|
On December 08 2010 05:24 FrostOtter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:23 Hyperbola wrote:
This is ridiculous. A case against him magically appears when he releases secret document? I call sincere bullshit on that one. The only reason for this is to have him in custody and in the hands of the government. This is like some V for Vendetta shit. As many people have pointed out already, this charge is months old and he is just now being arrested for it. Maybe it is shady, maybe it isn't, but it isn't like these women came out today and made the allegation.
Hm, it's not fully suspicious that these allegations are made now (even the fact that he is now in media attention could have triggered these women), but what surprises me is that he's put on Interpol's list.
|
The charge was originally released immediately after the Iraq War Logs leak.
Then the head prosecutor of Sweden dropped the case on lack of evidence. Then an unnamed politician intervened, sent the case to another prosecutor, who reopened it.
This reopening of the case happened immediately before the release of the Afghan War Logs. And the release of the warrant and his arrest was immediately...well, during...Cablegate.
This charge in months old because the Iraq War Logs is months old. And it's been milked for all its worth over the timespan of three document releases. There's another thread in TL on this very charge that shows a more-detailed chronology of events.
|
On December 08 2010 05:26 Half wrote:
Why is it not? The common threads are clear a)Exposes evidence of moral wrongdoing at the cost of b)Power of the establishment on a domestic and global seen, with no reported loss of life.
What wrongdoing? Talking frankly about US interests?
In fact, if you agree with surpressing wikileaks, you must also agree with imprisoning and suppressing Liu Xiabao because his release would hurt the domestic and international of China.
When did I say anything about suppressing Wikileaks?
Because the ideology is facism is based around using ideologues, mass movements and war to prop up a failing industrial sector that is no longer economically efficient.
No matter how you look at it, its wrong. Even if we ignore human morals, its economically inefficient and slows economic growth in the long term, should the movement succeed unsuppressed.
Uh, where exactly are you getting that information from? Fascism is based around a third path between socialism and capitalism, or preserving the private sector while allowing the government to have enough oversight to provide for the best interests of the country. Like any system, it is as strong as the people who make it work. Just like the same capitalism in one country can be more successful than other countries-- it isn't the system, it is the implementation. And what about human morals? What is inherently evil about fascism if you aren't speaking about historical fascist regimes?
I think you mean "jingoism" when you say "fascism"
|
I can feel rage building. Gosh, I'd be so angry to be accused of rape.
Such a low and dirty accusation.
|
On December 08 2010 05:27 Bartuc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:24 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 05:23 Hyperbola wrote:
This is ridiculous. A case against him magically appears when he releases secret document? I call sincere bullshit on that one. The only reason for this is to have him in custody and in the hands of the government. This is like some V for Vendetta shit. As many people have pointed out already, this charge is months old and he is just now being arrested for it. Maybe it is shady, maybe it isn't, but it isn't like these women came out today and made the allegation. Hm, it's not fully suspicious that these allegations are made now (even the fact that he is now in media attention could have triggered these women), but what surprises me is that he's put on Interpol's list.
What is that surprising? I posted a link a few pages back that listed 160 people on Interpol's list for "sex crimes," including him.
|
On December 08 2010 05:29 acker wrote:
The charge was originally released immediately after the Iraq War Logs leak.
Then the head prosecutor of Sweden dropped the case on lack of evidence. Then an unnamed politician intervened, sent the case to another prosecutor, who reopened it.
This reopening of the case happened immediately before the release of the Afghan War Logs. And the release of the warrant and his arrest was immediately...well, during...Cablegate.
This charge in months old because the Iraq War Logs is months old. And it's been milked for all its worth over the timespan of three document releases. There's another thread in TL on this very charge that shows a more-detailed chronology of events.
Hm, but why reopen the case now when there was never any original evidence?
On December 08 2010 05:31 Aruni wrote:I can feel rage building. Gosh, I'd be so angry to be accused of rape. Such a low and dirty accusation.
Indeed, if this is true it's a very low action from those women.
|
What wrongdoing? Talking frankly about US interests?
How about killing 50 civilians, included amongst them 26 women and children in a false flag UAV attack in a allied power to kill four suspected enemy operatives?
Would that be "right" if we did it in NY?
When did I say anything about suppressing Wikileaks?
