7 ms·

Assange 'to run for Australian senate'

115 points by sathishmanohar 15y ago

einhverfr 15y ago
I wonder what the US will spend to defeat him..... I bet the CIA is working out funding ideas right now..... This being said, I wish him the best of luck. It's quite possible such efforts might backfire if folks trace the money back far enough.
- mindslight 15y ago
  Funding 'ideas' ? Take $Xmm out of pre-mixed drug-running slush fund, donate to incumbent through multiple nyms, move on to six remaining tasks to do before lunch.
  - joering2 15y ago
    not that I wish to anyone, but seriously a sole fact that Asange is still alive proves to me a huge shift that happened at some point through US government agencies like CIA with the way they deal with outsiders like himself. Back in ole' days this guy would be quickly found hanging on the rope with hands taped behind, and officials classifying it as a "suicide". Who knows, perhaps he is just too darn popular right now for CIA to send someone to shut him down permanently. I recall the politicians bashing him that he endanger many US troops and US officials around the world with his publications, but yet 3 years later you can't hear about a single instant that someone got hurt due to Assange publications. I think down the line this guy made more good than bad; next time US will plot another inappropriate scheme between countries etc, they will think twice that sooner or later secrets can leak. On the other hand, guys like Bradley are heroes to me, especially now when he's going through hell served by US government. Respect! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
    - mindslight 15y ago
      Things have shifted because they've had to. The CIA is in the business of clandestine operations, strongly preferring to support an existing entity and failing that, small operations with extreme amounts of plausible deniability. For one, JA is just the messenger (as you point out, BM is the one who leaked the cables, and that damage has already been done), and JA is/was not even all of WL (although don't tell that to JA..). but really, since he's made it into the public spotlight, direct action is out of the question and JA can only be taken down through an illusion of law and process.
sathishmanohar 15y ago
I'd personally like to see, how a hacker runs a government.
- zethraeus 15y ago
  I'm unsure as to why you were downvoted for this comment. I think it would be terribly interesting to see the extent to which a hacker mentality was visible and/or effective.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- nopassrecover 15y ago
  China is currently run by engineers.
tnuc 15y ago
First he would need to live in Australia. He doesn't seem able to do that.
- dhbanes 15y ago
  This is not true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_44_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_44_of_the_Constitution_...
  - rprasad 15y ago
    Living in Australia may be a prerequisite for becoming a candidate for office. The source linked describes some but not all of the means by which someone who is already a candidate may be disqualified from the election or from such office.
  - tnuc 15y ago
    Looks like he is stuck in the UK under his bail conditions. So he is unable.
orbitingpluto 15y ago
I think the point is that the auspices of diplomatic immunity will force even the USA to handle him with kid gloves. It's kind of hard to charge someone with espionage when they are running another country. Unless the USA is also planning on snapping up Mikhail Gorbachev for espionage the next time he's in town, I think it's a brilliant play.
- electromagnetic 15y ago
  Well beyond anything. The US can't violate any countries diplomatic immunity otherwise giving US officials diplomatic immunity essentially becomes optional to every other country. I'm quite certain the US wants to keep its diplomatic immunity when dealing with North Korea, Iran, etc. I'm pretty sure they don't want any country having the option to arrest every diplomat and visiting state official at will. It's a very dangerous precedent to set. I'm sure China has a list of diplomats, or staff under diplomatic immunity that they would be willing to put on trial for espionage.
- rprasad 15y ago
  Diplomatic community does not extend to foreign legislators. It covers only those who are official diplomats of a foreign country (or those accorded derivative rights, such as immediate family of diplomats). Note that the right applies to the foreign country, not the individuals representing it, so the foreign country may choose (or not) to exercise the immunity. While many countries (especially Middle-eastern countries) abuse diplomatic immunity with regards to smaller crimes (and especially parking tickets), most countries choose not to exercise the immunity in the case of felonies (except where the death penalty is on the table). Alternatively, the country will exercise the immunity but will then honor an extradition request. IOW, unless Assange gets himself appointed as a diplomat of Australia, he's done nothing to improve his situation in the US.
  - mjwalshe 15y ago
    you know how much the US embassy owes Boris Johnson in C Charge and Parking tickets - its millions of pounds.
  - 15y ago
Maci 15y ago
Further background information: 2012-01-02 A 'Wikileaks' party and #JA4Senate in the Australian polity: Can Parliament be 'occupied'? http://wlcentral.org/node/2401 http://wlcentral.org/node/2401
nerdrider 15y ago
A criminal record is mandatory...
- dhughes 15y ago
  > Being convicted of a crime punishable under Australian law to 12 months or more in prison can disqualify a person from sitting in the Australian parliament for the duration of the sentence, even if that sentence is suspended. That seems a bit odd considering Australia's history doesn't it?
  - shirro 15y ago
    Only if you are totally ignorant of history. My Australian state wasn't settled by convicts just as the whole of the US wasn't settled by one ship full of Puritans. My state had a planned colonisation by free settlers attracted to civil and religious freedom and the promise of owning their own land which probably had more in common with somewhere like New Zealand than the penal colonies to the east.
    - satori99 15y ago
      Not only that, but the colony in Sydney had a civil legal system in place from almost day one, even though there were only marines and convicts about. Infact the very first civil case was bought against the British government by a female convict concerning belongings stolen en-route. She won. The captain of the first fleet, and governor of the first colony, fought for this against Lord Howe of the Admiralty before the fleet had left England.
    - vacri 15y ago
      It's just Americans thinking they're being funny about Australia, which is ironic given their modern-day extremely high levels of incarceration. Even the 'penal colonies' weren't just penal colonies - there were a hell of a lot of free settlers as well. Then the gold rushes hit and that's when things really took off. Besides, in the same period we were a 'penal colony', the Americans were 'slavers' - so much for not casting the first stone...
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
shirro 15y ago
One of the advantages of being a member of parliament or a senator is that you have Parliamentary Privilege for anything you say in the house or senate. Perhaps if Assange got in he could leak stuff in the senate without having to pretend to be a journalist. Quite a big advantage if you live in a country with only an implied constitutional freedom of speech limited to political matters vs punishing defamation laws. If he were to enter politics it might be as effective a way to neuter him as a show trial or assassination. Peter Lalor was one of the rebels at Australia's only real civil insurrection/revolution, the Eureka Stockade, but when he got into parliament he became an anti-democratic protector of wealth and privilege. Then you have Peter Garrett of Midnight Oil "US forces give the nod, its a setback for your country" fame who is a Labor minister and not at all outspoken these days.

