back to article US said to designate Assange 'enemy' of the state

The US military has allegedly classified Julian Assange as an "enemy", a desigation that could make any member of those forces who communicates with him or WikiLeaks to be liable for the death penalty. According to an article in Thursday's Sydney Morning Herald, this latest elevation of the charges against Assange was …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Forget It
    Alert

    Does this make the Ecuadorian Embassy in London a target for drones?

    1. Dennis Wilson

      Drones

      If they do use drones on the Ecuadorian Embassy in London then perhaps we should warn everyone in Amsterdam to climb under the kitchen table.

    2. Mr Young
      Coffee/keyboard

      Imagine if...

      The USA droned the UK with bombs - oops! sorry! reports! will! be! etc!

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I think Assange is being railroaded, but I also think this chain of tenuous and "my neighbor's sister's nephew" information is... not terribly convincing. Call me when it's the NY Times saying it and not Some Dude, who heard it from Some Dude, in the Sydney Morning Herald.

    1. John 104

      Optional

      @davidw.

      Being railroaded? He is a traitor to the United States.

      1. Bit Brain
        FAIL

        Re: Optional @John 104

        Last time I checked he's not a US citizen, so how the fuck can he be a traitor?

        1. Joe Cooper

          Re: Optional @John 104

          Easy, the same way Kennedy was a traitor to the Russians.

          ...What's a traitor again?

        2. Arctic fox
          Headmaster

          @Bit Brain "Re: Optional @John 104" Ah, but you see old chap as their.........

          .........brain-dead chimpazee former president G W Bush said "if you're not with us you're against us". As far as a very particular section of the US body politic is concerned if you do not play ball you are classified as "un-American" or "anti-American" depending on which passport you hold. However, in reality as far as they are concerned this is merely a formal distinction - everybody they don't like is a traitor and should be subject to the "appropriate" penalties.

          1. dssf

            Re: @Bit Brain "Optional @John 104" Ah, but you see old chap as their......... "Decider"

            "I'M THE DECIDER".... hahahaha

            Thanks to various reasons, many STILL "misunderestimate" him, hehehehe

          2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
            FAIL

            Re: @Bit Brain "Optional @John 104" Ah, but you see old chap as their.........

            Maybe they should check Artic Fox for brain death as Bush left office and it is Obambi's buddies passing the "enemy" calssification. When are the Dummicrats like Artic Fox going to stop trying to blame everything on Bush?

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Thumb Up

              Re: @Bit Brain "Optional @John 104" Ah, but you see old chap as their.........

              "Obambi"

              "Dummicrats"

              Oh, it's you, Matt! It's so nice to see your opinions again. I mean - Dummicrats! Wow! You're saying that *democrats* are *dumb*! What an incisive political commentary, Matt. I bet you're pretty proud: Biting *and* novel!

              You know, you really do have a way with words - you're saying that Obama is just like a small baby deer! So cutting! So witty! Way to slice him down to size, eh? I mean, it's *just* the kind of thing to expect from a fawn, you know? Little wily bastards, aren't they?

              I'm telling you, man - it's amazing you aren't writing for the Wall Street Journal. Have you considered applying?

              1. Fatman

                Re: I'm telling you, man - it's amazing you aren't writing for the Wall Street Journal.

                Actually, he would better fit in at FoxFaux News.

              2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                Facepalm

                Re: Re: @Bit Brain "Optional @John 104" Ah, but you see old chap as their.........

                So after all that, are you agreeing that Dummies like Article Fox should stop blaming all Americas actions/ills on George Dubyha, or are you agreeing with him and believing that the Obumbler's administration had nothing to do with it? Perchance, do you agree with A$$nut groupies like Ars$elicker Fox in thinking that A$$nut is above the law? After all, you waded in, it would be a pleasant surprise to see you post an actual opinion. I'm not expecting much, certainly nothing original, but it would be encouraging to at least see you try.

            2. Arctic fox
              Headmaster

              Re: "Maybe they should check Artic Fox for brain death"

              If you wish to post an ad hominem attack concerning another poster's intelligence you might at least try spelling his/her handle correctly.

              1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                Facepalm

                Re: "Maybe they should check Artic Fox for brain death"

                "If you wish to post an ad hominem attack...." is "ad hominem" the new buzz phrase in hippy land? Do you all sit down and get told which "long words to use this week"? Hilarious! If you post such nonsense as trying to blame A$$nut's current predicament on Bush then don't be surprised when you get accused of a low IQ.

                Obambi was inaugerated as Prez in January 20, 2009, six months before the airstrikes that formed the basis of the "Collateral Murder" vid, which was released with the rest of the documents stolen by Manning between April and November 2010. Manning was arrested in May 2010. The Swedish authorities started the investigations into A$$nut's Dikileaks problems in August 2010. Now, concentrate, this is the math bit - which number is bigger, 2009 or 2010?

                The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch. Trying to pretend otherwise is simply beyond childish.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: "Maybe they should check Artic Fox for brain death"

                  "hippy land"

                  "A$$nut"

                  "Obambi"

                  "Dikileaks"

                  " simply beyond childish"

                  Indeed.

                2. Local G
                  Unhappy

                  "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                  And the whole American sub prime housing bubble happened completely under George Bush's watch. Ask the citizens of Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Iceland, Ireland (and soon France and England) who is responsible for a greater threat to their existence: Julian Assange or Alan Greenspan.

                  Except for you, we are over the video that Julian released. However, we may NEVER get over the damage that Greenspan did to the world economy during his tenure as Chairman of the Fed. Please don't tell us that you know that the economy will recover by such and such date.

                  1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                    FAIL

                    Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                    "And the whole American sub prime housing bubble happened completely under George Bush's watch...." Straight out of Socialist Weekly! But if you happened to look at the FACTS instead of just repeating the dogma you have been spoonfed, you would KNOW the subprime mess was caused by Democrat vote-buying. Indeed, it can be traced as far back as the rewrites of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 by Bill Clinton, along with changes pushed by the White House in the late 1990s. Bush repeatedly warned that Democrat policy in the Democrat-dominated Congress was building a bubble. As early as Bush's first budget, written in 2001 and years before the bubble burst, Bush called runaway subprime lending by the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "a potential problem" and warned of "strong repercussions in financial markets." But the Democrats, especialy Barney Frank, protected Mae and Mac and tried to hide how they fudged the figures, because it allowed them to bribe poor families with "cheap" mortgages, those poor families often being in the 47% mentioned by Romney.

                    In November 2003, just two months after Frank said "I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis," Bush's top economist, Gregory Mankiw, warned that ".....The enormous size of the mortgage-backed securities market means that any problems at the GSEs [Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac] matter for the financial system as a whole....." His proposed reforms were also blocked by Democrats eager to protect a system that garnered them votes.

                    In 2005, after Alan Greenspan pointed out the global implications of the Democrats fudging the books, the Senate Banking Committee issued a bill that would have stopped the matter dead, but Democrats voted along party lines to defeat it. Shortly after the mortgage market collapsed and left the global banking markets in the brown stuff.

                    This did not outright cause the problems in Spain, Greece, Portugal, etc, but EXPOSED how they had not followed good financial policies (indeed, they broke their own European rules!) as they were too busy living on credit in the socialist European dream. In Greece's case this included deliberately fudging the books just to get on the European dreamtrain in the first place. When the cost of credit went up they were stuffed because of their borrowing habits, not because of Bush or Greenspan nor even directly by the Dummicrats, but by their own stupidity. And what is the European socialists' answer? Give the same people that created the mess in Europe MORE power so they can make a federated European superstate! I don't mind as long as the Germans pay for it (as they are doing now), but I won't support the UK being lumbered with it, and I won't let them pull the wool over my eyes and blame it on Bush.

                    If you want to believe that then go ahead, just don't be surprised if, when you to try dodging Obambi's part in the A$$nut farce by trying to segway off into some diatribe about Bush "breaking" Europe, you get called for saying something that is simply too stupid for words. When the US do issue a warrant for A$$nut's extradition it will be most probably be by the Obama administration. Unless Romney gets in, in which case he will simply pick up where Obama left off.

                    We need a new "Uberfail" icon for Local Dupe, please. Maybe one of a donkey's head wearing blinkers?

                    1. This post has been deleted by its author

                    2. Local G
                      Coat

                      Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                      In 20 of the 28 years, from January 1981 to January 2009, Republican Presidents wielded the veto pen in Washington. That is to say Reagan, Bush, Sr. and Bush Jr could have prevented any bill passed by Congress from becoming law. I don't remember seeing that Barney Frank or any other Democrat had a gun to heads of these presidents preventing them from vetoing anything.

                      In the last 6 years of the Clinton Administration, Republicans controlled the both the House and Senate. No bill reached Clinton's desk except that the Republicans passed it.

                      Forget Barney Frank, Bill Clinton, and the dull normal George W. Bush when it comes to blame for the sub prime bubble. It was Greenspan. Who later noted, "I really didn't get it until very late in 2005 and 2006." Time magazine placed him third on a list of 25 people to blame for the financial crisis"

                      Here are the top 6: (see any Dems?)

                      BLAMEWORTHY

                      Angelo Mozilo

                      Phil Gramm

                      Alan Greenspan

                      Chris Cox

                      American Consumers

                      Hank Paulson

                      "In 2000, Greenspan raised interest rates several times; these actions were believed by many to have caused the bursting of the dot-com bubble. However, according to Nobel laureate Paul Krugman "he didn't raise interest rates to curb the market's enthusiasm; he didn't even seek to impose margin requirements on stock market investors. Instead, he waited until the bubble burst, as it did in 2000, then tried to clean up the mess afterward."

                      I (moi) pointed that out in a comment to Krugman in his New York Times blog 3 years ago. The fact that Greenspan did not raise margin requirements before he made his 1997 idiot remark about 'irrational exuberance' was criminal.

                      The repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act was passed by the Republican controlled House and Senate.

                      There has been a Republican Chairman of the Federal Reserve System since 1987.

                      If you want to blame the bubble on something other than Republicans or Democrats, be my guest.

                      "In 2005, after Alan Greenspan pointed out the global implications of the Democrats fudging the books," Then "I really didn't get it until very late in 2005 and 2006." If he didn't get it till 2006, your quote is quite worthless. Maybe you better link me to Greenspan pointing out the global implications of the Democrats fudging the books? Gratzi.

                      "Shortly after (2005) the mortgage market collapsed" What? Did you want the bubble too inflate even more? More sub prime mortgages, more MBSs, more tranches, more CDSs? And you and the missus could have traded your house for a couple of those gorgeous Dutch tulip bulbs. Ah, what might have been!

                      But your gargantuan ignorance is getting me giddy. I have to go.

                      The uberfail icon you want should be a picture of you banging on your head, trying to get it to work again.

                      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                        FAIL

                        Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                        Ah, a Local Dupe fantasy - like Disney on acid!

                        ".... from January 1981 to January 2009, Republican Presidents wielded the veto..." Cough*BillClinton*cough. Sorry, didn't want to draw attention to the 42nd Prez and the fact he served as such from 1993 to 2001, it might make your whole argument look just stupid.

                        ".....It was Greenspan....." Yes, because he was in control at Freddie and Fannie, giving out those cheap mortgages to the poor (Democrat) voters, and fudging the books to hide the bubble. Oh, hold on a sec, that was Barnie Frank!

                        ".....Time magazine....." Oh puh-lease! If you are going to quote from a rag make sure it's not one that even lefty-liberals like The Guardian's Glenn Greenwald regularly savage for its biased and innaccurate articles. TBH, if you'd quoted "the Beano" it would carry as much weight.

                        "....But your gargantuan ignorance is getting me giddy....." I suspect it is either the collossal amount of denial you have to live with to function that is making you dizzy, or some illegal substance. Or more likely both.

                        1. Local G
                          Happy

                          Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                          Matt Bryant says:"".... from January 1981 to January 2009, Republican Presidents wielded the veto..." Cough*BillClinton*cough. Sorry, didn't want to draw attention to the 42nd Prez and the fact he served as such from 1993 to 2001, it might make your whole argument look just stupid."

                          That in response to LG's: "In 20 of the 28 years, from January 1981 to January 2009, Republican Presidents wielded the veto pen in Washington. That is to say Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr could have prevented any bill passed by Congress from becoming law."

                          20 of 28 years. Reagan 8, Bush Sr 4, Bush Jr 8 equals 20 years. Clinton equals 8 years.

                          That's what happens when you watch 'The Princess and the Frog' on acid too much. I thought you were more of a 'Peter Pan' guy.

                          You may withdraw your ill conceived and dull reply

                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                            Facepalm

                            Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                            ".....20 of 28 years. Reagan 8, Bush Sr 4, Bush Jr 8 equals 20 years. Clinton equals 8 years....." Except those were the important eight years originally mentioned, when Clinton started the proces of creating the bubble with the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995. You should have gone all the way back to Lincoln and claimed that meant Bill Clinton was only eight years out of 151 years, it would be just as stupid.

                            Look, these little evasions of yours are just exposing the fact you know very little outside of the usual leftie screaming points. So, if you're so dead set on not discussing A$$nut, would you like to discuss something that has been in the public eye a bit longer, so there is a chance you will have been spoonfed the correct leftie response? How about if we discuss if you think Obama's mentor Bill Ayers should also be classified as an "enemy" of the US due to his involvement with a terrorist bombing campaign by the Weatherman group in the Seventies? Yes, that should get you shrieking and frothly nicely.

                            1. Local G
                              Megaphone

                              Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                              To recapitulate, the US Treasury is part of the administration of the President. In the Democratic Clinton Administration Roger Altman and Robert Rubin, two known Democrats, served as Secretaries of the Treasury. They performed the typical Treasury duties of collecting taxes and selling bonds to name but two. Only some one as stupid as Matt Drudge would blame them for the disastrous sub-prime housing bubble.

                              Just around the corner from the Treasury is the Federal Reserve System of the US. The Chairman of the System is appointed by the sitting President when the previous Chairman's term has expired. In 1987 the chairmanship came up and the Republican President, Ronald Reagan appointed the Republican economist, Alan Greenspan, to become Chairman of the Fed.

                              The Fed is in charge of monetary policy, which is to say, it determines the interest rates that banks charge their customers. Another important duty is preventing asset bubbles. It was another charge of Republican Alan Greenspan as chairman. Prevent Asset Bubbles. Chairman from 1987 to 2006. Chairman for all the 8 years of Clinton's terms. Alas, the asset Bubble BURST in 2007.

                              The man was in charge of market interest rates. The man was in charge of mortgage interest rates. Remember, if the mortgage rates were higher most of the sub-prime borrowers could not afford the mortgages that blew up the bubble in all our faces.

                              THE FED'S CHAIRMAN SETS INTEREST RATES NOT BILL AYRES.

                              1. Local G
                                Facepalm

                                "Clinton could scream all he wanted about Freddy and Fanny

                                But right here is the name of the game.

                                "Even Greenspan, who shared the concerns of Treasury officials about the unrestrained growth of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, refrained for years from using his bully pulpit to urge action. He too wanted a hot housing market."

                                The man who raised and lowered interest rates wanted a hot housing market. 'Nuff said.

