Jump to content

Julian Assange debacle

Recommended Posts

This is good news, no-one should be locked up for telling the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jim Hardie said:

Don't care much for Mr Assange but pleased that we've stood up to America. Until they send that woman back to face justice, we shouldn't extradite anybody to the US.

That I agree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

The charges were dropped because of the passage of time and investigation going cold. 

 

There was absolutely no discussion of so called "trumped up charges"  Even the public prosecutor went on record to say that "...I would like to emphasise that the injured party has submitted a credible and reliable version of events.  Her statements have been coherent, extensive and detailed; however, my overall assessment is that the evidential situation has been weakened to such an extent that that there is no longer any reason to continue the investigation..."

 

One could argue that Assange's running and hiding act in the Ecudorian Embassay was a lucky move.  

 

He still proceeded to breach his bail conditions and now has had to face the consequences.

 

Can we stop talking about this man as if he is some unfairly persecuted savior.   He isnt.

Julian Assange is on record as saying he was more than happy to answer the charges as long as it took place in the UK, (with Swedish legals and legislation.) Nobody took him up on it. The whole point was to get him to Sweden so he could be extradited to the USA. 

8 minutes ago, Delbow said:

This is good news, no-one should be locked up for telling the truth.

I agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Anna B said:

Julian Assange is on record as saying he was more than happy to answer the charges as long as it took place in the UK, (with Swedish legals and legislation.) Nobody took him up on it. The whole point was to get him to Sweden so he could be extradited to the USA. 

I agree. 

The crime was in Sweden, he should have gone to Sweden. He shouldn't dictate which court he goes to.

 

Anyway, as he's free, looking forward to the leaks on putin, trump etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

The crime was in Sweden, he should have gone to Sweden. He shouldn't dictate which court he goes to.

 

Anyway, as he's free, looking forward to the leaks on putin, trump etc.

I thought he was still in prison pending a bail hearing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/04/2019 at 07:54, Phanerothyme said:

 

.
 

 

 

 

 

Actually most of the charges relate to perfectly permissible journalistic practice. The one charge they may or may not be able to get to stick will be that he "actively engaged in helping Manning try to crack a password that allowed the US soldier to gain unauthorized and anonymous access to highly sensitive military computers". The other four charges completely contradict common journalistic norms, and would melt away in the light of justice.

 

The notion that Assange was just a journalist doing his job is a contrivance developed by his lawyers in the absence of any other reasonable defence. Assange solicited for and published material provided to him unlawfully-he applied none of the triaging tests normally applied by most 'respectable' journalists, and as a result, sent some governments into a desperate dash to protect individuals that had been exposed by Assange. Yes a war crimes issue was exposed-but that was one event-Assange published reams more information that had nothing to do with war crimes. Instead, Assange set out to use sensitive government communications as a source of intrigue and titillation and to bring attention to himself. That's not journalism or free speech-it's espionage. Has anybody noticed Assange never published anything derived from Russian or Chinese sources? Don't tell me that information on issues like government human rights abuse by Russia and China is not out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, frigate said:

Instead, Assange set out to use sensitive government communications as a source of intrigue and titillation and to bring attention to himself. That's not journalism or free speech-it's espionage.

a) you don't know what motivated him

b) that's not what espionage is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Delbow said:

a) you don't know what motivated him

b) that's not what espionage is

Assange faces a U.S. indictment ( under the Espionage Act) for his role in the publication of secret documents relating to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars - including as leaked via Chelsea Manning. 

Edited by frigate
...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine to have your name leaked online by JA if you had been working with the Americans in the war zones where US data was leaked. Persecution would be relentless and swift and their families are perfectly fair game to death squads. Tough neighbourhood. Contrast that to skateboarding in an embassy and hiding away from the real world for the better part of a decade. Did the magistrate consider at all the magnitude and potential fall-out of JA's reckless and self-seeking conduct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, frigate said:

Assange faces a U.S. indictment ( under the Espionage Act) for his role in the publication of secret documents relating to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars - including as leaked via Chelsea Manning. 

Exactly, all he did was publish them. He didn't do any spying. It's usually regimes like Iran that brand people as 'spies' for reporting things they want to keep hidden and try to lock them up, but then the US seems to have become a lot more like Iran in the past several years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Assange's position appeared to radically change when it came to directly interfering in the US elections along with the Russian Govt. The Roger Stone indictment gives some insight into what reads as a deliberate attempt by Wikileaks to assist Russia in undermining the Democrat candidate for president. Stone was pardoned for his role in going between the three (Russia, Wikileaks and the Trump campaign). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are certainly valid criticisms to be made of Wikileaks, with a few leaks they seem to have failed to check the validity properly, and they have seemed a bit selective (although with Russia, Assange may have just decided that he didn't want to be assassinated). Those criticisms don't warrant locking the man up for life though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.