Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

State secrets act can be broken by any individual who feels compelled to reveal it if his conscious dictates it, however, breaking the law and his oath to retain such secrets confidential does have it’s penalties and one must be prepared to pay for it whatever the penalty may be. Going into such profession knowing ahead of time that it is a spying mission on citizens and foreign entities, one has the choice to remove themselves from that profession if they feel what they and their government are doing is wrong. Personally I admire those who follow their conscious and spill the beans, but I will admire them even more if they also stand and face the consequences for their actions.

Not to my knowledge.

They ask you this before accepting any duties bound by The State Secrets Act. If you say that you are compelled to reveal any information entrusted to you, then you have forfeited your clearance and position.

If you have a conscious that dictates you will betray the State, then join the Greens or become a MONK.

[Paphitis]

State secrets act can be broken by any individual who feels compelled to reveal it if his conscious dictates it, however, breaking the law and his oath to retain such secrets confidential does have it’s penalties and one must be prepared to pay for it whatever the penalty may be. Going into such profession knowing ahead of time that it is a spying mission on citizens and foreign entities, one has the choice to remove themselves from that profession if they feel what they and their government are doing is wrong. Personally I admire those who follow their conscious and spill the beans, but I will admire them even more if they also stand and face the consequences for their actions.

Yes sorry but you are very correct.

If you are going to accept a position in a State Agency involved in espionage and counter intelligence - which btw can involve spying on your own citizens as well as foreign entities, then I am sure you know well in advance what you are signing up to.

You don't have a leg to stand on.

In Assange's case, only a Federal Court and Jury can decide whether he is guilty. There is always a presumption of innocence in our courts system. The court will have to decide whether or not Assange is subject to The State Secrets Act. My guess is that any member of the public, and also journalists become subject to the Act the minute they are exposed to sensitive information belonging to the State. As I said, the courts have to decide.

I feel very sorry for Assange but in my opinion, the actions of Assange and his "whistleblowers" are probably very serious violations that have compromised the USA's Security Apparatus. It's very dangerous turf. Wouldn't want to be in his shoes.

[Kikapu]

State secrets act can be broken by any individual who feels compelled to reveal it if his conscious dictates it, however, breaking the law and his oath to retain such secrets confidential does have it’s penalties and one must be prepared to pay for it whatever the penalty may be. Going into such profession knowing ahead of time that it is a spying mission on citizens and foreign entities, one has the choice to remove themselves from that profession if they feel what they and their government are doing is wrong. Personally I admire those who follow their conscious and spill the beans, but I will admire them even more if they also stand and face the consequences for their actions.

Yes sorry but you are very correct.

If you are going to accept a position in a State Agency involved in espionage and counter intelligence - which btw can involve spying on your own citizens as well as foreign entities, then I am sure you know well in advance what you are signing up to.

You don't have a leg to stand on.

In Assange's case, only a Federal Court and Jury can decide whether he is guilty. There is always a presumption of innocence in our courts system. The court will have to decide whether or not Assange is subject to The State Secrets Act. My guess is that any member of the public, and also journalists become subject to the Act the minute they are exposed to sensitive information belonging to the State. As I said, the courts have to decide.

I feel very sorry for Assange but in my opinion, the actions of Assange and his "whistleblowers" are probably very serious violations that have compromised the USA's Security Apparatus. It's very dangerous turf. Wouldn't want to be in his shoes.

I had to sign the British Secrets Act back in 1975 when I joined the Scotland Yard’s Forensic Science Laboratory in London. It is still valid today long after I left the Lab back in 1979.

[Paphitis]

State secrets act can be broken by any individual who feels compelled to reveal it if his conscious dictates it, however, breaking the law and his oath to retain such secrets confidential does have it’s penalties and one must be prepared to pay for it whatever the penalty may be. Going into such profession knowing ahead of time that it is a spying mission on citizens and foreign entities, one has the choice to remove themselves from that profession if they feel what they and their government are doing is wrong. Personally I admire those who follow their conscious and spill the beans, but I will admire them even more if they also stand and face the consequences for their actions.