115 points by sathishmanohar 15y ago

I wonder what the US will spend to defeat him..... I bet the CIA is working out funding ideas right now..... This being said, I wish him the best of luck. It's quite possible such efforts might backfire if folks trace the money back far enough.

mindslight 15y ago
Funding 'ideas' ? Take $Xmm out of pre-mixed drug-running slush fund, donate to incumbent through multiple nyms, move on to six remaining tasks to do before lunch.
- joering2 15y ago
  not that I wish to anyone, but seriously a sole fact that Asange is still alive proves to me a huge shift that happened at some point through US government agencies like CIA with the way they deal with outsiders like himself. Back in ole' days this guy would be quickly found hanging on the rope with hands taped behind, and officials classifying it as a "suicide". Who knows, perhaps he is just too darn popular right now for CIA to send someone to shut him down permanently. I recall the politicians bashing him that he endanger many US troops and US officials around the world with his publications, but yet 3 years later you can't hear about a single instant that someone got hurt due to Assange publications. I think down the line this guy made more good than bad; next time US will plot another inappropriate scheme between countries etc, they will think twice that sooner or later secrets can leak. On the other hand, guys like Bradley are heroes to me, especially now when he's going through hell served by US government. Respect! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
  - mindslight 15y ago
    Things have shifted because they've had to. The CIA is in the business of clandestine operations, strongly preferring to support an existing entity and failing that, small operations with extreme amounts of plausible deniability. For one, JA is just the messenger (as you point out, BM is the one who leaked the cables, and that damage has already been done), and JA is/was not even all of WL (although don't tell that to JA..). but really, since he's made it into the public spotlight, direct action is out of the question and JA can only be taken down through an illusion of law and process.

sathishmanohar 15y ago

I'd personally like to see, how a hacker runs a government.

zethraeus 15y ago
I'm unsure as to why you were downvoted for this comment. I think it would be terribly interesting to see the extent to which a hacker mentality was visible and/or effective.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
nopassrecover 15y ago
China is currently run by engineers.

tnuc 15y ago

First he would need to live in Australia. He doesn't seem able to do that.