                                http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/13/AR2008091302638_3.html

                                1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                  FAIL

                                  Re: "Clinton could scream all he wanted about Freddy and Fanny

                                  ".....The man who raised and lowered interest rates wanted a hot housing market....." He wanted a hot market, not an overheated one. The Democrats justed wanted votes and used Freddie and Fannie as a cruel means of hooking the poor with "affordable housing". The proof is that Barnie Frank moved the oversight committee that oversaw Freddie and Fannie from Congress to a pet department at the Treasury, where he could fudge the figures as long as he liked. Frank defended this move with the quote: "I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness [in the regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] that we have in the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidised housing." Did you get that - he didn't want anyone else studying the books so he hid them away, so his party could gamble with voters' homes and livelyhoods.

                                  When challenged in July 2008, Frank said in an CNBC interview, "I think this is a case where Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound, that they are not in danger of going under. They’re not the best investments these days from the long-term standpoint going back. I think they are in good shape going forward." By that point the bubble was massive and just waiting to burst. Campaign contributions from both Freddie and Fannie no doubt had nothing to do with his complicity either....

                                  But that still is no reason to blame the subprime mess for the European crisis, which was due to poor spending plans run by socialist dreamers. And are you going to somehow link Alan Greenspan to A$$nut's escapades in Sweden? Maybe you want to claim Greenspan switched the condoms? LOL!

                              2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                Happy

                                Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                                ".....The Chairman of the System is appointed by the sitting President when the previous Chairman's term has expired.....It was another charge of Republican Alan Greenspan......" So, let's do a little math on that point - Alan Greenspan was re-appointed every four years by the POTUS between August 1987 until retiring on January 31, 2006, and Democrat Bill Clinton was Prez for eight of those years.... is that eight divided by four stumping you? Would you like me to draw you a diagram? In crayon?

                                "....The Fed is in charge of monetary policy, which is to say, it determines the interest rates that banks charge their customers...." Correct. BUT it was Clinton that removed the safeguards that stopped the banks setting mortgages where the interest payments could rise to silly levels. The rise in interest rates were predicted (George Soros made lots of money off it), yet the Democrats pushed through their mortgage plans so Freddie and Frannie could sell more mortgages to low-income (and in some cases, no income!) voters. When the interest rates rose the Democrat-controlled congress blocked every attempt to stop the bubble and went out of their way to cook the books to hide it. And then fed idiots like you the line that the blame was everyone's but their own. All of which in no way relates to the stupid socialist spending sprees in Europe, nor does it to A$$nut's being labelled an enemy of the States.

                                "....THE FED'S CHAIRMAN SETS INTEREST RATES NOT BILL AYRES." I know. Bill Ayres is a talk radio host and Executive Director and co-founder of World Hunger Year. Bill AYERS was the one that allegedly helped set bombs that killed policemen, talked about needing to "eliminate 25 million Americans who would not conform to the new order" after "the revolution", and later acted as Obama's mentor in Chicago. Was those caps you reflexively frothing, as anticipated? LMAO!

                                BTW, hold onto your hats, I'm told there is a leak doing the rounds on what defence Assange is planning to use in Sweden AND America!

                                1. Local G
                                  Trollface

                                  Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                                  " Alan Greenspan was re-appointed every four years by the POTUS between August 1987 until retiring on January 31, 2006, and Democrat Bill Clinton was Prez for eight of those years.... is that eight divided by four stumping you? Would you like me to draw you a diagram? In crayon?"

                                  Yes, please. Eight what (Clinton years?) divided by four what (presidents?) The answer is two. Two what?

                                  Turtle Doves?

                                  Reagan, appointed him once, Bush Sr once. Bush Jr once. Clinton twice. Five terms. 12 Republican years. 8 Democratic years. And a Conservative Republican chairman of the Fed in a pear tree.

                                  Do you have any evidence that Greenspan ceased to be a conservative Republican economist when he accepted Clinton's appointments? Just asking.

                                  1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                    FAIL

                                    Re: Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                                    ".....Clinton twice..... Do you have any evidence that Greenspan ceased to be a conservative Republican economist when he accepted Clinton's appointments?....." Ah, but what you FAIL (as usual) to do is link Greenspan to any Republican strategy to create a bubble, and then deny that there is evidence that Frank hid one he created by gambling with mortgages. You also FAILED to realise that if Greenspan had been so partisan and bad for the economy WHY would Clinton have re-appointed him twice?

                                    OK, so I was expecting you to fail, but then that is a common thread all your posts. Especially as the original accusation, posted Monday 1st October 2012 19:17 GMT, was that the subprime collapse was the cause of all the European economic woes. I notice you have failed to prove that it was not teh socialist spending policies of those European countries, but what's a little more FAILURE when your whole existance seems to be one big fail?

                                    Now, seeing as we have exposed your massive fail in this conversation, you want to get back to A$$nut so we can carry on laughing at your even more massive fail there? LOL!

                                    1. Local G
                                      Holmes

                                      "Monkey see. Monkey do."

                                      "European Banks Bolster Capital With Shunned Bonds: Mortgages

                                      By Esteban Duarte - Jul 1, 2012 3:00 PM PT

                                      "Spanish and Portuguese banks are leading European lenders in buying back their own mortgage- backed securities at distressed prices to bolster capital and stockpile eligible collateral for European Central Bank loans."

                                      When the Tweedle Dumb banks of Europe saw the money the Tweedle Dee American banks were making from mortgage-backed securities, they immediately set up shop. When the bubble burst in America, it took down the world economy. The sub-prime collapse in America is responsible for the 5 year long recession we're still experiencing and forced the US to import more crap from China and less crap from Europe, exacerbating Europe's economic woes. So it wasn't the socialist spending policies that caused the collapse, it was the American global pyramid scheme what done us in.

                                      Shortly after Greenspan became Chairman of the Fed, the markets crashed. "In the days between October 14 and October 19, 1987, major indexes of market valuation in the United States dropped 30 percent or more." Greenspan handled it very well. Then there was "the Savings and Loans Crisis which created the greatest banking collapse since the Great Depression of 1929. By 1989, over half the Savings and Loans had failed, along with the FSLIC fund that was created to insure their deposits." Again Greenspan was credited with a smooth recovery.

                                      "you FAIL (as usual) to do is link Greenspan to any Republican strategy to create a bubble, and then deny that there is evidence that Frank hid one he created by gambling with mortgages. You also FAILED to realise that if Greenspan had been so partisan and bad for the economy WHY would Clinton have re-appointed him twice?

                                      1) It was never my intention to link Greenspan to any Republican strategy to create a bubble. The only bubbles Republicans enjoy are made by blowing soapy water through a small plastic ring. Greenspan and his goon squad were marching to a different drummer.

                                      2) Barney Frank is only one of 435 Representatives in the US Congress and doesn't have the power to singlehandedly create or hide a bubble. He does have a key to the Member's men's room.

                                      3) Clinton looked back at the way Greenspan and the Fed handled the 2 crises, at the shrinking of the budget deficit and the thriving dotcom sector (not yet considered a bubble) and pulled the trigger.

                                      Some other group besides the Republicans are interested in creating a ginormous bubble in the American and global economies. They were responsible for Freddy and Fanny. They were responsible for the repeal of the juicy parts of Glass-Steagall.

                                      "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? " (Benedict Cumberbatch)

                                      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                        FAIL

                                        Re: "Monkey see. Monkey do."

                                        <Sigh> Local Dupe, the bubble just made the global markets depressed. What killed the European PIIGS's economies was their addiction to credit - bad global economy, credit costs high, nwohere for PIIGS to borrow more cash cheaply. The obvious evidence for this is that the German and UK economies still have their triple-A ratings because they did not spend stupidly quite as bad as the PIIGS (though that moron Brown had a pretty good go at spending all the family silver and left us in a much worse position than Germany).

                                        This was added to by the PIIGS's socialist governments all pushing up average wages (which garnered votes) and encouraged consumer credit booms without actually increasing productivity. In Germany's case, wages were kept relatively in-line with productivity increases, so Germany became the export powerhouse in Europe. For your theory to be correct ("it's all the subprime problem and nothing else") then Germany would need to be as badly hit as Greece, especialy as German banks are some of those worst exposed in the PIIGS countires. Maybe you should read some painfully unbiased BBC news rather than just socialist views:

                                        http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8508136.stm

                                        http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/2010/06/the_case_against_the_euro.html

                                        Whilst you're there, you may also want to look at some bad news for A$$nut and that old extradition thingummy: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19855380

                                        Enjoy!

                                        1. Local G
                                          Coat

                                          Neither a borrower NOR a lender be

                                          Show me who lent the PIIGS money and I will show you Capitalism equally as responsible as Socialism for the problem.

                                          "The bubble just made the global markets depressed. What killed the European PIIGS's economies was their addiction to credit"

                                          The falling tree limb just made the hole in the roof. What made it leak was the rain.

                                          You can make a list as long as the Catalogue of Ships in the Iliad for what killed the PIIGS economies, but the collapse of the Mortgaged Back Securities is the only correct answer: ONE RING RULES THEM ALL.

                                          The unsustainable losses -- well into double digit trillions -- that the banks around the world suffered from the overpriced derivatives they bought which were based on the value of American real estate as it inflated into a never-before-seen bubble.

                                          "From Moody's

                                          Moody's takes multiple actions on German banks' ratings; most outlooks now stable

                                          Frankfurt am Main, June 06, 2012 -- Moody's Investors Service has today taken various rating actions on seven German banks and their subsidiaries, as well as one German subsidiary of a foreign group. As a result, the long-term debt and deposit ratings for six groups and one German subsidiary of a foreign group have declined by one notch, while the ratings for one group were confirmed. Moody's also downgraded the long-term debt and deposit ratings for several subsidiaries of these groups, by up to three notches. At the same time, the short-term ratings for three groups as well as one German subsidiary of a foreign group have been downgraded by one notch, triggered by the long-term rating downgrades.

                                          Further to these actions, Moody's has assigned stable outlooks to the ratings of most German banks. The ratings of two groups and of one German subsidiary of a foreign bank carry negative outlooks, reflecting bank-specific vulnerabilities to a possible further deterioration of the environment.

                                          The ongoing rating review for Deutsche Bank AG and its subsidiaries will be concluded together with the reviews for other global firms with large capital markets operations.

                                          Today's rating actions are driven by the increased risk of further shocks emanating from the euro area debt crisis, in combination with the banks' limited loss-absorption capacity. The key drivers of today's rating actions on German banks are:

                                          - Increased risks to asset quality for the banks affected by today's actions due to their exposures to asset classes prone to further deterioration if downside risks from the euro area debt crisis and the weakened global economic outlook materialise.

                                          - Limited loss-absorption capacity, given the comparatively small equity cushions relative to total assets (not risk-weighted) and low pre-provision earnings. As a result, many German banks have limited capacity to absorb losses out of earnings, raising the potential that capital could diminish in a stress scenario.

                                          Moody's notes that several factors have caused the ratings of many German banks to decline by less than for other European banks and also less than the initial maximum guidance communicated on 15 February 2012. One mitigating factor is the comparatively benign operating environment in the German home market, supported by below-average unemployment, low household and corporate debt levels and the general resilience of the German economy. Another critical mitigating factor is the modest funding risk of many German banks, underpinned by broadly matched maturity profiles, recurring access to intra-sector funds (for the Landesbanks and the central institutions of the German cooperative banking sector), and improved liquidity buffers. Moreover, Moody's recognises the steps German banks have taken to address past asset quality challenges; however, as stated above, significant downside risks remain.

                                          Todays' rating actions have no impact on debt issued by Landesbanks that is guaranteed by state governments (grandfathered debt). The ratings for this debt continue to reflect the applicable sub-sovereign long-term and short-term ratings."

                                          http://www.zerohedge.com/news/moodys-downgrades-six-german-bank-groups-and-their-subsidiaries-three-notches

                                          Tell me about Germany's triple-A ratings after you read it.

                                          Finally, about the relative strength of the UK, Germany and France. One word covers both German and France: Triage. Germany and France have the two largest economies on the Continent and must be saved even at the great expense of the others. Elementary, my dear Bryant.

                                          As far as the UK goes, two words covers them: Printing press. The UK printed its way to economic recovery. Just like the US.

                                          1. Local G

                                            No economy is an island entire unto itself. (Not even China's)

                                            Is this where you got your statement that:" the German and UK economies still have their triple-A ratings because they did not spend stupidly quite as bad as the PIIGS ?"

                                            "GERMANY"S AAA RATING & STABLE OUTLOOK AFFIRMED

                                            Rating agency Fitch has just affirmed Germany's credit rating at AAA with a stable outlook.

                                            Fitch said Germany's underlying economic situation was good, pointing out that it is the only major advanced economy which had a lower unemployment rate in the first half of this year than in 2007.

                                            The affirmation reflects Germany's longstanding credit strengths and robust economic performance over the past two years. Against the background of fragile global recovery and the intensification of the eurozone crisis, Germany has recorded strong GDP growth and a declining trend in unemployment, partly as a result of previous structural reforms.

                                            Several factors contribute to Germany's solid macroeconomic position. Germany is the only major advanced economy which had lower unemployment rate in H112 than it had in 2007. The level of German GDP has increased by a cumulative 5.8% since the beginning of 2010, compared to 2.3% for the eurozone. The monetary conditions set for the entire eurozone by the ECB are commodative for Germany given the strong cyclical position of its economy. As a consequence of safe-haven capital inflows, yields are also at extremely low levels. Furthermore, Germany has a strong net external creditor position and a large, albeit gradually declining, current account surplus."

                                            You can find the rest here http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/aug/08/eurozone-crisis-bank-of-england-greece#block-502268e295cb77f057201c0d @14:25 BST

                                            .

                                            "Credit rating agencies such as Fitch Ratings have been subject to criticism in the wake of large losses in the collateralized debt obligation (CDO) market that occurred despite being assigned top ratings by the CRAs. For instance, losses on $340.7 million worth of collateralized debt obligations (CDO) issued by Credit Suisse Group added up to about $125 million, despite being rated AAA by Fitch."

                                            If Draghi, Bernanke, or Osborne asked the 3 rating agencies, Standard & Poor's, Moody's Investors and Fitch, to atone for their avaricious deceit in rating the CDOs during the inflation of the sub-prime bubble by repeating that same deceit today by exaggerating the ratings of the countries whose well being is sine qua non to any recovery whatsoever, do you have any doubt what their answer would be?

                                            Do you have any doubt that Draghi, Bernanke, or Osborne, or their agents, would ask such a thing?

                                            In October 2007 the Dow had a close of 14,164, an all time high. Yesterday the Dow closed at 13,610. Do you think that's an honest measure of whatever it is that the Dow Average pretends to measure?

                                            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                              FAIL

                                              Re: No economy is an island entire unto itself. (Not even China's)

                                              <ZZzzzzzz> Crap, I actually did fall asleep reading that post! Local Dupe, I know you're just thrashing around in angst at the thought of A$$nut being destined for a Swedish prison cell followed shortly after by an Amercian one, but trying to rewrite history by saying the PIIGS only failed due to alleged backscratching between ratings agencies and a few politicians is not sillines beyond comparison but also denial on both counts. The PIIGS got f*cked by popularist socialist politicians both in their own countries and in the Democratic party in the US, and A$$nut is going to go to an US prison eventually due to the process that has been kicked off by a Democrat administration. Enjoy!

                                              1. Local G
                                                Pint

                                                "<ZZzzzzzz> Crap, I actually did fall asleep reading that post!"

                                                Dude, you fell asleep from the Guinness Extra Stout just like you always do.

                                                1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                  Happy

                                                  Re: "<ZZzzzzzz> Crap, I actually did fall asleep reading that post!"

                                                  ".....Guinness Extra Stout....." Haven't drunk Guiness in the UK for years, it just doesn't taste right compared to the proper Irish stuff. But I suggest St Jules should ask his buddies in the Ecuadorean embassy to order him some in as he won't be able to drink ANY alcohol other than jail hooch soon!

                                          2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                            Facepalm

                                            Re: Neither a borrower NOR a lender be

                                            <Yawn> Sorry, nearly fell asleep waiting for you to make a pertinent point.

                                            "....The falling tree limb just made the hole in the roof. What made it leak was the rain...." A rather pointless response. In your scenario you need both the hole and the rain to cause water damage to the inside of the house. Simply saying one wthout the other caused the damage is obviously incorrect. The problems with the PIIGSs' economies were that the economic downturn caused by subprime mortgage bubble bursting meant the price of credit went up at a time when they their policies meant they were reliant on the continued availability of cheap credit. Your own reply in paragraph fourteen states that Germany was different due to better economic policies, so I will have to assume that is you stating you were wrong just not admitting it.

                                            BTW, do you think A$$nut thinks he can beat Abu Hamza's eight years of extardition blocking lawfare when Sweden apparently has a much more streamlined extradition system?

                                            1. Local G
                                              Mushroom

                                              You wouldn't know a pertinent point if it bit you on your bottom.

                                              "the economic downturn caused by subprime mortgage bubble bursting meant the price of credit went up at a time when they their policies meant they were reliant on the continued availability of cheap credit." So The Price Of Credit Went Up Because The Sub-Prime Mortgage Bubble Burst.

                                              "At A Time When..." Do you mean that period of time in 2009 when the Earth was spinning off its axis until Bernanke started printing money?

                                              Why do you pretend that doesn't mean exactly what I have been saying?

                                              Before the bubble burst: Financial institutions flush with assets, cash and liquid CDOs and MBSs.

                                              After the bubble burst: Financial institutions suffer huge losses, CDOs and MBSs no longer liquid, cash assets needed for day to day operations. Receivables slower and later. Supply of money available to be lent out shrinks considerably, demand for loans expands.

                                              Law of Supply and Demand affects Price of Credit.

                                              If you want to blame the 'socialist' governments of the PIIGS, fine. I don't. The extremely 'unsocialist' behavior of the the large financial institutions on Wall St, and in London, Paris, Frankfurt, etc. are more responsible for today's mess. It's not debatable.

                                              "Germany was different due to better economic policies" "The obvious evidence for this is that the German and UK economies still have their triple-A ratings."

                                              If the CRAs want to assign an AAA rating to Germany, they should make it clear to all that they're grading on the curve (in our 5 year old recession) and not the way they ordinarily do.

                                              Your argument that the bursting of the sub-prime bubble had nothing to do with the price of credit is a lot like saying that dropping the atomic bomb out of the bomb bay had nothing to do the nuclear explosion that destroyed Hiroshima.

                                              "Twinkle, twinkle little Matt. How I wonder where you're at?"

                                              1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                FAIL

                                                Re: You wouldn't know a pertinent point if it bit you on your bottom.

                                                Whatever, Local Dupe, you're just boring now. First you insist that the crash that drove up the price of credit is all Wall Streets fault, then you insist that the fact the PIIGS needed cheap credit was Wall Streets' fault too! Hilarious! It's the same old Dem mantra - "Nothing is our fault, blame it all on Bush/Reagan/Wall Street!" I must say that trying to stretch it to excuse the actions of your comrades in Europe is new.

                                                Next, you'll insist that A$$nut can't be guilty of stealing and selling US secrets because it's The Man's fault for having secrets in the first place! Oh, hold on a sec - I think you did propose that silliness here not too long ago.

                                                1. Local G
                                                  Stop

                                                  They call it a 'bubble'

                                                  Cause it's just like the inside of your head.

                                                  While bubbles are inflating, things look great and everyone invests his life savings (just like his neighbor, co-worker, friend, etc) in fantastic ventures which soon will make them all very rich. Some eager investors actually borrow money at the going rate to invest money that is not theirs in these 'can't lose' deals.

                                                  After the last uninvested dollar is invested, a couple of traders sell some holdings to take profits. That early selling, like the butterfly wings flapping in the Himalayas, snowballs and soon everybody with a profit decides to sell, the early birds get out and the whole thing unwinds.

                                                  In 1929, the margin rate was 10%. (Investors put up 10% of the price of the stock they bought and owed 90%. When the price of their stock declined 10% from the purchase price, their broker sold them out. That triggered more margin calls, which in turned triggered more calls.)

                                                  This time around the sub-prime mortgage bubble burst when some mortgage holders couldn't pay their monthly mortgage payment or even walked away from their homes. Without these payments, the MBSs, which owned the mortgages in default, couldn't pay the interest it owed to it's large corporate investors who owned tranches of the MBS.

                                                  "It was the socialist governments in the PIIGS countries that caused all the trouble in Europe", says Matt Bryant, tongue in shriek. He knows all too well that no one held a gun at the heads of the bankers from New York, London, Paris, Frankfurt to make now irrecoverable loans to socialistic governments in Greece, Spain, Portugal, etc.

                                                  No, Matt, it was Fed who permitted the lax creation of mortgages, not just for the sub-prime borrower, but for richies and their million dollar homes. And with all the mortgage paper that was created the Fed allowed Wall Street to package it together into derivatives, slice them into smaller units and peddle them any place in the world that had an airport.

                                                  When your grandchildren are old enough, you can tell them this.

                                                  1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                    FAIL

                                                    Re: They call it a 'bubble'

                                                    "While bubbles are inflating, things look great and everyone invests his life savings....." Yes, that's pretty much how all cons work - sell a good story, hook the marks, then run away with their cash. Of course, not everyone falls for a con. And the "con" of the subprime mortgages was not only legal, thanks to the regulation of the Democrats, but also warned about (by Bush) and then still defended by the Democrats!

                                                    ".....He knows all too well that no one held a gun at the heads of the bankers from New York, London, Paris, Frankfurt....." Just stop for a second and consider that no-one was holding a gun to the heads of the PIIGS socialist politicians that built their economies on cheap credit. It is completely astounding that you cannot see that the Europeans put themselves in the position. They had a choice - build responsibly or borrow lots of credit, and they CHOSE the credit option because it was easier.

                                                    ".....any place in the world that had an airport....." You really do need to stop shooting yourself in the foot with every post! One of the biggest scandals in Spain is the ludicrous number of airport projects run up by socialists in the "good times" of cheap credit, that have now been abandoned half-built or closed since the cost of credit went up. Please go read some of the following links before even thinking of displaying such obtuseness again:

                                                    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/10/spanish-politician-accused-megalomania-monument

                                                    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12/ciudad-real-international_n_1667526.html

                                                    http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/nov2009/gb20091111_227985.htm

                                                    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18277681

                                                    1. Local G
                                                      Thumb Down

                                                      Re: They call it a 'bubble'

                                                      <<" the "con" of the subprime mortgages was not only legal, thanks to the regulation of the Democrats, but also warned about (by Bush)">> MB

                                                      Wikipedia: "In 1992, President George H.W. Bush signed the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992." There were 44 Republicans in the Senate then, enough to filibuster the Act. And Bush could have vetoed it. Barney Frank did not threaten to come out of the closet if the President didn't sign the Act.

                                                      <<"They had a choice - build responsibly or borrow lots of credit, and they CHOSE the credit option">>MB

                                                      So the PIIGS just stood there hat in hand and said "Give us your money."

                                                      " the first obligation on the part of the lender, is to suffer the borrower to use and enjoy the thing loaned during the time of the loan, according to the original intention."

                                                      The Original Intention. Do you think the bankers, who had everything to lose, asked the borrowing nations, who had nothing to lose, what they were going to do with the the proceeds of the loan? Did they get a satisfactory answer? Or did the bankers just give the PIIGS a blank check?

                                                      <<"One of the biggest scandals in Spain is the ludicrous number of airport projects run up by socialists in the "good times" of cheap credit.">> MB

                                                      The Pain of Spain is you ranting about airports

                                                      Here's what I said: "package it together into derivatives, slice them into smaller units and peddle them any place in the world that had an airport."

                                                      My reference was to the worthless MBS which were being sold to any tin pot dictator who had a couple of million in cash and a dirt runway.

                                                      Have you tried to get it together with meditation?

                                                      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                        FAIL

                                                        Re: Re: They call it a 'bubble'

                                                        So, I point out the responsibility of the PIIGS governments and their spending policies base don cheap credit, and you somehow STILL try and blame it on the Bush? Did Bush travel around Europe writing out their fiscal programs for them all individually? You mention intention, well you have to ask what was the intention of running up a massive deficit with social programs if not to buy votes? And then when I point out concrete examples of their rediculous programs you just ignore it and start whittering on about MBS? Truly you are blinded by your politics.

                                                        "......Have you tried to get it together with meditation?" Your record of debunked arguments, evasions and denial show it is you that is very obviously living in a drug-addled fantasy World. I seriously worry for your personal safety when A$$nut does get locked up.

                                                        1. Local G
                                                          Childcatcher

                                                          The wicked Spanish socialists and their abominable airports!

                                                          So, Sherlock, you eliminated the impossible and what remained was the truth. Yep, the Spanish airports is what done in the global economy.

                                                          Pay no attention to these 14 digit figures.

                                                          http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/LD13Dj05.html

                                                          Someone emailed me - either your wife or your shrink - and said you were on the brink and could I let you win this one. So I'm not even going to mention the fact that the loans for the airports probably had a lag time of 3 or 4 years and were contracted during the high and palmy days of the early Bush bubble.

                                                          Forget that I said that.

                                                          You win.

                                                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                            FAIL

                                                            Re: The wicked Spanish socialists and their abominable airports!

                                                            "..... So I'm not even going to mention the fact that the loans for the airports probably had a lag time of 3 or 4 years and were contracted during the high and palmy days of the early Bush bubble....." Neatly ignoring the airports that COMPLETED and were opened long before being abandoned due to no-one using them. Now, Local Dupe ignoring facts, where have we seen that before? Oh, just about EVERY post he makes.

                                                        2. This post has been deleted by its author

                                                        3. Local G
                                                          FAIL

                                                          Seen this one, Matt? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17549970

                                                          "Spain's story illustrates the fact that the eurozone's problems run far deeper than the issue of excessive borrowing by ill-disciplined governments."

                                                          "Greece, Portugal and Italy all had way too much debt."

                                                          "But the Spanish government's borrowing was under control - that is, it ran a balanced budget on average every year until the eve of the 2008 financial crisis."

                                                          "And as Spain's economy grew rapidly before 2008, its debt-to-GDP ratio was falling. Germany's, by contrast, continued to rise."

                                                          And the airports aren't even a federal problem.

                                                          "In the boom years they (regional governments) spent lavishly on new infrastructure and big projects like airports and swimming pools."

                                                          "Valencia, which built an airport at which not a single plane has landed, has now asked the central government in Madrid for financial aid."

                                                          "So too has Spain's largest regional economy Catalonia, as well as Murcia and Andalucia."

                                                          If Barsetshire borrowed money for airports and swimming pools and couldn't pay for them, do you blame the UK for it?

                                                          All was well until 2008, when the MBSs melted down. The opposite of your sad argument.

                                                          Have you thought of finding another line of work?

                                                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                            FAIL

                                                            Re: Seen this one, Matt? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17549970

                                                            "......"In the boom years they (regional governments) spent lavishly on new infrastructure and big projects like airports and swimming pools."....." Yes, and you completely failed to read the bit about which political persuasion those overspending local governments belonged to. I won't give you a chance to guess as you'll just embarrass yourself. Let's just say they were from the left-of-center and leave it at that.

                                                2. Local G
                                                  Facepalm

                                                  Well, I sure got that one upside-down.

                                                  The pertinent point is at the top of your head. You can down vote me for that. Duh.

                                                  One of my neighbors is world class at channeling the departed. I asked her if she could channel Freud and ask him about someone with a severe case of Assangexia Nervosa.

                                                  If you wash your hands several times an hour, it's probably just guilt.

                                                  1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                    Facepalm

                                                    Re: Well, I sure got that one upside-down.

                                                    ".....If you wash your hands several times an hour, it's probably just guilt." Well, I wonder how many times A$$nut has to wash his hands when he thinks of the sh*t he dropped Manning in. Of course, that preposes that A$$nut has a consceince, which is doubtful given his remarks about not caring about exposing informers to the Taleban.

                                                    1. Local G
                                                      Mushroom

                                                      Re: "when he thinks of the sh*t he dropped Manning in"

                                                      Isn't that called 'the ends justify the means?" Like dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

                                                      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                        FAIL

                                                        Re: Re: "when he thinks of the sh*t he dropped Manning in"

                                                        ".....Like dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Comparing the actions of an egotistical, paranoid, confidence man out to make a quick buck, with the carefully and painfully deliberated action to end a war that had already cost millions of lives? That's hitting a new and desperate low even for you.

                                                        1. Local G
                                                          Meh

                                                          "an egotistical, paranoid, confidence man out to make a quick buck,"

                                                          Can you point me to some link describing the increase in Assange's personal fortune since Wikileaks put up the cables and videos the US government objects to?

                                                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                            FAIL

                                                            Re: "an egotistical, paranoid, confidence man out to make a quick buck,"

                                                            "Can you point me to some link describing the increase in Assange's personal fortune...." You're making this waaaaaay too easy!

                                                            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8225947/Julian-Assange-paid-two-thirds-of-WikiLeaks-salary-budget.html

                                                            http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/10/10/wikileaks-angers-supporters-with-donation-paywall-for-leaked-material/

                                                            Why do you think your Holy St Jules was crying so much when the US authorities blocked creditcard payments? Maybe it meant he couldn't afford condoms.....

                                                        2. Local G
                                                          Trollface

                                                          "That's hitting a new and desperate low even for you."

                                                          I wasn't aware there was a 'Robert's Rules of Comparisons'. Live and learn.

                                                          On another subject, you should like this:

                                                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihd7ofrwQX0

                                                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                                            Happy

                                                            Re: "That's hitting a new and desperate low even for you."

                                                            I'm surprised you even saw the Gillard video, I would have thought you'd be busier self-abusing over this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoFrBIKCwBU&feature=related

                                                            Oh, hold on a sec! If A$$nut is so sure Ecuador is going to keep him safe, why would he be suing Gillard and asking for more impossible guarantees...? LAMO!

                                                            1. Local G

                                                              Re: "That's hitting a new and desperate low even for you."

                                                              When you go to Australia, you must count yourself a Liberal. Doesn't it make you feel all icky? New low and stuff.

                                                              "Why would he be suing Gillard?"

                                                              I'm more interested in what she said. I didn't understand a word of it.

                                                              Maybe he's suing her to help Labor MPs who want to elect a new leader.

                                                            2. Local G
                                                              Facepalm

                                                              This kind of innovation is the reason...

                                                              the Chinese are eating our breakfast, lunch and soon our dinner.

                                                              http://bbs.wenxuecity.com/cooking/1160651.html

                                                              Why don't you ever think of anything, Matt Bryant?

                        2. Local G
                          FAIL

                          Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                          "What the U.S. Department of Treasury Does:"

                          "The U.S. Department of Treasury manages Federal finances once the President, Congress and the Office of Management and Budget set fiscal policy. It does this by collecting taxes via the I.R.S., and financing the public debt through Treasury bonds. It also advises the Office of the President on financial, trade and tax policy.

                          The Treasury Department is also responsible for printing postage stamps, currency and coinage through the U.S. Mint. It also enforces Federal finance and tax laws, as well as investigates and prosecutes tax evaders, counterfeiters, and forgers. As part of this function it aids the war on terrorism by identifying and freezing funds of terrorists."

                          The following page is off the internet that shows an idiot such as yourself that the FEDERAL RESERVE collects information about outstanding mortgages in this country. Alan Greenspan has seen such data since he became Chairman of the Fed in 1987. The Fed has nothing to do with Congress. And nothing to do with the US Treasury.

                          http://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/releases/mortoutstand/current.htm

                          "THE BOARD OF GOVENORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM"

                          the Fed News

                          & Events Monetary

                          Policy Banking

                          Information & Regulation Payment

                          Systems Economic

                          Research & Data Consumer

                          Information Community

                          Development Reporting

                          Forms Publications

                          Data Download ProgramResearch DataSurveys and ReportsFederal Reserve BulletinResearch Staff and ResourcesStaff StudiesWorking PapersOther Research

                          Home > Economic Research & Data > Statistics and Historical Data

                          PrintMortgage Debt Outstanding

                          Current Release About Release Dates

                          Release Date: September 2012

                          Mortgage Debt Outstanding (1.54)

                          Millions of dollars, end of period Type of holder and property 2008 2009 2010 2011Q2 2011Q3 2011Q4 2012Q1 2012Q2

                          1 All holders 14,672,829 14,386,625 13,730,184 13,544,517 13,461,791 13,402,194 13,292,581 13,216,356

                          By type of property

                          2 One- to four- family residences 11,133,064 10,926,508 10,422,777 10,281,963 10,223,794 10,167,078 10,081,043 10,028,032

                          3 Multifamily residences 1 843,936 853,520 842,773 841,808 842,705 847,660 846,251 849,652

                          4 Nonfarm, nonresidential 2,562,789 2,474,577 2,324,206 2,277,309 2,250,610 2,241,520 2,218,105 2,190,242

                          5 Farm 133,039 132,020 140,428 143,438 144,681 145,936 147,183 148,430

                          By type of holder

                          6 Major financial institutions 5,044,358 4,778,069 4,583,535 4,435,574 4,433,818 4,448,163 4,385,259 4,390,512

                          7 Commercial banks 2 3,841,344 3,818,641 3,651,215 3,521,933 3,515,827 3,529,523 3,546,618 3,551,813

                          8 One- to four-family 2,247,110 2,261,499 2,202,728 2,113,119 2,126,417 2,147,003 2,153,972 2,163,551

                          9 Multifamily residences 215,118 211,035 197,149 192,508 189,834 189,188 195,561 197,031

                          10 Nonfarm, nonresidential 1,328,516 1,296,007 1,197,438 1,161,850 1,144,862 1,138,361 1,141,857 1,135,746

                          11 Farm 50,600 50,100 53,900 54,456 54,714 54,971 55,228 55,485

                          12 Savings Institutions 3 860,586 633,327 614,839 590,881 589,369 586,160 501,982 498,160

                          13 One- to four-family 666,338 448,633 430,480 412,845 410,876 407,032 346,807 345,623

                          14 Multifamily residences 65,199 59,897 61,248 60,999 61,724 62,095 50,659 50,773

                          15 Nonfarm, nonresidential 128,130 123,913 122,217 116,152 115,830 116,039 102,818 100,064

                          16 Farm 919 884 894 885 939 994 1,698 1,700

                          17 Life insurance companies etc. etc.

                          "What the federal reserve system does"

                          "Preventing asset bubbles" (the subprime mortgage bubble was an asset bubble, Dude.)

                          The board of directors of each Federal Reserve Bank District also has regulatory and supervisory responsibilities. For example, a member bank (private bank) is not permitted to give out too many loans to people who cannot pay them back. This is because too many defaults on loans will lead to a bank run. If the board of directors has judged that a member bank is performing or behaving poorly, it will report this to the Board of Governors. This policy is described in United States Code:[50]

                          Each Federal reserve bank shall keep itself informed of the general character and amount of the loans and investments of its member banks with a view to ascertaining whether undue use is being made of bank credit for the speculative carrying of or trading in securities, real estate, or commodities, or for any other purpose inconsistent with the maintenance of sound credit conditions; and, in determining whether to grant or refuse advances, rediscounts, or other credit accommodations, the Federal reserve bank shall give consideration to such information. The chairman of the Federal reserve bank shall report to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System any such undue use of bank credit by any member bank, together with his recommendation. Whenever, in the judgment of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, any member bank is making such undue use of bank credit, the Board may, in its discretion, after reasonable notice and an opportunity for a hearing, suspend such bank from the use of the credit facilities of the Federal Reserve System and may terminate such suspension or may renew it from time to time.

                          The punishment for making false statements or reports that overvalue an asset is also stated in the U.S. Code:[51]

                          Whoever knowingly makes any false statement or report, or willfully overvalues any land, property or security, for the purpose of influencing in any way...shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.

                          These aspects of the Federal Reserve System are the parts intended to prevent or minimize speculative asset bubbles, which ultimately lead to severe market corrections. The recent bubbles and corrections in energies, grains, equity and debt products and real estate cast doubt on the efficacy of these controls."

                          As you can tell whatever happened with Fanny Freddy and mortgage interest rates from 1993 to 2001 can only be laid at the feet of Alan Greenspan. How F&F made their mortgages and the down payments they required and the appraisal of the property they loaned on and varifying the facts on the mortgage applications was all the responsibility of the Fed and its Chairman.

                          Only a partisan know-nothing idiot like you would try to blame it on the Dems.

                          But before you have one of your Grand Mal Hissy Fits, remember it goes perfectly with my theory that this housing bubble was intentional.

                          Greenspan for the inflation of the bubble. Bernanke (Dr Depression) for the bust.

                          You really should up your dose of Valium and try to get your GED

                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                            Happy

                            Re: Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                            ".....As you can tell whatever happened with Fanny Freddy and mortgage interest rates from 1993 to 2001 can only be laid at the feet of Alan Greenspan...." Completely wrong. Greenspan may have been responsible for interest rates, but he wasn't for the mortgages that were given out by Freddie and Fannie after Bill Clinton removed the controls that stopped them issuing silly mortgages. It also wasn't Greenspan that tried to cover up the true size of the bubble as Barnie Frank did, with the connivance of the Democrat party. IT IS Democrat dogma to blame it on everyone else, though.

                            ".....remember it goes perfectly with my theory that this housing bubble was intentional....." That hilarious conspiracy theory always makes me laugh! Why would the banks with the most to lose help trash the economy? I'm pretty sure neither the Republicans or the Democrats actually wanted the crash, so I can't see who you paranoia thinks would benefit? George Soros? The little green men dancing in your head?

                            But you still have to show the readers how this in any way was to blame for the socialist spending policies in Europe. The crash simply cut them off from the credit they required because they never tried to balance the books. Indeed, in Greece's case the books were kept fudged to hide that fact. Oh, and you have also yet to get back on to the topic of your Holy St Jules and his attempts to hide from justice.

                            I'm told that the Police reported one of A$$nut's groupies/lawyers took a pair of orange overalls into the Ecuadorean embassy. Theory is A$$nut is planning to walk out of the Ecuadorean embassy in the overalls as a publicity stunt if the Ecuadoreans hand him over to the British Police. LOL!

                  2. digismith

                    Re: "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                    Incorrect

                    As you do not understand how the US government works. Blaming Obama or Bush or Regan or any sitting president for ecconomic issues is like blaming the iceberg for sinking the Titanic.

                    Title Viii of the Civil Rights act of 1968 Signed by a democrat.

                    the Addition of the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 signed by a Democrat

                    The changes made in 1989 and 1991 allowed for greater transparancy signed by ... a REPUBLICAN.

                    Legislative changes 1992 Signed by a Democrat.

                    Although minor amendments were made directly to the Community Reinvestment Act concerning the consideration of minority and female owned institutions & partnerships during evaluations first established in 1991, other portions of the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 indirectly affected the CRA practices at the time in requiring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government sponsored enterprises that purchase and securitize mortgages, to devote a percentage of their lending to support affordable housing.[4]

                    Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 signed by ... A DEMOCRAT

                    Regulatory changes 1995 signed by A DEMOCRAT

                    in 1995 BILLY CLINTON (A DEMOCRAT) In July 1993, President Bill Clinton asked regulators to reform the CRA in order to make examinations more consistent, clarify performance standards, and reduce cost and compliance burden.[51] Robert Rubin, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, under President Clinton, explained that this was in line with President Clinton's strategy to "deal with the problems of the inner city and distressed rural communities". Discussing the reasons for the Clinton administration's proposal to strengthen the CRA and further reduce red-lining, Lloyd Bentsen, Secretary of the Treasury at that time, affirmed his belief that availability of credit should not depend on where a person lives, "The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live." Bentsen said that the proposed changes would "make it easier for lenders to show how they're complying with the Community Reinvestment Act", and "cut back a lot of the paperwork and the cost on small business loans".[36]

                    By early 1995, the proposed CRA regulations were substantially revised to address criticisms that the regulations, and the agencies' implementation of them through the examination process to date, were too process-oriented, burdensome, and not sufficiently focused on actual results.[52] The CRA examination process itself was reformed to incorporate the pending changes.[40] Information about banking institutions' CRA ratings was made available via web page for public review as well.[36] The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) also moved to revise its regulation structure allowing lenders subject to the CRA to claim community development loan credits for loans made to help finance the environmental cleanup or redevelopment of industrial sites when it was part of an effort to revitalize the low- and moderate-income community where the site was located.[53]

                    During one of the Congressional hearings addressing the proposed changes in 1995, William A. Niskanen, chair of the Cato Institute, criticized both the 1993 and 1994 sets of proposals for political favoritism in allocating credit, for micromanagement by regulators and for the lack of assurances that banks would not be expected to operate at a loss to achieve CRA compliance. He predicted the proposed changes would be very costly to the economy and the banking system in general. Niskanen believed that the primary long term effect would be an artificial contraction of the banking system. Niskanen recommended Congress repeal the Act.[54]

                    Niskanen's, and other respondents to the proposed changes, voiced their concerns during the public comment & testimony periods in late 1993 through early 1995. In response to the aggregate concerns recorded by then, the Federal financial supervisory agencies (the OCC, FRB, FDIC, and OTS) made further clarifications relating to definition, assessment, ratings and scope; sufficiently resolving many of the issues raised in the process. The agencies jointly reported their final amended regulations for implementing the Community Reinvestment Act in the Federal Register on May 4, 1995. The final amended regulations replaced the existing CRA regulations in their entirety.[55] (See the notes in the "1995" column of Table I. for the specifics)

                    Legislative changes 1999.

                    In 1999 the Congress enacted and President Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act. This law repealed the part of the Glass–Steagall Act that had prohibited a bank from offering a full range of investment, commercial banking, and insurance services since its enactment in 1933

                    1. Local G
                      Holmes

                      @ digismith "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce has happened completely under Obama's watch."

                      !0 years ago I would have agreed with you. 4 years ago too.

                      But today it is impossible to look at global economics without being overwhelmed by the enormous failure of reason and common sense that got us here.

                      Doesn't it look intentional? All you have to do is SPECULATE that the world's supply of oil is much less than the authorities tell us it is;

                      that the US Army, as the world's largest consumer of oil, doesn't want to be ambushed waiting in a queue during an oil shortage;

                      that even though we may continue to experience Peak oil for 40 or 50 more years, the time to start reducing demand is now;

                      that nothing reduces world wide demand for oil like a world wide double dip recession (depression?);

                      that the best way to create a world wide depression is to sell one hundred trillion dollars worth of worthless debt obligations backed by way overpriced mortgages to the banks around the world;

                      that when the blow back hits America, have the Federal Reserve print money which it gives to the banks by buying bonds from them and which they then use to buy stocks on the American stock exchanges which makes the economy look hunky dory.

                      It'd make a good movie, huh?

                      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                        Happy

                        Re: Re: @ digismith "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce....."

                        LOL @ Local Dupe desperately trying to evade from a discussion where he's had his butt handed to him on a plate! "....peak oil...." Ha!

                        Latest rumours doing the rounds is that the Ecuadoreans are trying to negotiate releasing A$$nut to British custody for transport to Sweden. It doesn't look good for Local Dupe, his head will explode if A$$nut actually ends up standing trial for rape in Sweden!

                        1. Local G
                          Black Helicopters

                          Re: @ digismith "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce....."

                          Look what I posted over a week ago, Matt Bryant:

                          Local G

                          Submitted on Sunday 23rd September 2012 05:53 GMT

                          Posted Sunday 23rd September 2012 05:53 GMT

                          "By now you've heard that Ecuador wants to swap Julian into the Ecuadorian Embassy in Sweden, where he can be questioned and, if he's given a 'safe passage' from the embassy to the court, even precede with the trial."

                          Ecuador wants to swap Julian out of its London embassy into its Stockholm one. Good for England, bad for Sweden, same for Ecuador. I would have thought that Hague called you by now to ask what he should do.

                          But they need safe passage from embassy to embassy, don't they?

                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                            Happy

                            Re: Re: @ digismith "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce....."

                            "Look what I posted over a week ago...." Yes, in your version the Ecuadoreans started with the idea of A$$nut being given safe-passage from the UK Ecuadorean embassy to the one in Sweden. The new discussion is about A$$nut surrendering to British Police who then send him to Sweden under the EAW. Ecuador gets to "oversee" the transfer and subsequent trial but A$$nut goes from Ecuadorean care to British arrest to Swedish cell whilst awaiting trial. By the looks of it, the only advantage to A$$nut is the UK's charge of bail-jumping gets dropped. BIG difference to what you originally posted. Enjoy!

                            1. Local G
                              Happy

                              @ Matt Bryant: Dude, don't count on Santa putting this under your tree anytime soon.

                              "The new discussion is about A$$nut surrendering to British Police who then send him to Sweden under the EAW. Ecuador gets to "oversee" the transfer and subsequent trial but A$$nut goes from Ecuadorean care to British arrest to Swedish cell whilst awaiting trial." signed Matt B.

                              Ho ho ho.

                              1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                                Happy

                                Re: @ Matt Bryant: Dude, don't count on Santa.....

                                ".....Ho ho ho." Didn't you just post something about laughing and being "a Ass" (sic)? Mind you, as a carefully thought out and thorough debunking of the story, no-one could possibly contend that you have not completely slain that rumour with that simple explanation of the facts! Well, no-one with an IQ under 90. With eloquent supporters like yourself on the case, I'm sure A$$nut is sleeping quite soundly at night. Maybe he's getting his sleep in before he lands in a Swedish cell? Enjoy!

                        2. Local G
                          FAIL

                          Re: @ digismith "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce....."

                          This is the actual story:

                          "LONDON -- British Foreign Secretary William Hague says talks with Ecuador over the fate of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange remain deadlocked.

                          Assange, who is seeking to avoid extradition to Sweden for questioning over sex crimes allegations, has been sheltering inside Ecuador's embassy in London – beyond the reach of British police – since June 19.

                          Ecuador has granted Assange asylum, but he will be arrested if he steps foot outside the small, central London mission.

                          Hague told lawmakers on Tuesday that talks are continuing."

                          Here is the rumor Matt Bryant posted this afternoon without a link: "Latest rumours doing the rounds is that the Ecuadoreans are trying to negotiate releasing A$$nut to British custody for transport to Sweden."

                          This is only Hague's reply to Ecuador in their back-and-forth negotiations.

                          Matt Bryant's tedious disinformation is that Ecuador is considering it.

                          "Julian Assange costs Britain 11, 000 pounds a day

                          Wednesday, October 03, 2012, 12:06

                          "London: It is costing a whopping 11,000 pounds a day for Britain to ensure that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, holed up in the Ecuadorean embassy here, does not flee the country.

                          "The final bill could be much more as the 41-year-old continues to defy extradition to Sweden where he is suspected of sexually assaulting two women.

                          "Scotland Yard confirmed it costs 11,000 pounds every day to ensure that the Australian does not flee his bolthole at the Ecuadorean Embassy, the Daily Mail reported.

                          "The police bill for staking out the embassy where Assange is holed up has already reached more than 1 million pounds.

                          http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/julian-assange-costs-britain-11-000-pounds-a-day_803228.html

                          He who laughs first, Matt, is a idiot. A ass.

                          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                            Happy

                            Re: Re: @ digismith "The whole Wikileaks and A$$nut farce....."

                            LOL, I think I touched a nerve there! Old Local Dupe just doesn't like the idea of anything intruding into his fantasy world of A$$nut adoration. Like a bit of reality. So much for his "just pulling your chain", it looks like poor Local Dupe has a lot personally invested in maintaining the illusion that his Holy St Jules can just fly off into the sunset.

                            "This is the actual story:...." No, that is the old story. As I said, it's a new rumour doing the rounds, it looks like you just haven't seen or heard it amongst the Faithful yet. I heard it from someone in Whitehall so it could just be a Whitehall rumour, civil service gossip, no reason for you to slit your wrists.... yet.

                            "....Matt Bryant's tedious disinformation...." Really? Anything that doesn't agree with your POV just must be disinformation? LOL! And I suppose you are intimately involved in the discussions between the British authorities and Ecuador...? Well, no, I don't suppose you are, are you? Which means the rumour is just that, a rumour, but since you can't disprove it you cannot just lash out in fear and call it disinformation. You'll just have to wait and see.

                            "...."The police bill for staking out the embassy where Assange is holed up has already reached more than 1 million pounds....." That is the price of being a law-abiding country, I suppose. It might have played a small part in why the UK is willing to drop the bail-jumping charge if A$$nut surrenders for the EAW. I wonder what the Ecuadorean bill is for keeping A$$nut cosy in his self-imposed prison?

                            ".....He who laughs first, Matt, is a idiot. A ass." Pedantic grammar nazi alert - that was needing to be "an" before the vowels. Were you thrashing at your keyboard in furious angst? As for the comment, I can only conclude that you must start the day laughing in your sleep. You see it doesn't work like you Wikitwits think, you can't just edit reality like A$$nut did with the "Collateral Murder" video. Maybe you should prepare yourself for bad news. Enjoy!

          3. Scorchio!!
            FAIL

            Re: @Bit Brain "Optional @John 104" Ah, but you see old chap as their.........

            ".........brain-dead chimpazee former president G W Bush said "if you're not with us you're against us". As far as a very particular section of the US body politic is concerned if you do not play ball you are classified as "un-American" or "anti-American" depending on [cut]"

            Non sequitur; there is no suggestion ATM that Bush's line is being peddled. Enemy of the state would be near the mark though, and it follows from his activities that he is indeed an enemy of the state; he certainly didn't intend to do nice things, as these will not revive his paywall and other fiscal activities.

            Anyone wanting the US to adopt a benevolent or at least empathic attitude to Assange would appear to have been doing too much waccy baccy, Bolivian marching powder, Mother's ruin or whatever their stimulus of choice happens to be, but it is indeed a pleasure to see stupidity parade itself with such joy, naked and proud.

        3. praos

          Re: Optional @John 104

          If US president is leader of the free world, then anybody (except US citizens) talking against him is traitor by definition.

        4. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          Boffin

          Re: Re: Optional @John 104

          ".....he's not a US citizen...." Correct, he's not a traitor as he's not and never was a US citizen. But he doesn't have to be a citizen to be classified as an enemy as the act of stealing and distributing secret military documents is enough to make him so. Whether Oz citizens want to class him as a traitor is their's to decide, but the majority probably just class him as a criminal, suspected rapist, bail-jumper and egotistical moron.

          1. Local G
            FAIL

            " just class him as a criminal, suspected rapist, bail-jumper and egotistical moron."

            Except for bail jumper, sounds like most politicians in government today. And these crooks don't have to jump bail. Before it comes to trial, the corrupt judiciary have dismissed all charges. La plus ca change...

      2. ByeLaw101

        Re: Optional

        @John 104 -

        Overreact much?

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @John 104

        How can you be a traitor to a country to which you owe no allegiance?

        1. g e
          Holmes

          Re: @John 104

          Presumably by being anti US foreign policy... makes you a traitor and entitles your god-damned pinko-commie subversive shit-hole of a third-world nation to be nuked back into the stoneage. There's freedom in them thar nukuler bombs, yeehaw.

          Or suchlike.

        2. xperroni
          Flame

          Re: @John 104

          How can you be a traitor to a country to which you owe no allegiance?

          What, don't you know?

          All of us who live in the Free World © owe the US a never-ending debt of gratitude for keeping the Evil Empire and its International Communist Conspiracy at bay. The fact it's been more than 20 years since anyone could claim any reason to believe such conspiracy even existed is no excuse.

          Therefore, anyone interfering in US matters is an enemy and traitor not only of America, but of Democracy & Freedom ®, and rightfully deserves to be shot, hanged and burned at the closest available stake.

          We've always been at war with Eastasia!

          1. Mage Silver badge
            Mushroom

            Re: @John 104

            "live in the Free World © owe the US a never-ending debt of gratitude "

            Actually it was Probably Germany Attacking Russia that Saved UK and Western Europe from Hitler. Not the Americans. They OTH impoverished Britain and are the only Nation ever to use Atomic weapons on Civilians (or indeed at all other than tests).

            Where is the Eastern Bloc today? Was it anything the US did? No. The US never won. The Russians just changed the rules.

            Or maybe they were playing Calvinball all along.

            1. eulampios

              Re: @John 104

              was Probably Germany Attacking Russia that Saved UK

              Yes, but more importantly, it was Russia having finally overcome Germany with great help of USA, Britain and other allies. Just think about the scale of the Stalingrad battle and compare German casualties on the Eastern front with those on the Western front.

              Yet, Americans, who know about WII anything at all, think it was private Ryan and US forces to have saved everyone.

              1. Philip Lewis

                Re: @John 104

                "Just think about the scale of the Stalingrad battle and compare ..."

                Kursk.

                That is all ...

              2. Vic

                Re: @John 104

                > it was Russia having finally overcome Germany with great help of USA, Britain and other allies

                ITYF it was the Russian winter, without much help from anyone...

                Vic.

                1. eulampios

                  indebted to the Russian Winter?

                  Vic, according to German statistics of the day (before Jan 31, 1945) from Wikipedia, 79% of all German losses (excluding civilians) had happened in the Eastern front. You might be also aware how costly that War was to the Russian Nations and it had touched on almost every family. Imagine, at least fraction of that cost paid by your country additionally to what it had already paid....

                  You can continue to be grateful to the Russian Climate, not to the Russian Soldier as much as you want. Some say, that gratitude is a pretty atavistic sensation.

          2. Fatman

            Re: @John 104

            I am not sure exactly how to take your comment, as I suspect this lousy forum software stripped out your <sarcasm> tags.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Black Helicopters

          Re: a country to which you owe no allegiance?

          Everybody owes allegiance to the USA. Better watch out for those drones!

        4. David Neil

          Re: @John 104

          The William Wallace defence - Didn't do him much good as I recall

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Optional

        Go check out Jeff Foxworthy

        You might be a redneck

      5. Anonymous Coward
        WTF?

        Re: Optional

        He's not a US citizen, but even if he was, he would only be a traitor to the nazicons, oops I meant neocons, i.e. he's a friend and doing a great service to the majority of US citizens by revealing the barbaric behaviour of some of it's leaders and their executioners.

      6. Chad H.

        Re: Optional

        wow John, nomination for moron of the week right there.

      7. asdf
        FAIL

        Re: Optional

        No he is just a self important douche bag whose 15 minutes of fame are way beyond up. If you are going to fling charges do it at Bradley Manning. He is the one who took the Oath of Enlistment which means he voluntarily accepted being under the UCMJ which is why this case is different than the Pentagon papers (Ellsberg was a civilian). Still how he as been treated is not only stupid is helping to undermine the government's case.

      8. hold2ransom
        Mushroom

        Re: Optional

        Assange cannot be a traitor to the USA as he has no affiliation with that state. The US DoD and State Department would no doubt like to incarcerate him but he is a bit too high profile to be placed on one of their extraordinary rendition flights to their currently preferred destination.

      9. Erwin Hofmann

        "Feindbild" (enemy stereotype) ...

        ... isn't it nice to have a simplistic "Feindbild" (enemy stereotype) ... it's much harder to tackle the real enemy, within ... arrogance, stupidity and abuse of power ... consider the consequences by targeting whistle blowing as an enemy (remember the Nazis) ...

      10. BillG
        Mushroom

        Re: Optional

        Look, Obama has designated Assange as an "enemy of the state" and Obama is determined to see Assange's ass sitting in a U.S. prison.

        No amount of whining by anybody is going to change Obama's mind on that. Deal with it.

      11. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Optional @John 104

        He's a traitor - obviously - because the World IS the US of A.

      12. I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects

        Considering my Option:

        I am Julian Assange.

      13. Fatman

        Re: He is a traitor to the United States.

        Says who???

        The same government that was involved in a sloppily thrown together raid on Dotcom for the benefit to the MAFIAA?? (By the MAFIAA, I mean the stooges that represent the film and recording industriesrackets in the USA.) The same government that, since 9/11 has attempted to curtail civil liberties by the use of unconstitutional act, like the PATRIOT act in an attempt to suppress its citizens???

        His "partner in crime", may be a traitor, but, since he (Assange) is not a US citizen; he can not be a traitor.

        Here, understand the definition of traitor, and treason:

        traitor: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/traitor?s=t

        treason: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/treason?s=t

        Dolt!!!

        1. BillG
          WTF?

          Re: He is a traitor to the United States.

          Why is it that people that scream against the PATRIOT Act have never read it?

      14. Goat Jam
        Mushroom

        Re: Optional

        To cretins like John 104, "Team America" is a training documentary.

        America? Fuck yeah!

  3. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
    Black Helicopters

    Bit late with this news then?

    This was on /. Yesterday

    http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/09/27/0020227/us-military-designates-julian-assange-an-enemy-of-state

    Personally, I think that certain unnamed agencies are preparing to 'go and get him' as soon as he leaves the UK. Then he will disappear and appear months/years later in gitmo.

    1. tom dial Silver badge
      Stop

      Re: Bit late with this news then?

      This whole thing is getting tiresome. The Slashdot item is not even as good as the Sydney Morning Herald article. The diplomatic cables have been public for a while and although embarrassing to quite a number of people who consider themselves important, have not caused the world to end or even cause major inconvenience to the U. S. Indeed, it appears to me Mr. Assange would be at greater risk from various Middle Eastern/North African political actors who lost jobs recently or are fighting to retain them. They have a stronger motive and, perhaps, fewer scruples about extreme measures than the U. S. government.

      Send him back to Sweden, where I suspect the pending charges will be found unwarranted, and let him go wherever he wishes and can gain admission. He is not in the U. S. military and therefore not subject to the UCMJ. He also is a self-important twit and does not warrant U. S. government attention. Wikileaks would be better off without him.

  4. NoneSuch Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    Well, I guess that eliminates the rumours of the USA being interested in him once he hits Sweden.

    No, wait. The other thing...

    1. Ian Michael Gumby
      Boffin

      Don't be daft...

      The Americans have time. Several years actually.

      As to the death penalty, it makes for great press however it's a moot point. If Manning doesn't face it, neither would Assange. Or any other co-conspirator for that matter.

      The Americans can wait Assange out, wait for the eventual trial in Sweden and the go after him when he gets back to Australia. You do realize that the Aussies can revoke his passport ...

      Remember it's not about the publication of the documents that has Assange worried. He's got some legal protection there... It's the actual theft and his alleged involvement that has him worried.

  5. Paul McClure
    WTF?

    Feeling guilty?

    Since much of the previous dump was boring, except for the state department stuff. One wonders what the military is so fearful of exposing? Clearly they need to be investigated and the likely multiple culprits tried and jailed. Recently a general was charged with rapes, which could be unusual if rape wasn't so common for the military. Probably not so dramatic, maybe just the usual fleecing of the public with broken weapons and deployment.

    1. ~mico
      Black Helicopters

      Re: Feeling guilty?

      > One wonders what the military is so fearful of exposing?

      UFOs, naturally. Alien conspiracies. Romney plans on new airplane windows systems.

      Wait, what was that noise?

      looks up

      Oops, should've posted this as AC.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Sadly the USA has turned into the monster it believed it was fighting against.

    The deaths of ~3000 on 9/11 was a very sad thing to have occurred but this level of vengeance needs to stop, 115,000 deaths in Iraq...

    1. John 104

      Optional

      It's not the quantity, its the quality.

      The same could be said for when the Japanese invaded Pearl Harbor. A few thousand were killed on our side. Then a few million on the Japanese side. Grab the tiger by the tail and you'll get the teeth.

      It is really surprising that no one seems to remember how much of a beat down we gave the Japanese after their actions in '41. We got our own licks as well, but nothing like what we dished out.

      The moral: Don't fuck with the US on our own soil or you will get a serious ass kicking. The rest of the world may not like it, but really, here in the US we don't care when it comes down to it.

      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge
        WTF?

        Re: Optional

        "It is really surprising that no one seems to remember how much of a beat down we gave the Japanese after their actions in '41."

        Er, sorry? Are you referring to the war in the Pacific, which saw Curtis LeMay invent carpet bombing and firestorms, and the A-bomb attacks on Japan, against a nation that had basically said to the entire world "We don't care how many of you we kill coz we aren't ever going to be brought to book over it.", only find itself *so* badly broken that *unconditional* surrender to that same world seemed like the better option?

        Nah. You couldn't *possibly* be referring to that, coz *everyone* knows about that. You must be referring to some other beat down.

        1. Ian Michael Gumby
          Boffin

          @ken Hagan

          It seems you've glossed over your knowledge of world history.

          But to your point even LeMay and other senior officers recognized their actions had moral and potential legal actions.

          The war in the Pacific would have lasted years longer...

          1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

            Re: @ken Hagan

            Ian: I wasn't expressing any moral position over the use of these techniques. I was merely responding to the OP's assertion that it was surprising how few people remembered who won WW2 and how.

        2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: Re: Optional

          Ken, go read a history book instead of IndyMedia.

          ".....which saw Curtis LeMay invent carpet bombing and firestorms....." Get a clue! Synchronised bombing was part of aerial ground attacks in WW1 and was first used to attack a civillian target (Guernica) by the Germans in the Spanish Civil War. Firestorms is subjective term, but both the RAF and Luftwaffe were packing their bombers with incendiary loads even before WW2 started, and the attacks on London and Coventry during the Blitz and the RAF's counter-attacks on German cities all used incendiaries to create firestorms.

          1. Ian Michael Gumby
            Boffin

            @Matt Bryant Re: Optional

            Matt,

            I think you miss Ken's point.

            Its not a question of carpet bombing, but the actual bombing of civilian targets and knowingly creating firestorms. It wasn't the bombs but the resulting firestorm that caused the bulk of the casualties and damage.

            If we were to isolate this act, its very possible to come to the conclusions that the actions of LeMay and others would be criminal. However, when placed in context of the Japanese culture the situation of the war and war crimes already committed by the Japanese... Things are a bit different.

            There's more to the history, but after the war, during a time of reflection, there is some guilt felt by those who had to make tough decisions.

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              Pirate

              Re: @Matt Bryant Optional

              ".....I think you miss Ken's point...." Nope. Ken tried to imply that the US forces came up with carpet bombing and the use of incendiaries to burn down cities, which are both deliberate innaccuracies. In both cases the US was very late to the game compared to other countries. Indeed, the official US policy for their bomber fleets in Europe in 1943 was to AVOID civillian casualties by doing carefully targeted daylight bombing rather than the area nightbombing being done by the RAF. This approach cost far more USAAF lives than if they had gone the route of nightbombing as the USAAF did not have escort fighters with the range to protect their bombers deep into Germany until 1944. In the Far East, when the USAAF started long-range raids on Japan, the problem was twofold.

              Firstly, they had to go such distances that the bombers could only carry small loads. RAF Liberator bombers attacking Japanes targets in Thailand from India had the same problem, often carrying only 1,000Lbs of incendiary bombs because the distances to their targets were so immense. To make their raids effective the USAAF also chose incendiaries as most Japanese buildings, including factories, were made of timber. Unfortunately, so were most of the Japanese civillian homes. By March 1945 the USAAF had destroyed the Japanes industrial base and switched to cities as Japan was still unwilling to negotiate a surrender. When the Japanese still refused to surrender the US used the atomic bombs.

              Secondly, the USAAF did not want to repeat the losses they had suffered in Europe. The majority of raids over Japan were by unescorted B-29s as the European theatre had priority on the long-range P-51 Mustang fighters needed, these not being available in the Pacific until April 1945.

          2. Ken Hagan Gold badge

            Re: Optional

            Matt: go do some arithmetic.

            The scale of bombing raids against Germany and Japan from about 1944 onwards was quite unlike anything that had gone before. Merely dropping incendiaries and burning the buildings that they hit is *qualitatively* different from sitting down with weather forecasts and theoretical models to plan where incendiaries would be dropped in order to create a self-sustaining storm. (The attack on Tokyo made conscious use of the fact that Tokyo's architecture was mostly wooden and the weather leading up to the attack had been hot and dry.)

            People had bombed cities before, but LeMay was quite emphatic at the time that he was trying to step up a gear and exploit the self-sustaining nature of a firestorm to create a new weapon of war.

            Perhaps the OP was correct, and the majority of folks *have* forgotten how WW2 ended. That would indeed be very sad. Future generations should be free to decide for themselves whether the allies over-stepped the mark or were merely doing what they had to in order to end the war with the right result. (Personally, I reckon the people best placed to make that judgement were the people fighting the war, so I'm reluctant to criticise even LeMay, although I think his subsequent behaviour during the Cuban Missile Crisis hardly inspires confidence in his general sanity.) However, we should not pretend that the war ended by the heroic efforts of GI Joe. It ended because the systematic annihilation of the homelands of the enemy was treated as a scientific problem and its solution resourced by everything that a fully industrialised society could throw at it.

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              FAIL

              Re: Optional

              "The scale of bombing raids against Germany and Japan from about 1944 onwards was quite unlike anything that had gone before....." Correct, but only because the USAAF had better resources. The Germans deliberately set out to raise London and Coventry during the Blitz, and if they had had a fleet of B-29s or even B-17s then there would have been little that Britain could have done to stop them. Luckily, they didn't. Their four-engine bomber projects (Ju89 and Do19) stalled after the death of General Wever in 1936. Wever was one of the few Nazis that realised the improtance of strategic bombing. Luckily for the Brits, Goering was more interested in numbers of bombers for use in direct support of the Wehrmacht, so he was happy with twins like the He111, Do17 and Ju88. Indeed, as early as the 1937 bombing of Guernica the Luftwaffe were using 1Kg incendiary bombs with the deliberate intent of setting civillian buildings alight. Don't confuse a prior lack of resource with a lack of prior intent.

              ".....The attack on Tokyo made conscious use of the fact that Tokyo's architecture was mostly wooden and the weather leading up to the attack had been hot and dry....." Neatly ignoring that Axis cities were number two on the list of agreed targets after military and industrial buildings. The USAAF had already destroyed the Japanese factories and warmachine. The USAAF and RAF did the same to Germany, both switching to bombing cities when they ran out of German indistrial targets. In all those raids, both on Germany and Japan, the staff planned to maximise damage. Just look at the joint planning for Dresden where the firestorm was not only predicted but planned and stoked over a number of attacks. LeMay did not switch tactics to low-level firebombing until February 1945, long after the RAF and USAAF had pounded plenty of German cities to rubble. LeMay simply did it bigger than before and made the mistake of bragging about it, probably because he had political ambitions. But one point all the historians agree on was that LeMay put the safety of his crews first, and two of his reasons for switching to night-time low-level bombing was it (a) reduced the loss rate of B-29 crews, and (b) meant that less crews had to risk their lives on missions as the low-level attacks were much more effective.

              "....It ended because the systematic annihilation of the homelands of the enemy was treated as a scientific problem...." Oh puh-lease, get a clue! Science has always been used to make war more effective, right from the first caveman that made a better club. And the reason it had to be applied in Japan to such an extent was becasue the Japanese were refusing to surrender, and the only alternative was an invasion of Japan that could have killed hundreds of thousands of Allied troops, who knows how many Japanese troops and civillian militias, as well as triggered mass suicides amongst Japanese civillians.

              1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                FAIL

                Re: Re: Optional

                ".....The attack on Tokyo made conscious use of the fact that Tokyo's architecture was mostly wooden and the weather leading up to the attack had been hot and dry....." I forgot to also point out that the RAF designed and started using the 4,000Lb "cookie" blast bombs with the express purpose of breaking open housing so that the 4Lb incendiaries used by the RAF were more likely to penetrate buildings and start larger fires. Conventional bombs of the day were usually about 50% HE by weight, the rest of the bomb being a thick and aerodynamic casing. The cookie was more like a cylinder and had a thin wall so the maximum amount of HE, about 75-80% by weight, could be used. This was after RAF studies of bombing results and test with housing in the UK showed that incendiaries falling on roofs were much more likely to set fire to the wooden roof timbers and battens if the roof had been previously stripped of tiles by a blast. The cookies had no other purpose, being less effective against targets like railroad junctions or yards, or hardened military targets and even thick-walled factories, than conventional HE bombs in the 500Lb and 1,000Lb range. The RAF used just over 25,000 of the 4,000Lb cookies in 1943 alone, which shows they had the intention of destroying Germany's civillian housing by firestroms in the most efficient manner possible long before LeMay started planning the Tokyo raids.

                But before you start switching your ire from LeMay to Trenchard, you might want to consider the RAF hit upon the idea AFTER noting how the Germans used modified naval mines for EXACTLY the same reason during the 1940 Blitz, dropping fifty on Coventry in one night alone. The Luftwaffe got the idea after trying area bombing with incendiaries over Warsaw in 1939, only to note that the incendiaries were much less effective in areas of Warsaw that had not been already damaged by HE bombs. So unless you want to pretend that LeMay was on Goering's staff, his attention to detail around maximising damage to civillian targets was nothing new.

              2. Ken Hagan Gold badge

                Re: Optional

                "Don't confuse a prior lack of resource with a lack of prior intent." Don't confuse intent with actually doing. A self-sustaining firestorm is a qualitatively different thing from dropping indendiaries. The damage of the latter is limited by what you carry to the target. The damage of the former is limited only by what is already at the target.

                "Neatly ignoring that Axis cities were number two on the list of agreed targets after military and industrial buildings." How is that even relevant to the point I was making? Having chosen the target, for whatever reason, they sat down and figured how to attack that target in such a way that the firestorm would be self-sustaining.

                "Oh puh-lease, get a clue! Science has always been used to make war more effective..." Nowhere have I said that it wasn't. My original point, which you seemed to miss entirely, was that it was quite ridiculous to describe the US response to Pearl Harbour as "forgotten", like the OP did. I cited LeMay and the A-bomb attacks on the assumption that just about everyone would be familiar with how the US response in the Pacific had proceeded.

                Given that LeMay was in charge in the Pacific and the OP was talking about the Pacific, I see nothing particularly mis-leading in saying that LeMay was one of the inventors of the technique. Yes, it evolved over several years and hundreds of people presumably had a hand in it, but history tends to credit the generals with the victories.

                1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                  FAIL

                  Re: Re: Optional

                  "....A self-sustaining firestorm is a qualitatively different thing from dropping indendiaries...." That's just male bovine manure. The Germans very carefully planned the Blitz attacks with three points to their attack startegy:

                  1. HE to knock buldings into the roadways and delayed action bombs to hamper firecrew efforts.

                  2. Naval mines dropped as blastbombs to open up houses for incendiaries.

                  3. Incendiaries to start the fires WHICH WOULD DO THE ACTUAL DESTRUCTION OF THE TARGET CITY.

                  The Germans planned and actioned deliberate firebombing with the intent of creating firestorms during the Blitz. The fact they were using HE to predominantly stop the firecrews shows their intent was to destroy by fire, not explosive. For you to somehow claim a German-made firestorm is not a "proper firestorm is just stupid. The fact that the Germans (and then the British) put just as much time and energy into working out the best way to create firestorms just demonstrates the idiocy of suggesting it was an invention of LeMay's.

                  "....How is that even relevant to the point I was making?...." You implied it was unknown for civillian targets in a city to be deliberately attacked with firebombing before LeMay did it to Tokyo. I ahev shown not only that it did happen before, but also why LeMay switched to targetting civillians.

                  "....Given that LeMay was in charge in the Pacific...." Yeah, it was called "World War 2" for a reason.... Oh, and there was a lot of that war going on before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour, including the firebombing during the Blitz.

                  "....LeMay was one of the inventors of the technique. Yes, it evolved over several years and hundreds of people presumably had a hand in it...." So basicaly you're not admitting you were wrong, just saying that you were wrong. On every point. Great summation!

                  1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

                    Re: Optional

                    You're still missing the point about scale and self-sustaining.

                    You're still missing the point about the OP referring to the response to Pearl Harbour being forgotten.

                    And yes, it was called WW2 for a reason, but only Britain and US actually fought in all theatres. The enemy didn't.

                    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                      FAIL

                      Re: Re: Optional

                      "You're still missing the point about scale and self-sustaining....." Because it's irrellevant. You slated LeMay for inventing firestorms and using them to attack civillians and applied an unusual amount of planning to the matter. I merely pointed out that he was far from the first to do either, and was only following an Allied policy in target tiering that had been applied by the Allies in attacking German cities. I'm betting yours and many fellow h8rs of LeMay only drag up the Tokyo firebombing becuase LeMay was a supporter of Nixon and the nulceur deterant, making him a "truly nasty person" in your politically-tinged viewpoint.

                      "....but only Britain and US actually fought in all theatres...." Well, ignoring that the German Kriegsmarine sent raiders and U-boats to attack Allied shipping in all theatres, the Fwench saw comabt in every theatre too, in either French Republic, Vichy or Free French form. But don't let simple FACTS get in the way of another bit of pointless and irrellevant blather.

                      At the moment it's a bit like arguing with an ill-equipped child - just admit you were wrong, stop dragging up more areas to be proved wrong in, and stfu already.

                      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

                        Re: Optional

                        "You slated LeMay"

                        Tell ya what, why don't you crawl back into your hole and read what I said and not what you read. Start at the very beginning, before you'd said anything, when I was replying to a guy who claimed that the US response to the Japanese had been forgotten. Along your way, you will note that I go out of my way *not* to slate Lemay for anything he might have done in WW2.

                        Once your reading comprehension has grokked both the original context of my remarks and the remarks themselves, you may be ready to re-enter the discussion, but given that I've already addressed your points several times without you acquiring anything resembling a clue, I shan't wait for you.

                        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
                          Facepalm

                          Re: Re: Optional

                          "....and read what I said...." Seeing as I copied exact quotes from your posts into my replies, before debunking the content of your quotes, it would seem that it is you that not only has to go back and re-read your posts but also got to do a lot more history reading. But, given the quality of your posts and your continued inabaility to admit you got called on what could be at best called inaccuracies, the likelyhood of you acquiring a clue is still hovering around the zero level.

                          In the meantime, would you also like to post any thoughts on the A$$nut matter seeing as it was the original topic of this thread? As a suggestion, though, try to steer clear of anything remotely military regarding A$$nut.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Optional

        But at least the Japanese did something to America, Iraq has done nothing to harm America and they got invaded anyways. No one who too part of 9-11 came from Iraq and they, contra to what Bush said, had no weapons of mass distruction The US is rapidly becoming the 'bad ass' country that we have previously claimed to oppose

        1. asdf
          FAIL

          Re: Optional

          Its what happens when you drastically cut funding for primary school education and college education only becomes affordable for the rich. You get a nation of 20k a year Walmart Republicans who think they are tough guys by having our kids go blow up brown people.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Optional

          No, Iraq did do something horrific to the US: they demanded euros instead of dollars for their oil sales. Recall Bush's first exec order after the invasion.

          (Iran announced the same...put 2+2 together, after you read John Perkins.)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Optional

            Thank God, someone else who spotted this. You know that story is long from over, don't you?

            China has started asking for the same change. They have fired the first warning shot at the World Bank: they want another currency for energy. Given the somewhat weird way the Chinese have to work out national GDP (it's got historic reasons - not something that is easy to correct) it'll be a while before they can make that credible, but you can see the intention and the thinking. And they are 100% correct. Next will be the reserve currency - in dollars those reserves are in danger of simply vanishing overnight. They have already devalued in a way that makes Gordon Browns damage to the UK economy look trivial in comparison (you know, the man that started with s trade surplus and ended up with the largest black hole in history, AFTER selling all of UK's gold reserves at the worst possible time and raiding the pension funds).