Your advocating for U.S. prosecution of Julian Assange no?
|
On December 08 2010 05:42 Half wrote:How about killing 50 civilians, included amongst them 26 women and children in a false flag UAV attack in a allied power to kill four suspected enemy operatives? Would that be "right" if we did it in NY?
I don't think anyone is disputing that kind of stuff, are they? People are talking about leaking diplomatic cables and whatnot.
|
On December 08 2010 05:44 FrostOtter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:42 Half wrote:
What wrongdoing? Talking frankly about US interests?
How about killing 50 civilians, included amongst them 26 women and children in a false flag UAV attack in a allied power to kill four suspected enemy operatives? Would that be "right" if we did it in NY? I don't think anyone is disputing that kind of stuff, are they? People are talking about leaking diplomatic cables and whatnot.
That was exposed and confirmed in a leaked diplomatic cable.
|
On December 08 2010 05:44 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:44 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 05:42 Half wrote:
What wrongdoing? Talking frankly about US interests?
How about killing 50 civilians, included amongst them 26 women and children in a false flag UAV attack in a allied power to kill four suspected enemy operatives? Would that be "right" if we did it in NY? I don't think anyone is disputing that kind of stuff, are they? People are talking about leaking diplomatic cables and whatnot. That was exposed and confirmed in a leaked diplomatic cable.
So that one cable explains the leak of the bajillion others?
|
On December 08 2010 05:44 Half wrote:
That was exposed and confirmed in a leaked diplomatic cable.
Unfortunately, exposing such abuses was not the point of the leaked cables. The fact that the biggest stories are whether or not the cables should be leaked and the hunt for Julian Assange is a testament to how little Assange cares about revealing governmental abuses.
|
On December 08 2010 06:07 FrostOtter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:44 Half wrote:On December 08 2010 05:44 FrostOtter wrote:On December 08 2010 05:42 Half wrote:
What wrongdoing? Talking frankly about US interests?
How about killing 50 civilians, included amongst them 26 women and children in a false flag UAV attack in a allied power to kill four suspected enemy operatives? Would that be "right" if we did it in NY? I don't think anyone is disputing that kind of stuff, are they? People are talking about leaking diplomatic cables and whatnot. That was exposed and confirmed in a leaked diplomatic cable. So that one cable explains the leak of the bajillion others?
So who should decide which documents should be leaked and which not? Assange? Obama? You?
On December 08 2010 06:13 domovoi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:44 Half wrote:
That was exposed and confirmed in a leaked diplomatic cable. Unfortunately, exposing such abuses was not the point of the leaked cables. The fact that the biggest stories are whether or not the cables should be leaked and the hunt for Julian Assange is a testament to how little Assange cares about revealing governmental abuses.
What? I have problem to understand logic of this...
|
well, if assange gets extradited, we can trust that noone in the future will be letting us know about anything secret in the future. considering if they are successful, nothing like wikileaks will be tolerated again.
free ticket to do something truly horrific. awesome!
|
On December 08 2010 03:45 FrostOtter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 03:40 -Archangel- wrote:On December 08 2010 03:35 Whiladan wrote:On December 08 2010 03:26 Bartuc wrote:On December 08 2010 03:25 Whiladan wrote:
Irrelevant, unnecessary, and hilariously wrong.
That's your opinion. For me, Assange has done far more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_DunhamShould we next debate the definition of heroism? I know my next statement is going to make you mad but it needs to be said for people like you. Since USA had no business to even be in Iraq, every USA soldier that died there is not a hero but an idiot for letting his government send him there. You can only be a hero if you do something like that in a defensive war. I am sure none of the German soldiers in WWII are called heroes. Many of my friends are in the military, and most of them are in it out of economic need. In fact, the military is largely populated with people who otherwise would not make much money-- so saying they are stupid to fight for their government is not only offensive to those who have died, but ignorant. Does the Croatian military allow soldiers to pick and choose when they fight? Because maybe, if so, we should start taking lessons from Croatia. Except that Croatia is only 18 years old, has struggled economically, and only recently had an education system that extended to the age of 18. In fact, what you didn't bother to mention is that part of the reason you have a country today is because of that US/UN intervention.
