[xQx]

Originally Posted by Run Silent

2) He committed high treason.

Forgetting the fact that his actions should be protected by journalistic protections, or that the information he was publishing was criminal actions of the US government that would've been protected under the Whistleblower Act if they were about a corporate entity rather than a government organisation:

When an Australian Citizen in a European country acts against the interests of the US government, that is not treason.

the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.

If Julian ended up collecting a stray bullet from an unknown shooter (assumed to be a US-financed clandestine agency), I'd say - fair's fair in love and war and that's a risk you take when you go to war with one of the most powerful sovereign powers in the world.

But if he ends up facing criminal charges on US soil - that would be an incredibly poor reflection on every western democracy involved.

He is an Australian in Europe. We should not be subject to the laws of your foreign government (ie. US Law), any more than you should be subject to ours.

... or do you think the CEO of Cisco should be able to be arrested in Europe and extradited to China to face spying charges against the Chinese government?

[edit: And just to be clear, this isn't just a crack at the US government over-reaching. Australia has been exceptionally piss-poor in this whole thing. Not only did we let him rot in an Ecuadorian apartment in London, but we updated our extradition laws to make sure he's got no right to a trial here if he comes home and the Australian Government want to extradite him to the USA]

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by minn19

Again, why just against the West and the US in particular? Russia hasn’t done any war crimes in shooting down an airliner, Ukraine or Syria to just name a few? China and their dissidents etc?

There are already countless international formal inquiries on those events with way more influential means.
I'm sure that if a reporter gets deep inside information in his hands regarding those events they won't be hesitant to publish it and then give it to the appropriate authorities. I don't understand how this is a comparison to the Assange case.

At least he has a chance to argue his case in court. Russia/China would’ve just killed him.

So the fact that there are worse countries that commit known human right crimes makes it right what the US government does?
How is the argument that elswhere in the world worse things happen a good and relevant excuse for what happens in this case? What's the logic behind that?

Not to mention the guys well known narcissism/ego. Wikileaks is better off without him and I’m sure many were not happy with a lot of his actions.

If being an asshole was a legit reason to put someone in jail, 99% of the politicians would be in jail.
He might be a narcissist jerk, but he's pale in comparison to the most powerful man on earth, both of them btw.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by xQx

Forgetting the fact that his actions should be protected by journalistic protections, or that the information he was publishing was criminal actions of the US government that would've been protected under the Whistleblower Act if they were about a corporate entity rather than a government organisation:

When an Australian Citizen in a European country acts against the interests of the US government, that is not treason.

the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.

If Julian ended up collecting a stray bullet from an unknown shooter (assumed to be a US-financed clandestine agency), I'd say - fair's fair in love and war and that's a risk you take when you go to war with one of the most powerful sovereign powers in the world.

But if he ends up facing criminal charges on US soil - that would be an incredibly poor reflection on every western democracy involved.

He is an Australian in Europe. We should not be subject to the laws of your foreign government (ie. US Law), any more than you should be subject to ours.

... or do you think the CEO of Cisco should be able to be arrested in Europe and extradited to China to face spying charges against the Chinese government?

[edit: And just to be clear, this isn't just a crack at the US government over-reaching. Australia has been exceptionally piss-poor in this whole thing. Not only did we let him rot in an Ecuadorian apartment in London, but we updated our extradition laws to make sure he's got no right to a trial here if he comes home and the Australian Government want to extradite him to the USA]

He's really not a journalist.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

There are already countless international formal inquiries on those events with way more influential means.
I'm sure that if a reporter gets deep inside information in his hands regarding those events they won't be hesitant to publish it and then give it to the appropriate authorities. I don't understand how this is a comparison to the Assange case.

So the fact that there are worse countries that commit known human right crimes makes it right what the US government does?
How is the argument that elswhere in the world worse things happen a good and relevant excuse for what happens in this case? What's the logic behind that?



If being an asshole was a legit reason to put someone in jail, 99% of the politicians would be in jail.
He might be a narcissist jerk, but he's pale in comparison to the most powerful man on earth, both of them btw.