            If there is one entity in the world that has made "too big to fail" into an art, it's the US. Eventually, the real current owners may decide they've had enough and pull their money back. At that point they won't even have enough money to buy fuel and the whole show will collapse. THAT is why the US has built it's nuclear arsenal.

            Irak and Iran and the whole Islamic lot (*) are IMHO less of a threat that the idiots in Washington who still think they can play John Wayne. God help us when they discover the game is over (and it may well be because of Wall Street, that's why they are so hot on attacking foreign banks like in Switzerland - anything to distract from their leading role in the crisis).

            (*) Not meant denigrating - it's just that the US has managed to promote the less savoury elements. It's a bit like supporting the idiots that did the Spanish Inquisition, or the priests that were a tad too fond of choir boys. Personally, I don't care which imaginary friend anyone prefers as long as it leads to better lives for all..

      3. asdf
        FAIL

        Re: Optional

        >The moral: Don't fuck with the US on our own soil or you will get a serious ass kicking. The rest of the world may not like it, but really, here in the US we don't care when it comes down to it.

        Yeah that attitude works great until the rest of the world quits lending us money so we can make weapons to kill them with. Keep thinking the US is not Rome circa 450 AD or so. I am sure they were pretty cocky too then at least until everyone turned on them at once.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Joke

          Re: Optional

          "Keep thinking the US is not Rome circa 450 AD or so."

          Of course, when Rome was sacked, the world was plunged into a thousand years of ignorance and darkness, with science and technology reverting by hundreds of years.

          And no running water. So, you know, watch out who you sack, or it'll be back to 1012 for the lot of you!

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Optional

        Totally makes sense, as deterrence is the main job of the Armies, and deterrence relies on extreme fear (A.K.A being terrized of the retaliation). Except when: the country you invade (Irak) is not even related remotely to the islamo-terrirsts wave since the 70's (including when they were useful in Astan against the Soviets). Hell, even invading Astan is not related to that! how about carpet-nuckuluaring S.Arabia and Pastan? this would make way more sense from a -Rest of The - World peace perspective...

        So if we agree that the U.S of Paranoia invaded the wrong country, does your "logic" [Don't fuck with the $XX on our own soil or you will get a serious ass kicking. The rest of the world may not like it, but really, here in the US we don't care when it comes down to it.] apply to them as well? or Do we need a USEULA disclaming that this "Law:" is only applicable from the US side?

        This comments proudly sponsored by the AC Federation. For cowardly reasons...

      5. Alien Doctor 1.1
        Mushroom

        Re: Optional

        "but really, here in the US we don't care when it comes down to it."

        In that case just get all your red-neck morons back into your own borders and leave the rest of the world alone - we don't give a damn about you.

        The icon? Maybe that's washington dc

        1. asdf

          Re: Optional

          Unfortunately its not rednecks that travel as they think their are no other countries besides the US and think an exotic vacation is going one state over. I used to occasionally have to explain to Canadian border people when they brought it up out of nowhere that not only did I think our President at the time was a moron (W Bush) and I had voted against him but I had even voted against his daddy the drug lord twice.

          http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qiKtyxVXSCA/TnIhJZRzMzI/AAAAAAAAAns/8gNjSkvWs08/s1600/dubya.jpg

      6. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Optional

        @ John 014:

        You know, I love America, I have no shame in it, I know most Americans are like the rest of people in the world living in a "democratic society" but GOD I wish people like you would die out..

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Optional

          That's the problem. People like that /don't/ 'die out' and decent people won't kill them off to make a better world because that isn't what decent people do.

      7. Anonymous Coward
        FAIL

        Re: Optional

        "Don't fuck with the US on our own soil"

        Yes, yes. We all know that Americans are genocidal bastards - the country was founded on mass murder after all. Nothing's really changed since the days of Custer.

      8. Ian Johnston Silver badge
        Thumb Down

        Re: Optional

        "The moral: Don't fuck with the US on our own soil or you will get a serious ass kicking."

        You can substitute "Vietnam", "Somalia", "Iraq", "Afghanistan" or any of the other places whose angry peasants have kicked American arses from one end of the country to the other for "the US" there.

      9. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Optional

        "The moral: Don't fuck with the US on our own soil or you will get a serious ass kicking."

        *cough* 1812 *cough*

        I hear it got a bit toasty at the White House.

      10. PatientOne

        Re: Optional

        Japan didn't invade Pearl Harbor: They bombed it.

        They planned to invade British and Dutch territories to secure resources the US/British/Chinese/Dutch embargo was denying them.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Tragedy?

      ...not to mention the > 30000 firearm related deaths in the U.S. every year.

      According to http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm the total number of firearm related deaths in the U.S. for 2009 was 31,347.

      Which is the greater U.S. tragedy; the ~3000 killed by the 9/11 terrorists or the 30000+/year killed by each other?

      1. hayseed

        Re: Tragedy?

        majority killed by themselves in this stat.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Tragedy?

        Because the 30k+ are only exercising their goddamn right to bear arms! The 3000 were killed by some fucking jumped up towel heads >:(

  7. Steen Hive
    Black Helicopters

    "Enemy of the state"

    Hey! Radio Moscow phoned from the 1970's - they want their lexicon back.

  8. JeevesMkII

    Considering it's Assange...

    It's entirely possible that any intercourse you hold with him might be against your will.

    (BTW, dear Reg hacks, you spelt his name wrong.)

  9. g e
    FAIL

    The Middle Ages Called

    They'd like their bullshit political philosophies back

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

    He's proven he is nothing more than trash in several countries, so prosecute him for his crimes and get on with life. He's simply not worth the media attention.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      FAIL

      Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

      Problem is people just keep writing about him...like you just did.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

        That's because keeping quiet means that all the fanbois spout their usual nonsense which I will not repeat for fear of provoking the kind of yawn that could dislocate jaws..

    2. Chad H.

      Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

      and which crime would that be? Informing a democracy as to the actions of its government?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

        "and which crime would that be? Informing a democracy as to the actions of its government?"

        But he's guilty of vanity and being egotistical! Why can't you see that means he has to die?

        /sarcasm

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

        Data theft, there are a couple of AU convictions, and, umm, let me see, didn't he skip bail in the UK as well? And then there is this uncleared rape thing in Sweden..

        As for "informing" - (a) there are better ways and (b) it's not Assange who takes that risk. As a matter of fact, anyone who DOES take that risk should do that for a very good reason, because only focused whistle blowing is a mitigation for what is in every nation a crime. Not mass dump everything on the street and cause collateral damage.

        Oh, and usin a mass dump as blackmail to protect these criminals doesn't exactly endear me to the whole concept. I had some understanding for them initially because they did what journalists started to forget, but it quickly descended into straight forward misguided activism, creatively used by (tm) to further his own nest, because it's so much better than working.

        That's my general problem with lefties: it's all good and well saving the world, but without people actually doing some work there won't be much world left to save. Especially the fanatism seriously gets in the way of solving the very problems they allege to address.

      3. tempemeaty

        Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

        Well said Chad H.

    3. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
      IT Angle

      Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

      He does'nt want to goto trial... or even a swedish police interview in case they go "No case to answer, thank you for your time Mr Assange, now piss off back to Australia you horrid egotistical squirt"

      1. Ian Michael Gumby
        Devil

        @Boris Le Roach. Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

        If it were only that simple.

        Sweden does plan to charge and take him to trial.

        The interview is just the precursor so that they can charge him.

        Assange already has a defense team on the ground. Heck, he even has a lawyer in the US watching Manning's Court Martial.

        But you are correct that when its all over, Sweden will bounce him back to Australia.

        That's when things will get interesting.

        We can always speculate what will happen... Starting with the Australian Government revoking his passport.

        After that, its anyone's guess.

        If the US were to act and then send an extradition request... who knows how the Australians would react.

        IMHO the current government will hand him over.

    4. This post has been deleted by its author

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

      He recieved stolen goods, no matter how philisophical all the conspiracy theorists are, he's a fence, plain and simple....and Manning was the thief, get over the "USA want him because" and look at what is actually happening....someone took stuff that was not theirs (THIEF) and gave it to someone else (RECIPIENT OF STOLEN GOODS)

      If that isnt a "CRIME" in your country then I suggest you remove all your door locks

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

        "He [received] stolen goods"

        excuse me while I laugh. Look up the meanings of "goods" and "stealing" please. At worst, we're looking at a copyright infringement.

        AC

        1. Ian Michael Gumby
          Boffin

          Re 'Stolen Goods' Re: Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

          Its not the receipt of the documents, but what was his involvement in the actual theft.

          A reporter who publishes material that while factual but comes from mysterious sources isn't going to be held responsible for the theft. There was a '70's case where the US Supreme Court said that the press was protected due to the probative value of the release of the documents.

          With respect to Assange that's a thin layer of protection, but enough to give pause to the US charging him with anything.

          If he was involved in the theft, that would have some serious consequences. In light of his past activities as a youth, and with his new found friends in Russia and Ecuador, he's not in a very good position.

          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
            Boffin

            Re: Re: Re 'Stolen Goods' Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

            ".....There was a '70's case where the US Supreme Court said that the press was protected due to the probative value of the release of the documents......" Two big problems with that.

            Firstly, the Wikitwits weren't registered as journalists or a press company with the Swedish authorities when they put the material up on the Swedish Wikileaks servers. A$$nut and co realised this later and tried to swing a listing as journalists after the fact. That was one of the reasons A$$nut was in Sweden, to "publish" an article written for him in a Swedish rag so he could claim he was a proper journo. They are not registered as such in the US either, so they do not automatically get the protection afforded proper journalists.

            Secondly, A$$nut not only failed to redact information in what he published, he made statements saying he couldn't give a sh*t about the possible damage he did by not redacting. That all helps with the US case for showing he had the intent of aiding an enemy (AQ, the Taleban, etc.) by exposing informers in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

            1. Ian Michael Gumby
              Boffin

              What's a journalist... Re: Re 'Stolen Goods' Just send ASSange to trial and get on with life

              Matt,

              I think you're again missing the point.

              The US Government was all about to go postal on Wikileaks over the release, when a bunch of journalists and professors (Law and Journalists) decided to opine what they thought a journalist meant in today's internet society.

              There's enough anecdotal evidence to show that in today's internet world, Wikileaks would qualify.

              Sad, but true. Many of the liberal press who were interested in getting their hands on the raw data jumped to Wikileak's defense, not to mention the reason why Assange was in Sweden in the first place was to get more protection.

              Fast forward now, Assange has a 'news' show on Russian TV.

              While you and I will agree that he's not a journalist, there's enough evidence to give pause to the US in trying him and then having to deal with that US Supreme court case. There is enough shaky evidence that would raise reasonable doubt.

              Having said that, and if you've read to this point, there's alleged evidence to the fact that Assange partook part in the actual theft. Journalist or not, if true, he can be charged and would face serious jail time in the US.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    They should declare him a HERO instead

    Instead of declaring him a HERO, they are condemning him.

    Finally someone came out and showed us the TRUTH about practically every leader.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: They should declare him a HERO instead

      Funny that he got very upset when someone showed the TRUTH about those events in Sweden..

      1. Goat Jam

        Re: They should declare him a HERO instead

        "Funny that he got very upset when someone showed the TRUTH about those events in Sweden"

        You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the arse.

        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          Happy

          Re: They should declare him a HERO instead

          Manning (allegedly, but almost certainly) broke military law when he stole the docs from the US systems he had sworn an oath to protect. If the US can prove in court that A$$nut was anything more than the unwitting and unsoliciting receiver of the dump of docs then Holy St Jules also broken US law. If the US has a strong enough case then they can issue a warrant and then go to Sweden to argue A$$nut's extradition. This will probably not happen until after the US election and after they have finished trying Manning. A$$ange is obviously worried as to what Manning can reveal as he has got a lawyer attending Manning's trial (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/17/wikileaks-lawyers-protest-manning-hearing).

          If the US's case is strong enough, and A$$nut will still have full recourse to Swedish law to appeal, then the Swedes will extradite A$$nut to the US for trial for espionage. Again, A$$nut will have another chance to take full recourse to US law, probably aided by such numpties as the ACLU, but if the case was strong enough for the US to go for a warrant, then it will be strong enough to put A$$nut behind bars. Whilst he is on trial they will not grant him bail. THAT is why Holy St Jules is hiding behind Correa - he knows that the road to Sweden will almost definately eventually end in a US prison cell, and his idiotic behaviour in Sweden has just made it easier for the US to keep an eye on him whilst they finish up with Manning.

          A$$nut's plan prior to his sexual escapades in Sweden was probably to keep an eye on the US (hence his lawyer in attendance at Manning's trial) so that he could skip off to a country with no US extradition agreement just before the US issued a warrant. The problem for A$$nut is the Swedish episode could tie him down in a Swedish prison for four years, givng the US plenty of time to chew up Manning and then go for the A$$nut course, and probably also the Birgitta "The Troll" Jónsdóttir (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/08/us-twitter-hand-icelandic-wikileaks-messages) and Wikileaks dessert. The fact that the Ecuadorean's are trying to make a deal to offload A$$nut back to Sweden is not looking good for St Jules.

          Now, all that revelation of exactly what kind of trouble their beloved A$$nut's ar$e is in will no doubt make the A$$nut groupies squeal and shriek in denial, but do try and help them keep just a tiny fraction of an open mind and they may come to accept the reality of the situation.

          1. Hans 1

            Re: They should declare him a HERO instead

            Manning was a whistle-blower; this will most likely not be taken into account during his trial and he will get to ride the lightning.

            As for Assange (Assange, Assange, is that so hard to spell?) he should also be considered as a whistle-blower.

            Wikileaks has allowed us to see the truth behind many international interventions, the war crimes that have been committed, the US intervention to protect US companies across the globe, the dissimulation of evidence and fabrication of false evidence... I could go on ...

            I think you still live in the 80's, have missed the information age and all that goes with it - just like most of the gvt's around the world.... I guess it's time you wake up, don't you think?

            BTW, I thought you worked for HP and not the MI6 ... in any case, from your comments you seem not to get out much and believe everything you hear on BBC news ...

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              FAIL

              Re: Re: They should declare him a HERO instead

              "Manning was a whistle-blower...." Manning was a very confused and possibly mentally unbalanced individual who was angry that the US military could not adapt to accept his gay/transgender issues, neatly ignoring that other gays have no problem working inside the military. Manning knew about his gayness and the militray's views on the matter BEFORE he signed up and took the oath. His tantrums and desire to "hit back" at the Corp are public record.

              ".....Wikileaks has allowed us to see the truth behind many international interventions...." Really? Where? In fact, proper professional journos scoured the Manning dump for anything juicy and came up empty-handed. Please do show me where the you saw any great "truth" as all those pro journos would probably like to employ you if you can uncover such "truths" that they missed.

              "....I think you still live in the 80's...." Well, I was probably more educated and had travelled a lot further around the World by the '80s than you have obviously managed. I would suggest you get out of your Mom's basement and get some real POV rather than just drinking the Koolaid.