dhbanes 15y ago
This is not true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_44_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_44_of_the_Constitution_...
- rprasad 15y ago
  Living in Australia may be a prerequisite for becoming a candidate for office. The source linked describes some but not all of the means by which someone who is already a candidate may be disqualified from the election or from such office.
- tnuc 15y ago
  Looks like he is stuck in the UK under his bail conditions. So he is unable.

orbitingpluto 15y ago

I think the point is that the auspices of diplomatic immunity will force even the USA to handle him with kid gloves. It's kind of hard to charge someone with espionage when they are running another country. Unless the USA is also planning on snapping up Mikhail Gorbachev for espionage the next time he's in town, I think it's a brilliant play.

electromagnetic 15y ago
Well beyond anything. The US can't violate any countries diplomatic immunity otherwise giving US officials diplomatic immunity essentially becomes optional to every other country. I'm quite certain the US wants to keep its diplomatic immunity when dealing with North Korea, Iran, etc. I'm pretty sure they don't want any country having the option to arrest every diplomat and visiting state official at will. It's a very dangerous precedent to set. I'm sure China has a list of diplomats, or staff under diplomatic immunity that they would be willing to put on trial for espionage.
rprasad 15y ago
Diplomatic community does not extend to foreign legislators. It covers only those who are official diplomats of a foreign country (or those accorded derivative rights, such as immediate family of diplomats). Note that the right applies to the foreign country, not the individuals representing it, so the foreign country may choose (or not) to exercise the immunity. While many countries (especially Middle-eastern countries) abuse diplomatic immunity with regards to smaller crimes (and especially parking tickets), most countries choose not to exercise the immunity in the case of felonies (except where the death penalty is on the table). Alternatively, the country will exercise the immunity but will then honor an extradition request. IOW, unless Assange gets himself appointed as a diplomat of Australia, he's done nothing to improve his situation in the US.
- mjwalshe 15y ago
  you know how much the US embassy owes Boris Johnson in C Charge and Parking tickets - its millions of pounds.
- 15y ago

Maci 15y ago

Further background information: 2012-01-02 A 'Wikileaks' party and #JA4Senate in the Australian polity: Can Parliament be 'occupied'? http://wlcentral.org/node/2401 http://wlcentral.org/node/2401

nerdrider 15y ago

A criminal record is mandatory...

dhughes 15y ago
> Being convicted of a crime punishable under Australian law to 12 months or more in prison can disqualify a person from sitting in the Australian parliament for the duration of the sentence, even if that sentence is suspended. That seems a bit odd considering Australia's history doesn't it?
- shirro 15y ago
  Only if you are totally ignorant of history. My Australian state wasn't settled by convicts just as the whole of the US wasn't settled by one ship full of Puritans. My state had a planned colonisation by free settlers attracted to civil and religious freedom and the promise of owning their own land which probably had more in common with somewhere like New Zealand than the penal colonies to the east.
  - satori99 15y ago
    Not only that, but the colony in Sydney had a civil legal system in place from almost day one, even though there were only marines and convicts about. Infact the very first civil case was bought against the British government by a female convict concerning belongings stolen en-route. She won. The captain of the first fleet, and governor of the first colony, fought for this against Lord Howe of the Admiralty before the fleet had left England.
  - vacri 15y ago
    It's just Americans thinking they're being funny about Australia, which is ironic given their modern-day extremely high levels of incarceration. Even the 'penal colonies' weren't just penal colonies - there were a hell of a lot of free settlers as well. Then the gold rushes hit and that's when things really took off. Besides, in the same period we were a 'penal colony', the Americans were 'slavers' - so much for not casting the first stone...

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

shirro 15y ago

One of the advantages of being a member of parliament or a senator is that you have Parliamentary Privilege for anything you say in the house or senate. Perhaps if Assange got in he could leak stuff in the senate without having to pretend to be a journalist. Quite a big advantage if you live in a country with only an implied constitutional freedom of speech limited to political matters vs punishing defamation laws. If he were to enter politics it might be as effective a way to neuter him as a show trial or assassination. Peter Lalor was one of the rebels at Australia's only real civil insurrection/revolution, the Eureka Stockade, but when he got into parliament he became an anti-democratic protector of wealth and privilege. Then you have Peter Garrett of Midnight Oil "US forces give the nod, its a setback for your country" fame who is a Labor minister and not at all outspoken these days.