Yes sorry but you are very correct.

If you are going to accept a position in a State Agency involved in espionage and counter intelligence - which btw can involve spying on your own citizens as well as foreign entities, then I am sure you know well in advance what you are signing up to.

You don't have a leg to stand on.

In Assange's case, only a Federal Court and Jury can decide whether he is guilty. There is always a presumption of innocence in our courts system. The court will have to decide whether or not Assange is subject to The State Secrets Act. My guess is that any member of the public, and also journalists become subject to the Act the minute they are exposed to sensitive information belonging to the State. As I said, the courts have to decide.

I feel very sorry for Assange but in my opinion, the actions of Assange and his "whistleblowers" are probably very serious violations that have compromised the USA's Security Apparatus. It's very dangerous turf. Wouldn't want to be in his shoes.

I had to sign the British Secrets Act back in 1975 when I joined the Scotland Yard’s Forensic Science Laboratory in London. It is still valid today long after I left the Lab back in 1979.

Valid for life under the act.

The English one is probably exactly the same as the Australian one.

The Americans will have something similar but the Americans probably have more protection for defendants because of the Bill of Rights. Assange's lawyers could for instance argue perhaps (I am not sure) and try and uphold their amendment rights if they are pertinent to his case. lawyers will try everything. In UK and Australia there is no such thing.

In all likelihood though, I think Assange faces an uphill struggle. I say that because I think the Americans are going to want to make an example out of Assange.

[Kikapu]

However, unlike Manning and Snowden, I don’t believe Assange has signed any Secrecy Acts with anyone regards to what he is accused of.

[Paphitis]

However, unlike Manning and Snowden, I don’t believe Assange has signed any Secrecy Acts with anyone regards to what he is accused of.

Yes I know that but that probably doesn't absolve him from anything.

If Snowden and Manning violated the US Secrecy Act by revealing information to third parties like Assange and Media, then Assange and all the other third parties could be vulnerable. That is something for the courts.

Didn't Manning and Snowden reveal stuff to MSM media and they decided to not use it and dropped it like a hot potato?

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis.
I notice that you do not answer the question .......... you make many justifications for illegality when carried out by the State but, your principals appear to apply to just the States you support. You are also very vocal on the seriousness of Assanges ‘crimes’ against The US State but completely ignore the far more serious State tolerated war crimes and crimes against humanity that he exposed.

What you are advocating is the Totalitarian State just like those you believe are such and which you so often condemn for their actions. Countries such as Russia, China, Iran, N.Korea, Syria etc. but you never apply the same condemnation to the US/UK/EU/Australia or Israel, in fact as you show here you actively encourage it.

Killing people by using a drone is every bit a murder as feeding the victim Novichoc or Polonium, just engineering a simple car crash or an unexplained heart attack or suicide ........ which I might add, is ALSO a method often used by the CIA and MI6.

Your attitude surely demonstrates what gave rise to the Holocaust in Nazi Germany? The State was beyond the Law and acted in the interest of certain members of The State, not the people! Many people knew what was going on, including the Zionists, but said nothing. They just claimed in Nuremberg that they were ‘.... just following the orders of the State’! But that was not accepted by the Court as a good reason for being part of it, so why should it be any different now? If The State, even if it happens to have declared itself as ‘exceptional’ is guilty of wrong doing then we should welcome and protect those that expose it.

Assange, if you take the trouble to read the reports from those attending the Hearing, is NOT receiving a fair hearing and even though he is being held only as a remand prisoner (that is without charge), he is held in conditions normally provided for mass murderers, serial killers or dangerous terrorists. He is being denied his basic human rights, even though you claim that UK justice is fair and impartial and it is being applied by a Court that is without doubt heavily biased against him. This is something you would vehemently condemn if this was going on in Moscow or Beijing, as an example of what is clearly a dictatorship!

