Rex Murphy: Removing Julian Assange’s halo


View Poll Results: Assange is responsible for a number of Innocent Deaths
Yes 11 50.00%
No 5 22.73%
He was right to release the files 7 31.82%
He was wrong to release the files 6 27.27%
Do not give a hoot about repercussions. We had to know. 1 4.55%
The US Govt will eventually catch him 4 18.18%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 22. You may not vote on this poll

Goober
+1
#61
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Did he really say that? I'd like to know the source. If true, that's digusting.

From the very beginning of this cyberleak story, the question that interested me was: Who was Julian Assange and what gave him the moral authority to do what he did?
In the OP.

That others may suffer or be killed because of his revelations doesn’t seem to bother Assange very greatly. In one batch of documents, journalists were able to find the names and home villages of dozens of Afghans credited with providing detailed intelligence to U.S. forces — thereby making them targets for Taliban reprisal. Assange early and chillingly dismissed those consequences as something beyond his control — or, famously, on American television, as “his” collateral damage.
My view of the WikiLeaks disclosures — leaving aside for the time being the Americans own vast carelessness over the files — is that they were absolutely wrong. The action was licensed only by Assange’s own massively arrogant assumption that he, Julian Assange, was somehow “entitled” to do so; that he was the Solon who could determine whether lives could be put at risk, relations between countries ruptured, names named, and life-and-death operations opened to all.

We have come to regard almost any and all actions against “the state” automatically as works of virtue and worthy of praise. But our esteem is, in many instances, deeply misplaced and fraught with mischief and peril. Assange is more fame-seeker and groupie-collector than he is a moral agent. We should not confuse Assange, or the immature, morally witless Bradley Manning, with Solhenitsyn or Sakharov. The great Russians were heros who faced imprisonment, torture and ostracism to tell the truth. Assange was taxed to summon the courage for an appearance on the Today Show, with the grand inquisitor Meredith Vierra.
 
CDNBear
+1
#62
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Whose theater was it?

The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU.

Are you playing devils advocate, or do you really think exposing a CI to the very real possibility of reprisal, is somehow protected by free speech?
Last edited by CDNBear; Dec 27th, 2011 at 12:06 PM..
 
petros
#63
Was the data released from servers in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU?

Who published it? Who in the chain of authority over that material in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU. Why did that chain break? Who broke it? Who failed to monitor and maintain each and every link of that chain?

Who published it in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU and is getting away with it?

Put everything back in the frying pan (including hookers and blow) and try as you might but none of it will ever sizzle and become a stir fry within the recipe of legal boundaries that is digestable.
 
CDNBear
+3
#64
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Was the data released from servers in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU?

Who published it? Who in the chain of authority over that material in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU. Why did that chain break? Who broke it? Who failed to monitor and maintain each and every link of that chain?

Who published it in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU and is getting away with it?

Put everything back in the frying pan (including hookers and blow) and try as you might but none of it will ever sizzle and become a stir fry within the recipe of legal boundaries that is digestable.

You can babble all you want. It doesn't change the fact that Assange publishing the names of individuals aiding Coalition Forces, isn't free speech.

Hence the US indictment on the way.
 
petros
#65
IN your opinion otherwise his *** wouldn't be indicted on the alleged rape of hookers but on espionage.
 
CDNBear
+2
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

IN your opinion...

Based on case law. Unlike yours.

Quote:

... otherwise his *** wouldn't be indicted on the alleged rape of hookers but on espionage.

Unless he actually raped someone. And like I said, the Justice Dept is reportedly working on an indictment.

Given the fact that it was US property that was stolen, released on foreign servers, affecting people in another country. It isn't something the local JP can throw his stamp on willy nilly.
 
Cliffy
+1
#67
I really don't get why one person is guilty of treason for endangering a few lives while all the *******s who sent troupes to foreign lands to kill innocent people and be killed are free of responsibility. I really don't give a flying phuck about whether he is guilty or not. Either everybody is equal before the law or they are not. If he is to be charged, then charge the rest: all those responsible for starting these unprovoked wars and the untold death toll of innocent populations.
 
CDNBear
#68
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

I really don't get why one person is guilty of treason for endangering a few lives while all the *******s who sent troupes to foreign lands to kill innocent people and be killed are free of responsibility.