Where in these posts have I said this excuses the US in any way (I said the exact opposite as a matter of fact) or where have I said being an asshole was a legitimate reason to put him in jail? You’ll get no argument from me about the other two assholes you are talking about, but .

Funny Trump was singing his/Wikileaks praises all through the campaign etc and then claims to not know of Wikileaks. Put him in a long line of people used by him then discarded when he is no longer of use to him.

It goes to you and others saying the US has zero reason to arrest the guy or that he is a hero and just a journalist. Give me a break. Yes, the US has been and is still doing horrible things. But, at least he has due process in the US and a chance to defend himself against said charges.

Did you guys really think the US and others wouldn’t fight back?

Edit: It isn’t a comparison, but it goes against he is just a journalist crap and not a willing participant in certain political movements etc.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasb.../#5bfe960530a0

[xQx]

Originally Posted by minn19

It goes to you and others saying the US has zero reason to arrest the guy or that he is a hero and just a journalist. Give me a break. Yes, the US has been and is still doing horrible things. But, at least he has due process in the US and a chance to defend himself against said charges.

Did you guys really think the US and others wouldn’t fight back?

Edit: It isn’t a comparison, but it goes against he is just a journalist crap and not a willing participant in certain political movements etc.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasb.../#5bfe960530a0

Do you really think he's going to get a fair trial, considering that the people who he exposed as criminals and liars are the same people who make the laws that the court enforces?

Also, do you think it's reasonable that he be brought to the US for trial, given that he is a foreign citizen on foreign soil?

... and being a foreign citizen, forcibly recovered from foreign soil, do you think he will enjoy all the same protections of the US legal system and US constitution as he would if he were a US citizen?

Originally Posted by Real Dodger

He's really not a journalist.

That's one of the key points which would be tested in a fair trial. (does a casual blogger get the same protection as a full-time newspaper employee, and if not, where's the line?)

But would the situation be any different if he was a full time employee of the Guardian?

My point is that he's not a US citizen, and he's not on US soil - so it should be entirely immaterial whether or not he broke the law in the Eastern District of Virginia.

[Poiseuille]

Originally Posted by Real Dodger

It's true, the Masters started today. In Augusta Georgia.

that's the problem with ironic humor RD, especially if you get too subtle about it: sometimes people think you're serious. even now you-know-who thinks i'm on-board with chem trails...

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by Poiseuille

that's the problem with ironic humor RD, especially if you get too subtle about it: sometimes people think you're serious. even now you-know-who thinks i'm on-board with chem trails...

He who shall not be named...

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by minn19

Where in these posts have I said this excuses the US in any way (I said the exact opposite as a matter of fact) or where have I said being an asshole was a legitimate reason to put him in jail? You’ll get no argument from me about the other two assholes you are talking about, but .

Well you mention the asshole thing in a discussion about whether or not the arrest of Assange is a good thing or not.
If you dont mean anything by that relating to the matter at hand, why mention it? You even announce it with "not to mention" which in my book means that its introduced as an additional argument or to reinforce the argument.

It's not only the arrest the US wants to make but also the possible extradition from other countries to the US (the UK). I think that the matter at hand that the US militairy shot innocent men in a situation were lots of countries and specialists say, after analizing the footage, that there was no need to should be leading, and not how a (foreign) journalist got that footage.
xQx said it quite well in his post

And to elaborate on your previous question of how its going to help the US hide their misdeeds: this serves as an exemplary case, a deterrent to other journalists regardless of their nationality or where they live.

[Poiseuille]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

He who shall not be named...

yes, that guy.....

[F32Fleet]

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/t...ange-explained


"Assange “conspired” with Manning by helping her crack a Defense Department computer password in March 2010 that provided access to a U.S. government network that stored classified information and communications."


- Journalists do not offer to assist in the stealing of state secrets.

[Poiseuille]

Originally Posted by F32Fleet

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/t...ange-explained


"Assange "conspired" with Manning by helping her crack a Defense Department computer password in March 2010 that provided access to a U.S. government network that stored classified information and communications."


- Journalists do not offer to assist in the hacking. That's called conspiracy.