This hearing is to determine whether the US request to extradite him under the UK/US Extradition Treaty is valid. As you make quite clear, in your opinion, what he has done has endangered the US State, not his own country or indeed the UK! That unarguably is a political crime and anything to do with State Security is unquestionably a political crime. The Treaty specifically excludes extradition on political grounds. What this kangaroo Court is doing now is to make prosecuting and defence Lawyers play legal games with UK law and semantics, to redefine the application and intent of The Treaty as it is very specific, very clear and they would have no alternative but to let him walk free under the terms of The US/UK Extradition Treaty.

As I understand it, as this is just a hearing not a trial, Assange will not have the automatic right to appeal and, as you again point out, he will probably end up being sent to the US to stand trial for something that is NOT a crime! Thousands of journalists do what he has done, every day of the week ..... ask your wife, she is a journalist. Think about it ..... your wife could get a bee-in-her bonnet about the US government and publish something based on a leaked document that The US didn’t like and she could end up just like Assange. What would you say to her “..... serves you right, you deserve all they throw at you.” ?

This is a manipulated and engineered excuse used as a tool of revenge against Manning and Assange because they exposed the embarrassing truth about US war crimes and human rights offences and it has NOTHING to do with exposing State Secrets.Quite the contrary!

In fact Assange was working with the US authorities because he had all the details but was presenting them with all the contents that could identify individuals, redacted. He was not involved in the theft, he was just the recipient and it was two Guardian journalists and a German newspaper that exposed the names and locations by effectively stealing those very same US Government documents from the Wikileaks Data base and publishing details he redacted.

They did the damage not Assange ...... why are they not on an extradition charge and getting shipped out to the US for a trial .......... a trial which, I might add, is held behind closed doors! More information the State does not want you to know about.

[Paphitis]

Paphitis.
I notice that you do not answer the question .......... you make many justifications for illegality when carried out by the State but, your principals appear to apply to just the States you support. You are also very vocal on the seriousness of Assanges ‘crimes’ against The US State but completely ignore the far more serious State tolerated war crimes and crimes against humanity that he exposed.

What you are advocating is the Totalitarian State just like those you believe are such and which you so often condemn for their actions. Countries such as Russia, China, Iran, N.Korea, Syria etc. but you never apply the same condemnation to the US/UK/EU/Australia or Israel, in fact as you show here you actively encourage it.

Killing people by using a drone is every bit a murder as feeding the victim Novichoc or Polonium, just engineering a simple car crash or an unexplained heart attack or suicide ........ which I might add, is ALSO a method often used by the CIA and MI6.

Your attitude surely demonstrates what gave rise to the Holocaust in Nazi Germany? The State was beyond the Law and acted in the interest of certain members of The State, not the people! Many people knew what was going on, including the Zionists, but said nothing. They just claimed in Nuremberg that they were ‘.... just following the orders of the State’! But that was not accepted by the Court as a good reason for being part of it, so why should it be any different now? If The State, even if it happens to have declared itself as ‘exceptional’ is guilty of wrong doing then we should welcome and protect those that expose it.

Assange, if you take the trouble to read the reports from those attending the Hearing, is NOT receiving a fair hearing and even though he is being held only as a remand prisoner (that is without charge), he is held in conditions normally provided for mass murderers, serial killers or dangerous terrorists. He is being denied his basic human rights, even though you claim that UK justice is fair and impartial and it is being applied by a Court that is without doubt heavily biased against him. This is something you would vehemently condemn if this was going on in Moscow or Beijing, as an example of what is clearly a dictatorship!