You might want to take that up with the Germans, with regards to Iraq.

As far as Afghanistan goes, I guess the Taliban shouldn't have allowed themselves to be used in such a way.

Quote:

I really don't give a flying phuck about whether he is guilty or not. Either everybody is equal before the law or they are not. If he is to be charged, then charge the rest: all those responsible for starting these unprovoked wars and the untold death toll of innocent populations.

I agree with regards to Iraq, but when it comes to Afghanistan, I don't.
 
petros
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Based on case law. Unlike yours.

Unless he actually raped someone. And like I said, the Justice Dept is reportedly working on an indictment.

Given the fact that it was US property that was stolen, released on foreign servers, affecting people in another country. It isn't something the local JP can throw his stamp on willy nilly.

Really? So why the hookers?

Give your head a shake.
 
Goober
+1
#70
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

IN your opinion otherwise his *** wouldn't be indicted on the alleged rape of hookers but on espionage.

It is in front of a Grand Jury as we speak.
 
CDNBear
#71
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Really? So why the hookers?

Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Unless he actually raped someone.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Give your head a shake.

I'd much rather listen to the rattle when you shake yours.
 
petros
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

It is in front of a Grand Jury as we speak.

NY Times too? How do you get hookers to bust a Corp?
 
Goober
+1
#73
Question for those that belive he was right to release this infomation.
What information should not be released?

One point to consider is that all the people who worked with and backed him left and publicly declared why they did so. Check the reasons why they left before you answer the question.
 
petros
+1
#74
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

I'd much rather listen to the rattle when you shake yours.

One day at midnight, the sun was so bright
The moon had no light, but I could see
This big ol' sasquatch, said he was top-notch, at playin' hopscotch
Way up in a tree
So I bet my wrist watch, that big ol'd sasquatch
Would never play hopscotch way up in a tree
Now, there's a sasquatch, up in a tree crotch
He's got my wrist watch, and he's laughin' at me
I told the mounties, throughout the counties
To put some bounties all over B.C.
And stop that sasquatch, from playin' hopscotch
'Till he gives my wrist watch, right back to me
Then Corporal Savern, he found a tavern, in an empty cavern
Where the sun don't shine
And he found a sasquatch, drinkin' blue blotch
Wearin' a wrist watch, lookin' just like mine
So he asked the sasquatch, where he got the wrist watch
And that big ol' sasquatch, he began to lie
Said he got the wrist watch, while playin' hopscotch
Up in a tree crotch, with a stupid old guy
So the mountie told him, he could never hold him
He'd have to scold him, for doing no harm
So they played some hopscotch, until the sasquatch
Had the mountie's wrist watch, on his other arm

Now all the mounties, throughout the counties
They're placing bounties all over the land
And that big ol' sasquatch, he won't feel top notch
When they get their sasquatch, like they get their man
'Cause if that sasquatch keeps playin' hopscotch
There won't be a wrist watch, for miles around
'Cause he'll play hopscotch, 'till he gets your wrist watch
Up in that tree crotch, and he'll never come down
So don't play hopscotch, near any old tree crotch
Until that old, watch stealin', big feelin', hopscotchin' sasquatch is found


 
CDNBear
#75
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

One day at midnight...

Ya, that really squelched the rattle...

It's not my fault you have a fixation with hookers, blow sasquatch.
 
petros
#76
Keep an eye on your wrist watch.
 
CDNBear
#77
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Keep an eye on your wrist watch.

Which one?
 
petros
#78
 
CDNBear
#79
I don't have one of those.

The one I'm wearing is non-reflective, olive drab with Timex on a RealTree AP HD camo face. The other ones say Coleman on on a solid black face, and Timex on a solid beige face.

My watches serve different purposes, none of which are to emphasize my political bent, like yours apparently.

Anyways, I'm off to attempt to fill my third tag this year. TTFN.
 
petros
#80
My political bent? You've read my copyrighted manifesto by downloading it of off the Pirate Bay?
 
Machjo
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Was the data released from servers in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU?

Who published it? Who in the chain of authority over that material in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU. Why did that chain break? Who broke it? Who failed to monitor and maintain each and every link of that chain?

Who published it in The States', Canada's and several countries in the EU and is getting away with it?