Really, what is the going rate for participating in the deaths of 1.5 million Iraqis?
|
On December 08 2010 05:31 FrostOtter wrote:
Uh, where exactly are you getting that information from? Fascism is based around a third path between socialism and capitalism, or preserving the private sector while allowing the government to have enough oversight to provide for the best interests of the country. Like any system, it is as strong as the people who make it work. Just like the same capitalism in one country can be more successful than other countries-- it isn't the system, it is the implementation. And what about human morals? What is inherently evil about fascism if you aren't speaking about historical fascist regimes?
I think you mean "jingoism" when you say "fascism"
This is a very dangerous way of thinking. The "evil" of fascism is the centralization of absolute power into the hands of the few (or the one). How often have experiments down the road on awry? Better yet, how disastrous have some of those experiments been?
Let's turn your question around: when has fascism ever worked out well?
|
On December 08 2010 06:13 domovoi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 05:44 Half wrote:
That was exposed and confirmed in a leaked diplomatic cable. Unfortunately, exposing such abuses was not the point of the leaked cables. The fact that the biggest stories are whether or not the cables should be leaked and the hunt for Julian Assange is a testament to how little Assange cares about revealing governmental abuses.
I don't understand this post. If wikileaks took it upon themselves to censor the stuff people sent them and only released what they deemed 'interesting' the point would dissapear.
The fact is that people are getting tired of being lied to, maybe they no longer want their tax money to fund the slaughter of civilians.
In sweden a story is just now flaring up regarding the current governement violating the swedish constitution in their anti terror cooperation with the US as another example.
It's quite evident that enough stuff is being kept from the general public that shouldn't be that Assange is justified in publishing all information given to him regardless of content.
|
This reminds me of the raid on the Pirate Bay a few years back when the USA pressured (or simply asked, it's not entirely clear) the Swedish minister of justice who in turn put pressure on the police. This is probably along those lines, an order issued in the USA and carried out in Sweden long ways down the power structure.
I don't see why Sweden would do this by itself, no one here is very concerned about the Wikileaks documents, they actually only put the Swedish government in a better light after turning down CIA's prisoner transports through Sweden in 2006. I guess some people have a few things to clarify to the public but no one THAT powerful.
|
On December 08 2010 06:31 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 06:13 domovoi wrote:On December 08 2010 05:44 Half wrote:
That was exposed and confirmed in a leaked diplomatic cable. Unfortunately, exposing such abuses was not the point of the leaked cables. The fact that the biggest stories are whether or not the cables should be leaked and the hunt for Julian Assange is a testament to how little Assange cares about revealing governmental abuses. I don't understand this post. If wikileaks took it upon themselves to censor the stuff people sent them and only released what they deemed 'interesting' the point would dissapear. The fact is that people are getting tired of being lied to, maybe they no longer want their tax money to fund the slaughter of civilians. In sweden a story is just now flaring up regarding the current governement violating the swedish constitution in their anti terror cooperation with the US as another example. It's quite evident that enough stuff is being kept from the general public that shouldn't be that Assange is justified in publishing all information given to him regardless of content.
Do you mean the American embassy spying on Swedish citizens? I read about that, really interesting stuff. The government could've actually stepped out of their mandate if they allowed foreign powers to spy on their own citizenry. One law expert claimed that if this is the case then the governement actually comitted treason against the Swedish people which requires a re-election at the least. It probably wont come to that, they'll just make an internal investigation and maybe fire some mid-levels and it'll be the end of it, but it tickles the mind.
But yeah, after reading about stuff like that and even more now with these documents I'm even more sure that Wikileaks are doing the right thing. Transparancy is crucial in a democracy.
|
Blindly publishing documents sent to wikileaks would not be very smart of wikileaks. I'm sure that's not what they're doing.
Why is it stupid to not sort through the stuff first?
1. You might end up hurting (e.g. killing) a lot of people.
2. Your enemies can make you look stupid, and your output so noisy that it's worthless.
|
On December 08 2010 06:51 BottleAbuser wrote:
Blindly publishing documents sent to wikileaks would not be very smart of wikileaks. I'm sure that's not what they're doing.
Why is it stupid to not sort through the stuff first?
1. You might end up hurting (e.g. killing) a lot of people.
2. Your enemies can make you look stupid, and your output so noisy that it's worthless.
But number two is exactly what's happening ~~
People get caught up in pointless gossip and ignore the stuff that actually matters, the impact of the leaks would have been a lot bigger if they had cherry picked and maybe released stuf over a much longer time period. However that would have been counter to their philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