^^^^ this

[minn19]

Originally Posted by xQx

Do you really think he's going to get a fair trial, considering that the people who he exposed as criminals and liars are the same people who make the laws that the court enforces?

Also, do you think it's reasonable that he be brought to the US for trial, given that he is a foreign citizen on foreign soil?

... and being a foreign citizen, forcibly recovered from foreign soil, do you think he will enjoy all the same protections of the US legal system and US constitution as he would if he were a US citizen?



That's one of the key points which would be tested in a fair trial. (does a casual blogger get the same protection as a full-time newspaper employee, and if not, where's the line?)

But would the situation be any different if he was a full time employee of the Guardian?

My point is that he's not a US citizen, and he's not on US soil - so it should be entirely immaterial whether or not he broke the law in the Eastern District of Virginia.

Does Australia or any other country extradite non citizens that commit crimes that cause harm against them or their citizens? Of course they do.

Do I think he’ll get a fair trial. I do as he will have access to the very best defense lawyers and non stop media coverage.

[xQx]

Here's a pretty simple analogy. Say Elon Musk visits Thailand today, then comes back home to the USA and tweets something bad about the Thai King.

Do you think the US should extradite him back to Thailand for a "fair trial" under their Lese-majeste laws?

[ItsGary]

Originally Posted by F32Fleet

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/t...ange-explained


"Assange “conspired” with Manning by helping her crack a Defense Department computer password in March 2010 that provided access to a U.S. government network that stored classified information and communications."


- Journalists do not offer to assist in the stealing of state secrets.

Conspiracy related charges are so stupid.

"We have no proof he did it, but we think he did!"

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by ItsGary

Conspiracy related charges are so stupid.

"We have no proof he did it, but we think he did!"

They do have proof. They have copies of the communications between Assange and Manning. Now if you want to believe the "proof" was manufactured that's entirely up to you, but in any case this is the official charge.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

Well you mention the asshole thing in a discussion about whether or not the arrest of Assange is a good thing or not.
If you dont mean anything by that relating to the matter at hand, why mention it? You even announce it with "not to mention" which in my book means that its introduced as an additional argument or to reinforce the argument.

It's not only the arrest the US wants to make but also the possible extradition from other countries to the US (the UK). I think that the matter at hand that the US militairy shot innocent men in a situation were lots of countries and specialists say, after analizing the footage, that there was no need to should be leading, and not how a (foreign) journalist got that footage.
xQx said it quite well in his post

And to elaborate on your previous question of how its going to help the US hide their misdeeds: this serves as an exemplary case, a deterrent to other journalists regardless of their nationality or where they live.

I’m not a lawyer and this is a discussion forum so non legal opinions abound and get brought up.

How has it deterred all journalists? The US has tried this in the past with regard to the Vietnam leak and also with many others in the recent past. Yet journalists are still at it so it doesn’t look like it works.

Any country is going to go after someone that is undermining nearly their entire foreign policy agenda.

What does the military case have to do with it? That is a separate case on its own.

[Poiseuille]

Originally Posted by xQx

Here's a pretty simple analogy. Say Elon Musk visits Thailand today, then comes back home to the USA and tweets something bad about the Thai King.

Do you think the US should extradite him back to Thailand for a "fair trial" under their Lese-majeste laws?

^^^^ "...tweets something bad"

thud.....

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by minn19

How has it deterred all journalists? The US has tried this in the past with regard to the Vietnam leak and also with many others in the recent past. Yet journalists are still at it so it doesn’t look like it works.

You dont know that. You can't see in the alternate reality where the US doesn't try it.

What does the military case have to do with it? That is a separate case on its own.

It has everything to do with it. It is one of the main scandals that came out of it. Without Assange this would have been a cover up.
I think people have right to know these things but the US government seems to think otherwise.

Originally Posted by minn19

I’m not a lawyer and this is a discussion forum so non legal opinions abound and get brought up.

what exactly do you mean by this. To what part of my post is this directed?

[minn19]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

You dont know that. You can't see in the alternate reality where the US doesn't try it.