Put everything back in the frying pan (including hookers and blow) and try as you might but none of it will ever sizzle and become a stir fry within the recipe of legal boundaries that is digestable.

Now there is a technical point that if Assange never set foot on US soil, then by definition he did not break any US laws. Then the question is whether he broke the laws of the country in which he was when he was committing those acts.
 
Goober
#82
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Now there is a technical point that if Assange never set foot on US soil, then by definition he did not break any US laws. Then the question is whether he broke the laws of the country in which he was when he was committing those acts.

The US is funny that way - Example - A warrant is issued - Someone kidnaps the person from another country - takes him to the US - Guess what - He - the accused goes to trial - The guy that brought him in. The US does not care and does not lay charges - That is for the country that the accused was picked up from to proceed with.
Google Dog the Bounty Hunter - he did the same thing in Mexico and brought an accused back to the US for trial - Dog was extadited on request from Mexico - charges dismissed in Mexico.
And that is why he has such a big show.
 
Cliffy
#83
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Now there is a technical point that if Assange never set foot on US soil, then by definition he did not break any US laws. Then the question is whether he broke the laws of the country in which he was when he was committing those acts.

It really doesn't matter if he broke any US laws. If they want to get him they will manufacture a reason. As Arlo Guthry said, "there is no discrimination and there is no hypocrisy because we will get anybody."
 
Goober
+1
#84
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

It really doesn't matter if he broke any US laws. If they want to get him they will manufacture a reason. As Arlo Guthry said, "there is no discrimination and there is no hypocrisy because we will get anybody."

No they will use the law. Man that hate runs deep.
Now Assange is resposnisble for providing information that led to peoples deaths. He is innocent?? Is that your take on that?
 
Cliffy
+1
#85
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

No they will use the law. Man that hate runs deep.

Yes, they will use the law, they will, however, manufacture a reason, like hookers and blow. And I could say you are an *** kisser for supporting their reign of terror under the BS title of War on Terror.
 
TenPenny
#86
It's rather funny that he would say, ''Well, they're informants so, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it.", and yet, he seems awfully concerned with preserving his own ***.
 
Cliffy
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

It's rather funny that he would say, ''Well, they're informants so, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it.", and yet, he seems awfully concerned with preserving his own ***.

Personal survival is an overwhelming human motivator. Try drowning yourself. It is damn near impossible.
 
TenPenny
#88
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Personal survival is an overwhelming human motivator. Try drowning yourself. It is damn near impossible.

I don't know, I know several people who have managed to do so.
 
Goober
#89
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Yes, they will use the law, they will, however, manufacture a reason, like hookers and blow. And I could say you are an *** kisser for supporting their reign of terror under the BS title of War on Terror.

No - Iraq i stated my opinion on that a number of times - Afghanistan - They should have gone in with enough troops to cut of Tora Bora - Rumsfeld turned that down.
Regardless, they should have packed up and hit the road out of there after that. It was Fuked before and they should have left it alone.

Call it a War on Terror, call it this, that or whatever. i know that there are wackos out there that would just love to kill like they did on 911.
You may have a differing opinion.
 
Cliffy
#90
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

No - Iraq i stated my opinion on that a number of times - Afghanistan - They should have gone in with enough troops to cut of Tora Bora - Rumsfeld turned that down.
Regardless, they should have packed up and hit the road out of there after that. It was Fuked before and they should have left it alone.

Call it a War on Terror, call it this, that or whatever. i know that there are wackos out there that would just love to kill like they did on 911.
You may have a differing opinion.

And therein lies the crux of the problem. 10 second sound bites. We are trained to look at microscopic events and not connect the dots. There is a reason why people are willing to die to get back at the US. That reason is called foreign policy. Iran's hatred of the US goes back to the Shaw. Interference in the internal affairs of the middle east are at the root of all Muslim and Arab animosity toward the US and Britain and now, with our involvement in Afghanistan and Libya, Canada. But I can understand why people can't see past their noses. We have been conditioned that way on purpose. That is why I don't have a TV, read news papers (an oxymoron) or magazines. You should try it some time. It would help you see a little clearer.
 

Similar Threads

8
Gun registry usless: rex murphy
by Nuggler | Sep 17th, 2011
3
brittany murphy rip
by spaminator | Dec 24th, 2009
no new posts