Senate Bill would label WikiLeaks 'non-state hostile intelligence service'

[Marikins]

The Washington Times (http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/23/senate-bill-would-label-wikileaks-non-state-hostil/?update9) reports:


Congress will formally consider WikiLeaks a “non-state hostile intelligence service” if lawmakers adopt the annual Intelligence Authorization Act passed 14-1 by a Senate panel last month — a provision the bill’s sole dissenter now cites as his reason for rejecting it.

Sen. Ron Wyden, Oregon Democrat and the only member of the Senate Intelligence Committee to cast a ballot against the 2018 authorization act during last month’s vote, said Tuesday his decision was driven by the inclusion of language specifically targeting WikiLeaks, the antisecrecy website responsible for publishing millions of pages’ worth of U.S. state secrets ranging from military documents and diplomatic cables to internal Democratic Party emails.

Here is the full information from the House government site on HR 3180 Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018: https://rules.house.gov/bill/115/hr-3180

The bill cleared the House and is on to the Senate.

This is the information on the Senate Bill S. 1761: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1761/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22wikileaks%22%5D%7D&r=5

[Marikins]

So while we were watching faux conflicts and statues being torn down in the US, our faithful lawmakers were busy:

1. Approving warrantless searches in Virginia, Maryland and Washington, DC
2. Making it possible to bring terminal force against WikiLeaks by labeling it "a hostile non-state intelligence agency"

[Nasu]

Thanks for posting this. Sad times for the republic. I do hope Sen. Ron Wyden stays safe, seems he is an impediment to THE future..x... N

[Nasu]

It's a catch 22 situation imho. Were wikileaks to be based, server wise, in the US, it would be shut down in a heartbeat under some spurious homeland security protocol for the supposed protection of the people....

So in order to be truly independent it must have proxies outside and away from the USA. However in doing do it is therefore not protected by the first amendment. Catch 22.... N

[Marikins]

It's a catch 22 situation imho. Were wikileaks to be based, server wise, in the US, it would be shut down in a heartbeat under some spurious homeland security protocol for the supposed protection of the people....

So in order to be truly independent it must have proxies outside and away from the USA. However in doing do it is therefore not protected by the first amendment. Catch 22.... N

You are so right. No easy course for freedom or freedom of information.

[jake gittes]

This is the "we don't want to be caught molesting children" Bill, plain and simple.

[Desire]

This is the "we don't want to be caught molesting children" Bill, plain and simple.

Jake
Can you explain what you mean a little more?

[Marikins]

This is the "we don't want to be caught molesting children" Bill, plain and simple.

Jake
Can you explain what you mean a little more?

I wonder if Jake is referring to the Podesta WikiLeaks which contained likely pedophile codewords and suggested a Luciferian connection ("A Thelema Favor" leak) that kicked off the citizen PizzaGate research.

[jake gittes]

This is the "we don't want to be caught molesting children" Bill, plain and simple.

Jake
Can you explain what you mean a little more?

I wonder if Jake is referring to the Podesta WikiLeaks which contained likely pedophile codewords and suggested a Luciferian connection ("A Thelema Favor" leak) that kicked off the citizen PizzaGate research.

Bingo! That's what I was referring to...