It has everything to do with it. It is one of the main scandals that came out of it. Without Assange this would have been a cover up.
I think people have right to know these things but the US government seems to think otherwise.

what exactly do you mean by this. To what part of my post is this directed?

Uh we do know that. Journalists, enemies, opportunists and whistleblowers have continued to come forward all the time in wars and other things regarding the US government.

That case/incident was already reported on before Assange released the video by the AP and others. Yes the video evidence obviously helped bring more awareness etc to the case. We are a very visual species.

Going back a few posts where I asked why Assange/WikiLeaks didn’t release any secrets from Russia/China etc misdeeds. You said many other professional organizations are investigating those incidents. Wouldn’t a video or some documents hacked/stolen from those countries help those organizations greatly like they did for the US case? But, no for some strange reason Assange/WikiLeaks only goes after the West/US. I truly wonder why that is.

As for the last part I don’t know what to say. Reread the post I was referencing and see if you understand it better. It was something along the lines that you thought I was saying because I though Assange was and egotistical asshole was a reason for his arrest. I basically said it wasn’t and it was just an opinion of mine on a forum filled with opinions.

Any way, enough round and round. None of us know what either side has or doesn’t have so we’ll have to wait for the trial to get some more information.

[minn19]

Hmm, interesting.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/foreign...-campaign/amp/

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by minn19

But, no for some strange reason Assange/WikiLeaks only goes after the West/US.

If you look on wikileaks you know that that technically isnt completely true.
Most publications are, but its not 'only'. There are also some russian files for example. (but russia is for a part europe, more on that below)

But like I said, there are countless official western intelligence agencies spying on the situations/areas that you reffered to earlier. I dont think there is a thing that wikileaks could get up on the table that those agencies dont already know as their resources are infinate compared to wikileaks.
And I cant imagine that the western governments cover up large scandals found in china, russia or other non allied countries. If that was the case then wikileaks with chinese documents etc would make sense
That regarding the collection of data and information in general worldwide, but that is not the point of wikileaks


Their goal is to uncover classified documents that our government holds classified to us, or organisations/companies that are located here hold classified from us.
So they fight agains secrets and coverups that organisations where we (as the people of a nation or allied conglomerate) should have an influence on.
So I dont think its clear to you what wikileaks is about (or at least we have a different opinion about that)
Its not there to show how bad the chinese government or NK government is and what kind of awful things take place there. I'm pretty sure the government has no problem telling us about that as much as there is to tell.
Its about what aweful things our government (or other organisations here in the west where we should have an influence on) do, under our noses (or abroad) for which they didn't get a mandate (either legally or democratically) and fail to tell us about.
Its about collecting persecuted documents here.

A wikileaks regarding russian documents would make sense for a site in russian, accessable for russians.
Or chinese documents for chinese people, accessable in china.
Thats the idea.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

If you look on wikileaks you know that that isnt true.
Most publications are, but its not 'only'. There are also russian files for example. (although russia is for a part europe, more on that below)

But like I said, there are countless official western intelligence agencies spying on the situations/areas that you reffered to earlier. I dont think there is a thing that wikileaks could get up on the table that those agencies dont already know.
That regarding the collection of data and information in general worldwide, but that is not the point of wikileaks
Wikileaks is a western oriented site (multi national with a team in europe and a team in the US) that tries to inform citizens from the western world (regarding classified documents), so it makes sense to publish scandals that happen there or by organisations that are situated there. Its goal is to show what happens under our noses or is caused by organisations that act under our noses.

I dont know if russians have a need for a russian version of wikileaks.
And a chinese version... well... the chinese internet will surely block that in china.

You aren’t actually serious with this post are you? Russia doesn’t need a WikiLeaks? Second to China they are the ones most badly in need of such a type of organization. Please show me these big releases that have had the same impact/importance as the ones against the West/US.

Honestly after this we are so far apart in our thinking, I don’t think there is much use in more back and forth. I’m not saying that in a dick/condescending way, just pragmatically.

Besides I’ve got to catch up on these shows. Gee I wonder who controls the content on this site?

https://www.rt.com/tags/the-julian-assange-show/