|
On December 08 2010 00:16 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 00:09 KhrisKruel wrote:On December 08 2010 00:06 garmule2 wrote:
Anyone else feel like this is just proof that it's already over for us? Us as in normal people. We can see this circus happening in full global view, knowing it's all crap and that governments are lying and acting immorally, and there's _absolutely_ _nothing_ we can do. Assange is going to get convicted by these obvious lies while millions of us stand around shocked. What we, as normal people are going to see, is a man with skewed views on how global progress works and is going to jail for crimes against the global community that borders on terrorism. What are these 'crimes' you speak of? Care to be more specific?
Acquiring classified information in any unauthorized form is illegal, and not just to the US. It's illegal in the UN, which is considered the face of global community. The EU has laws against it as well, since America and the EU's economies are linked and they are our ally, which makes cooperation imperative in upholding law.
Publishing illegally obtained information is a crime. