ForumGarden

It's the banks this time. I'll buy this guy a beer any day of the week. Hell, a steak too. Talk about making history.

YouTube - Swiss banker hands Assange secrets

Hummm!! wonder where he keeps his money?

At what point do we start seeing the value in someone being as good as their own word? Who can we trust if we can't trust our bankers, doctors, etc to keep our confidential information confidential?

flopstock;1351082 wrote: At what point do we start seeing the value in someone being as good as their own word? Who can we trust if we can't trust our bankers, doctors, etc to keep our confidential information confidential?


Within the banking industry there is a legal requirement to detect and report money laundering or other criminal activity - this is fairly much an international requirement.

Where an employee can see that the bank he is working for is not only not reporting such activity but is actively taking steps to make it possible then what is he to do? Keep quiet?

Is it protection of client confidentiality to aid and abet criminals in securing the proceeds of their crime?

It's all fun and games until somebody gets hurt.

Within the banking industry there is a legal requirement to detect and report money laundering or other criminal activity - this is fairly much an international requirement.


Exactly. What's the point in a war on drugs if you can't stop the flow of cash? How many people in the states skip out on their fair share of taxes?

This is a big can of worms and quite frankly I thank Assange and his people, I think the information should be put to good use. We all have a right to know what is going on in the world around us. Our corrupt, hypocritical system needs to be exposed.

Scrat;1351104 wrote: Exactly. What's the point in a war on drugs if you can't stop the flow of cash? How many people in the states skip out on their fair share of taxes?

This is a big can of worms and quite frankly I thank Assange and his people, I think the information should be put to good use. We all have a right to know what is going on in the world around us. Our corrupt, hypocritical system needs to be exposed. Then let's start with an exbanker who has apparently availed himself of confidential banking information on his way out the door after being let go in 2002.

What has he been doing with this information up to this point? Whose information may not be included in what is surely his first offering and why?

IMO this smells more like a show of proof and this persons personal banking records should be looked at before .

The ex-banker does say, flops, that this is all material given to him by other current bankers equally disgusted with the criminality, it's not bits he took with him nine years ago. And neither is it a threat to exposing your account details or even mine, this is primarily about people salting the proceeds of corruption out of sight while still in office, or hiding one-off payments of megabucks out of sight of their lawful tax authority.

spot;1351145 wrote: The ex-banker does say, flops, that this is all material given to him by other current bankers equally disgusted with the criminality, it's not bits he took with him nine years ago. And neither is it a threat to exposing your account details or even mine, this is primarily about people salting the proceeds of corruption out of sight while still in office, or hiding one-off payments of megabucks out of sight of their lawful tax authority.


Of course he says that.

Do we know why he was let go or is that considered confidential and protected information?

BaghdadBob;1351097 wrote: It's all fun and games until somebody gets hurt.


If you see someone engaged in criminal activity and do nothing to report it the you are just as guilty.

If this was someone in a saudi bank disclosing how money was sent to Al Queda would you consider that to be a breach of trust if they disclosed it to wikileaks because they knew saudi authorities would do nothing about it?

flopstock;1351147 wrote: Of course he says that.


Just think of what you're saying for a moment. Within a month all the material he's releasing will be readable from your own computer screen. It's not as though we'll be left wondering whether he's told the truth about the age of the transfers or not. Why on earth would he lie about something he's putting into the public domain where it can be immediately checked?

Do we know why he was let go or is that considered confidential and protected information?


Why does it matter? Some people in this world have a good sense of morality, some people feel pain when they see a starving child, some do not. If the information he has is not fraudulent then he is right in doing this. He could have been let go because he was perceived as a threat, because he didn't toe the line.

If you think security is the big issue here you're barking up the wrong tree. The issue is transparency, 100s of children died at the school in Beslan because of dirty money. If the terrorists had no money they wouldn't have had the means to buy the tools to pull it off. Russia knows the funding for the terrorists came from outside Russia, they just can't follow the trail because of all the built in protections for the people who feed the terrorists.

Weren't the Brits trying to take a look into the Saudi families Swiss bank accounts? Trying to see what was being done with it? IT'S A WELL ESTABLISHED FACT THAT THROUGHOUT THE ARAB WORLD AND ABROAD SAUDI SOURCES FUND ALL KINDS OF ORGANIZATIONS, INCLUDING TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS.

The issue here is transparency, not security. People who do wrong should be scared s**tless. People who don't pay their taxes should be punished.

gmc;1351154 wrote: If you see someone engaged in criminal activity and do nothing to report it the you are just as guilty.

If this was someone in a saudi bank disclosing how money was sent to Al Queda would you consider that to be a breach of trust if they disclosed it to wikileaks because they knew saudi authorities would do nothing about it?


Over 2000 accounts, about 40 politicians and “pillars of society” were among them - what about the right to privacy for the others?

IMO this guy is less honest and trustworthy than the folks he's giving up. No ethics whatsoever, IMO

flopstock;1351174 wrote: Over 2000 accounts, about 40 politicians and “pillars of society” were among them - what about the right to privacy for the others?

IMO this guy is less honest and trustworthy than the folks he's giving up. No ethics whatsoever, IMO
I think we have a simple test in prospect once the material is available. We can look at all the people whose privacy he's breached and you can tell us which specific individuals among them you feel sympathy for. If any.

flopstock;1351174 wrote: Over 2000 accounts, about 40 politicians and “pillars of society” were among them - what about the right to privacy for the others?

IMO this guy is less honest and trustworthy than the folks he's giving up. No ethics whatsoever, IMO


If a politician is taking advantage of his position to line his own pockets as a citizen of that country I have a right to know about it as does the citizen of any other country. Quite frankly I have a right to look at his bank account and check his expense accounts. In the UK we've just found how how much fiddling has been going on by our politicians, the smaller fish are going to jail the bigger ones hide it better. If joe bloggs down the road works on the black and gets caught he goes to jail. If a pillar of society does the same so should he. There is no such thing as a respectable crook whose privacy need be respected. If a company is not paying taxes when it should it is you that is being robbed.

I suggest you wait and see exactly what is being disclosed and then decide if it was justified or not. We need whistleblowers and they should be protected when they blow the whistle not persecuted IMO.

When the day is done it comes down to catching the dishonest. And as for "security" and "privacy" in the world of information as of late, it doesn't really exist to begin with. Nothing is secure, nothing is private.

Take confidential information about cars, a lot of stuff is not printed in these technical manuals you can get in auto shops such as Haynes manuals are tightly limited in content, why? Auto companies don't want a lot of trade secrets getting out. Just do a google search on a code or oxygen sensor or another car part. What they don't want people to know is either obtained illegally or figured out by people. It's really quite amazing. We live in the most privacy and security deprived age in human history.

Scrat;1351059 wrote: It's the banks this time. I'll buy this guy a beer any day of the week. Hell, a steak too. Talk about making history.


lol. If I were him, I'd make darn sure that my beer didn't have a small particle of a radioactive isotope in it. Messing with the big dogs is dangerous.

Saint_;1351266 wrote: lol. If I were him, I'd make darn sure that my beer didn't have a small particle of a radioactive isotope in it. Messing with the big dogs is dangerous.That's why you're not him.

Saint_;1351266 wrote: lol. If I were him, I'd make darn sure that my beer didn't have a small particle of a radioactive isotope in it. Messing with the big dogs is dangerous.


Are you really saying you are happy with the state killing people without due process? The only crime he has been accused of is in Sweden and they haven't made their case yet to get him extradited.

gmc;1351272 wrote: Are you really saying you are happy with the state killing people without due process? The only crime he has been accused of is in Sweden and they haven't made their case yet to get him extradited.


Where's the indignation from the left when clowns like obomba order a murder?

The silence is deafening.

BaghdadBob;1351274 wrote: Where's the indignation from the left when clowns like obomba order a murder?

The silence is deafening.


You have, presumably, an instance? None springs to mind but you can't have posted that without ammunition.

spot;1351282 wrote: You have, presumably, an instance? None springs to mind but you can't have posted that without ammunition.


Yes, you're right. I do. Google Anwar al-Awlaki. Born in the USA (unlike obumber). I guess he's not worthy of due process.

BaghdadBob;1351286 wrote: Yes, you're right. I do. Google Anwar al-Awlaki. Born in the USA (unlike obumber). I guess he's not worthy of due process.


I blinked when I saw that. Surely Anwar al-Awlaki is alive, I thought. Then I went back and checked - "order" appears to be the accusation, rather than "murder".

You think there's something special about being American that should act as protection from "targeted killing" by the US military or intelligence community? On the contrary.

I'd quite like to see a situation where the US military and intelligence community were forbidden to kill anyone who wasn't on such a list.

spot;1351291 wrote: I blinked when I saw that. Surely Anwar al-Awlaki is alive, I thought. Then I went back and checked - "order" appears to be the accusation, rather than "murder".

You think there's something special about being American that should act as protection from "targeted killing" by the US military or intelligence community? On the contrary.

I'd quite like to see a situation where the US military and intelligence community were forbidden to kill anyone who wasn't on such a list.


I was responding to this:

Are you really saying you are happy with the state killing people without due process?


Your post seems to confirm it. So, I'll take it you're another Marxist that has no problem with it when it's ordered by one of your own.

Understood.

BaghdadBob;1351296 wrote: I was responding to this:[quote=gmc]Are you really saying you are happy with the state killing people without due process? Your post seems to confirm it. So, I'll take it you're another Marxist that has no problem with it when it's ordered by one of your own.

Understood.[/QUOTE]My post actually put a question to you. "You think there's something special about being American that should act as protection from "targeted killing" by the US military or intelligence community?". You ignored it.

Marxist is a very hackneyed phrase. It would be far more accurate to describe me as a Stalinist. We could compromise and call me a communist instead if you'd rather, I happily put my hand up to that.

spot;1351298 wrote: My post actually put a question to you. "You think there's something special about being American that should act as protection from "targeted killing" by the US military or intelligence community?". You ignored it.


Yes, in this country every American is entitled to established due process. We have a Constitution. Leftists like to use it as asswipe but the vast majority prefer to uphold its tenets.

Marxist is a very hackneyed phrase. It would be far more accurate to describe me as a Stalinist. We could compromise and call me a communist instead if you'd rather, I happily put my hand up to that.


Marxist is shorter. Makes it easy on me.

So, tell everybody why you find Stalinism so yummy.

BaghdadBob;1351299 wrote: Yes, in this country every American is entitled to established due process. We have a Constitution. Leftists like to use it as asswipe but the vast majority prefer to uphold its tenets.You're as good as the original. Bob. It's a pleasure watching your parody of rootin' tootin' patriotism, it really is.Whenever we attack, they retreat. When we pound them with missiles and heavy artillery, they retreat even deeper. But when we stopped pounding, they pushed to the airport for propaganda purposes.

BaghdadBob;1351299 wrote:

So, tell everybody why you find Stalinism so yummy.


Well?

BaghdadBob;1351303 wrote: [quote=BaghdadBob]So, tell everybody why you find Stalinism so yummy.Well?[/QUOTE]Oh... a great man in a great country. Did what the times called for. Foresaw the inevitability of World War Two, built up the capacity of the Soviet Union to take on and destroy the Axis forces, did the job regardless of the national sacrifice involved and succeeded. Turned a backward uneconomic backwater into an industrialized superpower, practically eliminated domestic crime, taught the nation a sense of pride which it still holds now sixty years after his death. Magnificent chap all round, we could have done with someone like him ourselves, I'm all for egalitarian socialism. He picked up the ball and ran the goal. Not a team player particularly, but he was good at delegating.

One thing is for sure all BS aside. Assange is on a roll and if someone offs him or the US gets their hands on him and toss him in Guantanamo somebody else will pick up the torch.

I think he's a hell of a lot smarter than he's given credit for. He knows how the media works, he's put himself in the spotlight in order to take the heat off others. Go ahead, make him a martyr. This is a train you're not stopping. We all saw recently what a martyr can bring about in Tunisia. That's not over yet, neither is this. :yh_rotfl

spot;1351304 wrote: Oh... a great man in a great country. Did what the times called for. Foresaw the inevitability of World War Two, built up the capacity of the Soviet Union to take on and destroy the Axis forces, did the job regardless of the national sacrifice involved and succeeded. Turned a backward uneconomic backwater into an industrialized superpower, practically eliminated domestic crime, taught the nation a sense of pride which it still holds now sixty years after his death. Magnificent chap all round, we could have done with someone like him ourselves, I'm all for egalitarian socialism. He picked up the ball and ran the goal. Not a team player particularly, but he was good at delegating.


:wah: You wacky Marxists. I get a real chuckle outta you chuckleheads.

BaghdadBob;1351307 wrote: :wah: You wacky Marxists. I get a real chuckle outta you chuckleheads.


Which bit's inaccurate, Bob? Put up or shut up.

spot;1351308 wrote: Which bit's inaccurate, Bob? Put up or shut up.


Magnificent chap all round, we could have done with someone like him ourselves, I'm all for egalitarian socialism.


I didn't in any way imply inaccuracy. Guilty conscience on your part? Nah, I doubt you have one.

Anyways, by egalitarian did you mean murdering anyone that you don't agree with? That everyone has an equal chance of being whacked?

Dood, you gotz no idea how hard I'm laffing at that post of yours.

I guess Rudolf Elmer is to be arrested again, if he hasn't been already.

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-17/worl ... s=PM:WORLD

Nope I guess he was lat off the hook. At least Swiss justice works.

BaghdadBob;1351310 wrote: Anyways, by egalitarian did you mean murdering anyone that you don't agree with? That everyone has an equal chance of being whacked? No, I meant what the dictionary gives as the word's meaning. A society which minimises the wealth and health and education gap between rich and poor. Something toward which, sadly, Americans in general tend not to aspire despite it being in the best interest of the majority of them. Something the Soviet Union was startlingly good at under Stalin.

spot;1351314 wrote: No, I meant what the dictionary gives as the word's meaning. A society which minimises the wealth and health and education gap between rich and poor. Something toward which, sadly, Americans in general tend not to aspire despite it being in the best interest of the majority of them. Something the Soviet Union was startlingly good at under Stalin.


I think you totally misunderstand us.

The vast majority are capitalists -egalitarian capitalists. All we want is a level playing field in which to advance our lives and society. It's the new Nazi party, er democrats, that seek to balkanize Americans.

spot;1351314 wrote: No, I meant what the dictionary gives as the word's meaning. A society which minimises the wealth and health and education gap between rich and poor. Something toward which, sadly, Americans in general tend not to aspire despite it being in the best interest of the majority of them. Something the Soviet Union was startlingly good at under Stalin.


We believe in equal rights, not equal outcomes.

It seems your view is that of nobody left behind but it resulted in nobody getting ahead. The soviet economy was a gross failure by nearly any metric.

In a Capitalist society, while there is certainly a wealth strata, all willing to get ahead have the opportunity and results in a much more advanced society.

You remind me a lot of Pastor Jones in today's report, Bob."I'm not against Muslims, we are not against their religion," he said [...] "What I am against is the radical element. If I came to England we would expect Muslims to rally with us."

BBC News - US pastor Terry Jones banned from entering UK

and this is the chap who invented International Burn a Koran Day. He's so far into his propaganda that he really thinks he somehow makes sense. Much like you on the topic of egalitarianism, or your namesake on the day to day progress of the "liberation".

spot;1351320 wrote: You remind me a lot of Pastor Jones in today's report, Bob."I'm not against Muslims, we are not against their religion," he said [...] "What I am against is the radical element. If I came to England we would expect Muslims to rally with us."

BBC News - US pastor Terry Jones banned from entering UK

and this is the chap who invented International Burn a Koran Day. He's so far into his propaganda that he really thinks he somehow makes sense. Much like you on the topic of egalitarianism, or your namesake on the day to day progress of the "liberation".


Read the first paragraph of egalitarian on wikipedia. The key word is 'treated' as equals, etc. Being egalitarian does not mean guaranteed equal outcomes.

BTW, we expect to drive those pesky Americans outta Iraq in about a year or so. We thought we would have driven them out in 16 months after obomba was elected but it didn't work out that way.

BaghdadBob;1351286 wrote: Yes, you're right. I do. Google Anwar al-Awlaki. Born in the USA (unlike obumber). I guess he's not worthy of due process.


Everybody is worthy of due process. The point of most Due Process is to curb the power of government and prevent arbitrary imprisonment and arrest by those in authority not to protect the criminal, so any government suspending habeus corpus is taking a first step on a dangerous road. I notice Obama still hasn't done anything about guantanomo and his attitude and actions over wikileaks is gaining widespread condemnation outside of america.

BBC News - US approves killing US-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki

Our news media report it, you need to hunt through the press to find comment on it. Although both the right and left wing in our country see objective reporting events as being biased depending on whether they are in power or not. Not being american I probably look at different tv and news programmes from you and am only familiar with some of them thanks to you tube, and indeed posters here putting in links to such things, Fox news and bill O'Reilly for instance I have only ever seen on you tube. I watch CNN occasionally to get a wider perspective and also trawl if a story interests me.

Yes, in this country every American is entitled to established due process. We have a Constitution. Leftists like to use it as asswipe but the vast majority prefer to uphold its tenets.


Interesting way of looking at it, it's usually the right that complain about being soft on law and order and the rights of the criminal being looked after far too much.

BBC News - Rights groups sue US over Muslim cleric al-Awlaki

It does seem some of what I assume you see as left wing groups don't think he should be ordering the execution of american citizens. Left and right have slightly different connotations in America than the rest of the world and being called a leftie isn't much of an insult.

Incidentally I'm not a marxist, although I a socialist in some of the ways the term is used in the UK. If someone claims to be a socialist the next question they get asked is usually what kind of socialist. But you really don't need to worry about the arcane world of european socialism unless you want to know how it has affected american politics. You used to have a working class movement in the states concerned about social justice and the like. What happened to it? To describe Obamna as a socialist is laughable - only in america indeed.

posted by spot

Marxist is a very hackneyed phrase. It would be far more accurate to describe me as a Stalinist. We could compromise and call me a communist instead if you'd rather, I happily put my hand up to that.


Oh... a great man in a great country. Did what the times called for. Foresaw the inevitability of World War Two, built up the capacity of the Soviet Union to take on and destroy the Axis forces, did the job regardless of the national sacrifice involved and succeeded. Turned a backward uneconomic backwater into an industrialized superpower, practically eliminated domestic crime, taught the nation a sense of pride which it still holds now sixty years after his death. Magnificent chap all round, we could have done with someone like him ourselves, I'm all for egalitarian socialism. He picked up the ball and ran the goal. Not a team player particularly, but he was good at delegating.


Oh dear. but I will refrain from going off topic.



posted by baghdad bob

We believe in equal rights, not equal outcomes.


Congratulations you get one of the tenets of socialism, equality of opportunity. Poverty is one of the biggest constraints on opportunity so we have free education for all, or we did until fairly recently.

In a Capitalist society, while there is certainly a wealth strata, all willing to get ahead have the opportunity and results in a much more advanced society.


You don't have a capitalist society any more, nor do we. Time to redress the balance and curb the power of the rich and powerful.

For those who didn't know such orders existed, here's the small print on the fax demanding IP details on Wikileaks activists last month:Twitter shall not disclose the existence of the application or this Order of the Court, or the existence of the investigation, to the listed subscriber or to any other person, unless and until authorized to do so by the Court.Well done Twitter on standing up to a totalitarian intelligence community by publishing the fax. There's a neat article about it in the current edition of Revolution.

Voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA


Good grief I didn't know america even had a communist party. I thought they were banned or something.

They lobby for a change in the Constitution, as far as I can see. And quite right too.

Interesting reading. Thanks for the link.

I would think these folks would have no objection to having all of their correspondence shared with the world so that we can draw our own conclusions on their good or evil intent, rather than just relying on what they choose to disclose to us.

Seems to me that what is wanted here is for the masses to continue to be blindly lead, just by a new master.

gmc;1351403 wrote: Good grief I didn't know america even had a communist party. I thought they were banned or something.


We don't ban political groups. There is even a communist (used to call himself one but in recent years calls himself a democratic socialist) US senator - Bernie Sanders of Vermont. He caucuses & votes with the donks (duh).

flopstock;1351427 wrote: I would think these folks would have no objection to having all of their correspondence shared with the world so that we can draw our own conclusions on their good or evil intent, rather than just relying on what they choose to disclose to us.

Seems to me that what is wanted here is for the masses to continue to be blindly lead, just by a new master.Good lord - it's Twitter! They've already shared it with the world, Twitter's a tweeting place. What exactly is your point?

The court order was for locations. The content was fully public the moment it was typed.