Have you heard of the following debate issues? Roe v Wade? Same sex marriage? Gays in the military? Being gay at all?
Rex Murphy: Removing Julian Assange’s halo
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
The US has talked about charging him but won't in the end. If they could do so they would have a long time ago but since all of his acticvities were outside of US jurisdiction there is not much tehy can do.
As for the rape allegations though, while it is theoretically possible for US agents to hire some women to make such claims, I highly doubt they would do that owing to the risks involved. After all, imagine that during the court procedings one of the women changed her mind and came out with the ruse. Immediately the US would be suspected. I doubt very much the US would do that for that reason alone. For that reason, I believe either the rape allegations are true or based on some misunderstanding, but not likely some secret US plot to frame him. It would be jsut too riskly for the US to do that and it would not be work the risk.
I never said he was innocent. The bull sh!t part is that he is being persecuted in the public opinion realm to coverup the much greater crimes of human rights violations and mass murder of innocents by allied forces in unprovoked and trumped up wars. He is being used as a scapegoat by the real guilty parties.
What was it Stalin said - 1 death is a tragedy one million is a statistic. You condemn one for killing yet
Assange is also guilty of causing deaths.
Tell me the difference.
And he is not important enough to rate the Title of scapegoat. Never was, never will be.
Where is the proof that anyone has died? Or is that just an assumption on your part
Read the news - I believe it was the Guardian that stopped posting his info as they were able to ID quite easily a number of persons. Do you think the Taliban is stupid.
What does the Taliban do to people and their familiies that do not follow their decrees.
Take them out for lunch?
I was just thinking of something though. Where was Assange when he engaged in these activities. I'd imagine most jurisdictions do have laws concerning putting people's lives unnecessarily at risk, no?
So while he may not have broken US laws, he may very well have broken some other country's domestic laws and could potentialy be charged and tried for that of course, with the US being more than happy to provide any assistance it can in helping prove that he had negligently put people's lives and safety unnecessarily at risk or even simple privacy laws if not that.
For example, let's say Assange was in Canada when he'd done these things, at the very least Canadian privacy laws would apply with regards to those Afghans, no?
So while he may not have broken US laws, he may very well have broken some other country's domestic laws and could potentialy be charged and tried for that of course, with the US being more than happy to provide any assistance it can in helping prove that he had negligently put people's lives and safety unnecessarily at risk or even simple privacy laws if not that.
For example, let's say Assange was in Canada when he'd done these things, at the very least Canadian privacy laws would apply with regards to those Afghans, no?
If he was smart (with all the electronic possibilities these day) he have done all his law breaking on the high seas!
And those of us that don't fall neatly at either end of the spectrum? What, we have no values then?
And I'm deluded why exactly? Because I don't see things the way that you do?
For those that seem ok with this information being released to the world, would you feel any differently if it was personal data held by either a corporation, a bank, VISA, or the government about their customers (including possibly yourself) that had been released to the public? Would there be a sense of outrage or a sense that well, its best everybody knows anyways.
Is this a 'because it doesn't affect me its good to know' type situation?
Is this a 'because it doesn't affect me its good to know' type situation?
Yep, considering that the USA had some of their cables leaked (among hundreds of other nations), it must be a plot.
The foilers are really having a field day with this one.
I have no problem with most of the data, such as the reporters getting killed.
But when it identifies people, that places them at risk. The Afghanis are in all likelihood hiding or dead.
The Taliban will exact vengeance on their extended families.
But for some that complain about innocents these people do not seem to matter. Why, they were cooperating with the US. That is one main reason. They go into denial. Tell me who was killed.
Some people are so ffn dumb, but then they are protecting their so called morals. An innocent person is just as dead, no matter who kills them, the US or the Taliban. Ty and explain the difference to me. Why they do not matter.
FFn Sad.
Yes, these are the failings of the social conservatives. Or those on the left-hand side of the social freedom index.
Yes, those of us that don't fall neatly have no values.
We're completely valueless.
Wait, what?
No, because the notion of one who is "right-minded" commonly understood as a conservative when those to the right are actually supposed to be libertarians.
Assange is right-minded as is Levant when it comes to freedom of information. The only difference between the two is how much they are willing to sacrifice security to achieve that end.
Last edited:
So then it's the labels themselves that have no meaning and are without value then? Ethics, morals, principals cross social/political boundaries. At least, that's my point of view. I'm just trying to understand yours as you were the one that said that the principal of freedom of speech was a value of the right.
There is a HUGE chasm between freedom of speech and treason (in the case of Manning) and offering aid, comfort, and information to the enemy (in the case of Assange)
I voted both "he didn't have the right to post and he did have the right". He didn't have the right to post that which would put persons at risk. He did have a right to post those that did not, and/or that which had been redacted.
What I find "amusing" are those screaming about the posts possibly causing the death of innocents and scoffing at the "collateral damage" tag that he used, yet these same people will defend the "collateral damage" deaths caused by the "good guys" as unfortunate but a fact of war.
What I find "amusing" are those screaming about the posts possibly causing the death of innocents and scoffing at the "collateral damage" tag that he used, yet these same people will defend the "collateral damage" deaths caused by the "good guys" as unfortunate but a fact of war.
A lot of people do only give it lip service, from all points along the political spectrum. That denigrates the individual though, not the principal itself.