              "..... I thought you worked for HP and not the MI6...." <Yawn> Whatever conspiracy theory floats your boat. It's obviously far too much to expect you to listen to sense. In the meantime, keep posting the rage, it does provide plenty of laughter!

  12. Christoph
    WTF?

    You what?

    They've declared him an enemy, so any member of their armed forces who communicates with him may face the death penalty.

    But they've kept the declaration secret, so most of the members of their armed forces don't know about the declaration that could have them facing the death penalty?

    1. Kit-Fox
      FAIL

      Re: You what?

      Members of the US armed forces who deal with classified or sensitive information already know not to pass it on to anyone who is not already authorised to recieve said information as they all sign a nice lil non disclosure agreement when they agree to handle such data.

      All this declaration does is formalise the fact that you will be considered to have in essence given aid & comfort to the enemy

      1. Mystic Megabyte
        FAIL

        Re: You what?

        If I read it correctly the "secrets" were available to two and a half million service personnel. To me that means that the "secrets" were not of any great importance.

        1. tom dial Silver badge
          Stop

          Re: You what?

          You might have read something correctly, but if so, what you read was quite false.

      2. asdf
        FAIL

        Re: You what?

        Most on here don't seem to agree but I do think there is a HUGE difference between civilians and Armed Forces when it comes to disseminating information. That said this would have been a tempest in a teacup if the %90 of the information the government unnecessarily hides for political reasons (as opposed to security reasons) is public in the first place.

  13. Tom 7 Silver badge

    Double secret probation

    its the only solution.

  14. samlebon23
    Megaphone

    I designate America the enemy of Assange and the rest of the world.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      It won't do you any good

      Ignorance and stupidity aren't the qualifications for declaring anything thus you don't have a chance at designating anything.

      1. hplasm
        Facepalm

        Re: It won't do you any good

        That;s the US Govt screwed then.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I designate enemies EVERYWHERE

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Here's a trick.

    Next country the US tries to 'liberate' rolls out the Assagne with a huge megaphone. He talks to the approaching US troops who are then obliged to kill each other for communicating with him.

  16. J.G.Harston Silver badge

    Doesn't being an enemy of the state mean that anybody is authorised to him out?

    Don't stand too close to the windows, Julian.

    1. hplasm
      Happy

      Re:Don't stand too close to the windows, Julian.

      Authorised to him out?

      You must be thinking of Julian Clary.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Flame

      They Prefer Character Assassination In The West

      After all, there are still some functioning policemen around who would ask nasty questions. So they try smearing plus "rendition". I wonder why they haven't tried "child porno" yet.

  17. Chris 228

    Juli knows his days are numbered

    I imagine he'll try to escape in disguise but it will only be a matter of time before he is caught and brought to justice. He's got a lot of court dates in numerous countries to fill the few days he has left on the planet.

    1. Goat Jam

      Re: Juli knows his days are numbered

      It must be nice to live such a comfortably ignorant existence, one where bad guys are whoever the government and their media lapdogs say they are and where death is a suitable punishment for anyone as long as "the authorities" say it is.

      Justice, who needs it eh? It just confuses things really.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I have to quote the master here:

    When you are born in this world you get a free ticket to a freak show. When you are born in US, you get the front row seat.

    -- George Carlin

  19. JaitcH
    FAIL

    The US military has allegedly classified Julian Assange as an "enemy" and the World ...

    classifies the US as the largest terrorist organisation in the world.

    Given their accuracy with drones, Assange should be safe, but I wouldn't want to be in his vicinity given the Americans penchant for killing innocent people.

    Still, Bin Laden still holds the record for the largest US expenditure to kill one man! Remember Tora Bora?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Stop

      You Already Bought Their Story Line

      They claim a "Mr Bin Laden" was behind all that. They also claim they found him in Pakistan, killed him and then quickly fed him to the fishes. Can we verify ANYTHING of that story ?

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Julian sez bend ovah we want to publish your secrets with impunity, so there!!!!!!

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Small problem here

    No one seems to have pointed out a small problem with declaring Assange an "enemy". That term assumes a state of war, and the USA is not at war. Indeed, it cannot be without the agreement of Congress, which has not been sought for a declaration of war against Julian Assange - or even Australia. The USA cannot go to war with Wikipedia, as only nations can wage war.

    Of course the USA has not formally declared war on any nation since 1942 (Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania). Nevertheless, it has engaged in no fewer than 34 "conflicts" - almost all of which were authorized by Congress in one way or another.

    It's intensely ironic that President Franklin D Roosevelt declared December 7th 1941 "a date which will live in infamy" because Japan accidentally failed (by a matter of minutes) to deliver its declaration of war before the attack on Pearl Harbor took place. Yet since then the USA itself has attacked dozens of countries and killed millions of people without ever declaring war. Maybe, just as it saw and liked Josef Goebbels' propaganda techniques and the German Blitzkrieg tactics, it decided that the Japanese had a good idea in attacking without warning.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Enemy of the state

    It shouldn't be difficult for the US to take out the Ecuadoran embassy with one of their unmanned drones. Do it at night when JA is the only one there. Problem solved.

  23. Mage Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    Assange cannot be a traitor

    But it doesn't prevent him from being a self serving egotistical idiot. I suppose it's a bit better that he molests grown women than children.

  24. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge
    Big Brother

    "But they've kept the declaration secret, so most of the members of their armed forces don't know about the declaration that could have them facing the death penalty?"

    Most of the members of the armed forces have secret clearances, so this information has most likely been disseminated to them already. Just because you and I are hearing about it now doesn't mean its not already old news.

    What could be a problem is to have some members of the armed forces RickRolled into visiting WikiLeaks, the logs recorded and then this information held for the purposes of blackmail. Sending info. in; still a No-no. Taking a quick peek; so what? Don't ask, don't tell* at worst.

    *This is what made this policy for gays so damaging. If you are 'out' you're out (of the armed forces), so gays became susceptible to blackmail.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. tom dial Silver badge
      Stop

      The large number of civilian and military employees and government contractors with secret or higher clearances has to be understood in the correct context. Having clearance to access secret or top secret classified material means only that one may see classified material needed to perform job duties that is classified at a level no higher than one's clearance permits. Bradley Manning, e. g., although possibly cleared for access to secret-classfied data, is alleged to have gone well beyond his assigned duties in accessing such data and to have released it to individuals who were not authorized to have access to it. Both types of action are violations.

      When Wikileaks released the initial group of diplomatic cables, all USDoD military and civilian employees were cautioned that, as ludicrous as it seemed, the material had not been declassified and access to it via Wikileaks would be unauthorized access to classified materials and could be punished. I worked at the time for a DoD agency and we all understood that web accesses from the workplace were likely to be logged and reviewed if they showed "inappropriate" activity. There was no hint of entrapment.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "... or holds any intercourse with the enemy"

    Does that make certain Swedish women criminals, in the eyes of the usa?

  26. Local G
    Unhappy

    @ asdf "until the rest of the world quits lending us money"

    They quit 2 years ago. Today the Fed buys bonds from the Treasury and prints money to pay for them.

    " Barack Obama on Friday issued an order revoking a Chinese company's purchase of four wind farm projects in the United States citing national security concern..."

    Next week China will announce it will no longer accept the US dollar as settlement for the difference in balance of payments. Swiss francs are preferred.

    1. dssf

      Re: @ asdf "until the rest of the world quits lending us money" Eminent Domain

      I wonder whether Chinese officials are reading this: SPRC could REVOKE Japan's purchase of the three remaining island Japan did not already own and add a kicker: declare eminent domain (or the PRC equivalent) a cite national security reasons.

      See, not EVERYone holding a USA passport drinks the KoolAid...

      I say this because it is interesting that the USA can revoke Chinese purchases of windfarms but China as yet seems slow to emulate that. Maybe thendifference is that somehow China lost effective control of the islands in question?

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Flame

    Adolf Hitler, From Valhalla

    ...likes how his brainchilds destroy any real freedom, any civility and any rule of law. It took superhuman efforts by Adolf to set up a huge army, wage a huge war - all with the aim to make America like Nazi Germany. Finally, Adolf is happy what he sees: the American constitution defecated by the President himself ("we can detain you indefinitely without ever asking a judge for permission"), people being killed without due process and no declaration of war, people being abducted and handed to the Chambers Of Arab Torture.

    Yeah, Mr Hitler succeeded in his great plan to destroy liberty ! Long Live Fascim !

    (Yes, I mean that ironic, or lets say, sarcastic).

  28. nexsphil

    traitor?

    > How can you be a traitor to a country to which you owe no allegiance?

    Yes, and Oscar Schindler was a "traitor" to his country too I guess. There is a limit to which scum can use idiotic trigger words to corral the craven. That limit is the US border.

  29. Matt Bryant Silver badge
    Facepalm

    More non-news about A$$nut.

    So the US military may have classified A$$nut as an "enemy" - so what? It's fun watching the A$$nut groupies jump up and down and shriek on cue, but the reality is he currently has bigger problems in trying to avoid facing trial in Sweden. I'm guessing the "enemy of the States" push is a bit of windrow-dressing from the A$$nut groupies in an attempt to push the A$$nut discussion back to the "heroic whistleblower" meme rather than the "avoiding trial for rape" reality. Whatever the States chooses to claissify A$$nut with will have zero bearing on the likely result of his rape trial in Sweden.

    1. majorursa
      Facepalm

      Re: More non-news about A$$nut.

      Matt, your confused rambling shows an unclear mind. Maybe you do not understand that the rape-trial IS BECAUSE the US wants him? Obvious for most people but you sound a bit foggy.

      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        FAIL

        Re: Re: More non-news about A$$nut.

        "....you do understand that the rape trial IS BECAUSE the US wants him?....". Actually it is because two women wanted him to take an HIV test after he had unprotected sex with them in a non-consensual way, and then the Swedish authorities decided to investigate him for rape. But don't let mere facts get in the way of your delusions. After all, if the US had wanted him in 2010 all the need have done is issue an extradition request and the Swedes would have held him whilst they considered it.

  30. Local G
    Meh

    He's as snug as a bug in a rug (with no bugellas to tempt him.)

    In the "Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he sought protection and was then granted asylum, avoiding extradition to Sweden to face sexual assault charges for which key evidence has recently found to have fallen apart."

    While all of the nations in America's thrall run hither and yon, like the Evil One's slaves ("yes, Master") in 'Time Bandits', unable to dislodge Julian from his shell even with a EAW nut pick.

    "O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!"

    And America's wrath, C squared greater than Matt Bryant's, embiggens each day that Julian remains in asylum. While the helpless, hopeless superpower, usually so good at killing unarmed civilians, can not get to Julian in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Not even with all the currency the Fed is printing in its basement.

    What to do? What to do?

    What would Hit.., I mean, Godwin do?

  31. Mutantone
    Holmes

    Talk about Enemy of the State!

    "The US military has allegedly classified Julian Assange as an "enemy", a designation that could make any member of those forces who communicates with him or WikiLeaks to be liable for the death penalty."

    Yet when Obama does so no charges? Obama opened the doors to the Muslim Brotherhood And now the Enemy is here

    Obama needs to be charged with treason for his inclusion of the Muslim Brotherhood inside our Nations security network the White House and the office of Secretary Of State. That he used American resources and troops to advance the Brotherhoods agenda in the “Arab Spring”. And now his and Hillary's defense of the people dragging the Body of Our Ambassador through the streets Ala Mogadishu. The recent clash with the truth should be more than enough to show how Obama and Hillary lied to defend the Muslim Terrorist group that is taking credit for the attack AL-Qaeda of course jumps up to say they supported it and planned the event, and Just who is also a member of the group the Muslim Brotherhood Obama's new friends.

    He gave the Russians the information about the Missile Defensive shield allowing them to find a means to work around it making it worthless. So who is the real enemy of the State? I say the treasonous one Obama!

    1. Local G
      Mushroom

      Re: Talk about Enemy of the State!

      "He gave the Russians the information about the Missile Defensive shield allowing them to find a means to work around it making it worthless."

      Apparently the information Obama gave the Russians didn't make the shield worthless enough, because earlier this year Russia announced they were prepared to make preemptive strikes against defensive missile shield installations in NATO's member states that bordered Russia, causing Poland to pee in her pants. So to speak.

  32. Tom 7 Silver badge

    Is he any good at golf?

    NT

  33. Purlieu

    Strengthen

    Does not this "enemy of the state" pronouncement actually strengthen Assange's position against deportation ?

    Since he can now point to what will happen rather than what could happen.

  34. Purlieu

    It's under the bed

    "Barack Obama on Friday issued an order revoking a Chinese company's purchase of four wind farm projects in the United States citing national security concern."

    If the US thinks wind farms are a national security concern then something has gone badly wrong in their heads, and it could now be "that time"

  35. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Hasta la vista baby...

    The time is near Julian.

  36. Matt Bryant Silver badge
    Devil

    Here, fishy, fishy, fishy......

    OK, here's the scoop from Sweden! Allegedly, A$$nut's defence is going to be based on the grounds that he's homosexual. Apparently, his lawyers are going to say this is the reason he left his wife and suggest that Ms Ardin and Ms Wilen were bitter because A$$nut rejected their unsolicited offers to "straighten him out". They are (allegedly) further going to argue in US court that A$$nut was only chatting with Manning online because he thought it was a bit of harmless gay sex chat, and when Manning sent messages like "I have a big load for you" and "I have a vid of big bad chopper action in Iraq" A$$nut just thought it was a response to his irresistable charms, and was totally surprised when the Manning document dump landed in his lap. To back up his claim of being fond of men he is allegedly going to provide pics of himself and Vaughan Smith indulging in a round of hide the sausage, complete with Smith in his Guard's unifrom and A$$nut dressed as Little Boy Blue and blowing.... well, the pics will talk for themselves.

    You just couldn't make this sh*t up!

    Only I just did, for the sole purpose of yanking Local Dupe's chain. Along with the rumour of the orange overall and the new deal with the UK. And that sizzling sound is Local Dupe, hooked, landed, gutted, filleted and frying in the pan! The difference between you and I, Local Dupe, is I can make this stuff up for fun, but you just base your whole POV and life around whatever is spoonfed to you. Enjoy!

    1. Local G
      Happy

      Re: Here, fishy, fishy, fishy......

      Matt, if you're still interested in that pig farm in Coos Bay, why don't you fly out next week? It's got a large herd -- the littlest guy weighs in at 700 lbs -- and the best part is that they practically feed themselves. All you have to do is read them things like the Biography of Margret Thatcher and you'll have them eating out of your hand in no time.

      It's a great buy. Freddy Mac could provide all the financing.

      Call me on my cell.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Here, fishy, fishy, fishy......

      Matt, until just abut now you made sense - regardless of wether I agreed or disagreed with your position, the arguments were sound.

      However, I am disappointed to see you go personal (as far as that is possible with aliases).

      People are commenting for either side, and IMHO the "Assange is an idiot who really needs to be locked up ASAP so we can get on with our lives" side makes more sense (I think I may have just invited a heap of screeching downvotes, but it's worth it - and I'm happy to admit that I actually concur with that conclusion as it's built on facts rather than fiction). Until you went personal. *Not* good IMHO, and certainly not needed.

      Consider this a friendly nudge :)

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022