonstrating that people did go missing. If they did go missing then Mr Shipton facilitated their disappearance.