This hearing is to determine whether the US request to extradite him under the UK/US Extradition Treaty is valid. As you make quite clear, in your opinion, what he has done has endangered the US State, not his own country or indeed the UK! That unarguably is a political crime and anything to do with State Security is unquestionably a political crime. The Treaty specifically excludes extradition on political grounds. What this kangaroo Court is doing now is to make prosecuting and defence Lawyers play legal games with UK law and semantics, to redefine the application and intent of The Treaty as it is very specific, very clear and they would have no alternative but to let him walk free under the terms of The US/UK Extradition Treaty.

As I understand it, as this is just a hearing not a trial, Assange will not have the automatic right to appeal and, as you again point out, he will probably end up being sent to the US to stand trial for something that is NOT a crime! Thousands of journalists do what he has done, every day of the week ..... ask your wife, she is a journalist. Think about it ..... your wife could get a bee-in-her bonnet about the US government and publish something based on a leaked document that The US didn’t like and she could end up just like Assange. What would you say to her “..... serves you right, you deserve all they throw at you.” ?

This is a manipulated and engineered excuse used as a tool of revenge against Manning and Assange because they exposed the embarrassing truth about US war crimes and human rights offences and it has NOTHING to do with exposing State Secrets.Quite the contrary!

In fact Assange was working with the US authorities because he had all the details but was presenting them with all the contents that could identify individuals, redacted. He was not involved in the theft, he was just the recipient and it was two Guardian journalists and a German newspaper that exposed the names and locations by effectively stealing those very same US Government documents from the Wikileaks Data base and publishing details he redacted.

They did the damage not Assange ...... why are they not on an extradition charge and getting shipped out to the US for a trial .......... a trial which, I might add, is held behind closed doors! More information the State does not want you to know about.

I did answer your questions but I will briefly respond to you about it again.

there is no illegality by the State.

The Coalition and the USA do not commit illegal acts or war crimes. Every step is taken to avoid that, and there is an extremely stringent chaon of command and very stringent rules of engagement. There is certainly a very big difference between our forces and those from Russia, Syria, and Iran. Night and Day.

That said, whatever happens in the field, is classified information and protected by the State Secret Act.

No one has the right to divulge any of that information, let alone people serving under the Act like Snowden.

To do so is a very serious offense against the Act which subjugates the transgressor to very serious charges and if convicted, guaranteed time in a Federal Prison.

There is no grey area, or whistle blower protections from this act.

People who sign up to the military, any State Security Agency (like the CIA), or are elected to office and become a member of Government or Cabinet, as well as some people serving in the Police, arms suppliers and defence contractors are vetted and covered by this act.

Any journalists or media outlet that is exposed to such sensitive information are also exposed to the act. There is no room for Mother Theresa here.

If people are overcome with their conscious, then obviously they are not suited to these things or suited to work in such areas. perhaps an alternative career path like becoming a Monk at Mount Athos is better for such individuals.

In addition to that, the country with the highest benchmarks in human rights in the world in my opinion is the USA. I say that because of the Bill of Rights, and their mentality of stripping as many layers of Government as is possible. There is no country in the world that has more laws and instruments protecting freedom of speech. On face value, the judicial processes in the USA are like no other country, and in my view are far better than any in the EU, Australia or any of the Scandinavian Countries.

Assange's lawyers will try to use these laws to defend Assange. There are literally no laws in the EU, Australia or UK which can provide such potential protection.

[Paphitis]

BTW, you say I differentiate between the States I support and others.

Well yeh! I do. I differentiate between countries like US, Australia, UK, France, NZ, Canada, Greece to others like Russia, Syria, China, North Korea, and Iran.

Put it this way, if Assange had messed with the likes of Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea, he would have been whacked *murdered) long ago. There is no way he would be alive, let alone face court.

We have seen this time and time again. Juts recently, Chinese Secret Service murdered an Australian MP of Chinese background. He was found laying in a pool of blood in his Sydney Apartment.

The other clear difference is this. The Coalition doesn't drop Barrel bombs on civilians, or use Chemical and Biological Weapons on civilians or arrest people of interest, put them in a torture factory and then suddenly disappear.

There is a very clear differentiation here.