Julian Assange and Wikileaks

Who knows. the way US politics is currently going...Sweden is the safer option. And then there is the time limit.

Some of the data he leaked did directly aid the Taliban, I believe several people working against either the Taliban or AQ died to the Wikileaks compromising their identities, treason would be hard to make stick but there’s a train of thought for it.

I’d still rather he go down for, rape>jumping bail>aiding Russia over Brexit>aiding Russia over Trump>getting people killed by outing them to AQ and the Taliban, in that order.

That’s pure speculation, not a realistic analysis of the situation. Legal precedent and judicial appointments aren’t going to change overnight.

True, but the fact that the charges in Sweden are more pressing should put it on top of the list.

Also Sweden issued a warrant first.

And once Sweden is done they can still send him to the US if they think that their claim is valid.

This by the way proves a point I made years ago, that the Sweden case was never about getting Assange to Sweden and then to the US (this was always the defence used for Assange against the rape claim, that Sweden faked the case so as to get him and send him to the US), because if the US wanted Assange they could always get him strait from the British, which looks to be what’s happening.

Is doxxing a criminal offence in any of the countries that want him?

I can't think of a single charge other than rape I'd prosecute Assange for.

Even if he were being aided by Russia or working for them, what he did was simply reveal events.

If a Communist Agent in the 1950s reveals Mc Carthy is a shitbag, he's not committed crimes.

What he did went a little beyond “simply reveal events”.

Though I agree Sweden should have the first shot at him, the rape charge is certainly the most pressing.

Edited by archonspeaks on Apr 14th 2019 at 6:58:26 AM

Deliberately revealing the identities of intelligence sources to the Taliban/AQ? Actively working with the Russian government to release false/misleading information so as to influence an election/referendum, helping bring about coordination between political actors and the Russian government? Assisting in the murder of numerous LGBT individuals by revealing their LGBT status to those who want LGBT dead? Soliciting individuals with security clearance to break into classified systems for him? Directly providing intelligence information to hostile governments?

Shit simply jumping bail.

None of those should be crimes in your mind?

Edited by Silasw on Apr 14th 2019 at 2:36:05 PM

But he is against USA so it's fine

The legal precedent set by prosecuting him for just about all of that can and will be used by authoritarian-leaning actors in the United States. The Obama Administration did not pursue action against Julian Assange not because they liked the guy or he wasn't an enormous pile of shit but because the dangers for curtaining freedom of speech and the press were immense, no matter how he misused it.

The revealing of the LGBT status of people seems line a no brainer.

But who will decide the crime there?

Is the crime. "Reveal information that might endanger someone?"

How about using that to throw an LGBT whistler blower into prison and be tortured for it?

Because that happened for different crimes.

I don't trust this government to prosecute Assange fairly or not to use him as a weapon against freedom.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Apr 14th 2019 at 7:43:31 AM

Shit I forgot one, just strait up doxing people, both public and private individuals.

So? "authoritarian-leaning actors" will use anything as precedent regardless of reality, or they will just make something up, that's hardly a good enough reason to allow: jumping bail, doxing, conspiracy to rig an election, conspiracy to assist in homicide, conspiracy to assist in terrorism, conspiracy to assist espionage, conspiracy to breach classified systems, ect...

I'd at least kinda get it you said you thought he should just be above the law, but you clearly think that some laws should apply to him, so why not laws again jumping bail and doxing? Those aren't even crimes against the US government specifically (they're against the British government and numerous individuals).

Edited by Silasw on Apr 14th 2019 at 2:49:09 PM

Like I said, I will never understand why anyone ever admired his guy.

Than you should demand a better quality of government, not that he be declared above the law.

I trust the Obama Administration's judgement.

And I think Assange's crimes in Sweden should be where he's prosecuted.

Obama wasn't a wise omnicient philosopher-king, maybe Obama could have...beign wrong?

I know, this is the Trump era and now every over-the-top anti american paranoia seems justified but...c'mon. I think that even Granny Hillary thought that Assad was a danger.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Apr 14th 2019 at 10:29:48 AM

@M84

- Most stuff I've seen is holding governments accountable for their actions, even if it was well-intentioned.

Granted that some of those who advocate this may say it under an ideology or something similar.

They were clearly projecting their own issues on to Assange rather than objectively seeing him for what he was.

As a former fan of Assange, it was largely a case of more information coming out. The idea that all a man's dirty secrets were instantly available to know is silly.

Assange should be punished but in a way that doesn't make it more difficult for widespread distribution of information and protection of those who release it.

It was a lot easier for people who already had anti-authoritarian biases (particularly against USA authority) to hold up Assange as some paragon for transparency.

When in truth, he was never anything more than an asshole who made it his life's mission to troll the USA.

David Leigh and Luke Harding's history of Wikileaks recorded Assange saying to a group of reporters that US informants in Iraq and Afghanistan had it coming. His later leaks exposed a large number of Chinese and Tibetan human rights activists and their contacts with US diplomatic staff. The guy himself clearly isn't a sincere believer in the protection of civil liberties.

I can't think of any way to prosecute him beyond the rape charge that isn't morally iffy from a civic standpoint. But there's got to be a way to protect the people he's endangered, at least. And the guy clearly needs a lot of psychological help in his current state.

Yeah, Assange spit on every bit of good will he was given by everyone he worked for and became someone virtually everyone could hate by the end. Thankfully, there are actual hero leakers and publishers to revere.

As someone who takes a very dim view of internet trolls who do harmful shit like exposing people's secrets and doxxing, I have no sympathy for Assange.

Assange is yet more proof that putting people on pedestals is a terrible idea.

Edited by M84 on Apr 15th 2019 at 12:28:02 AM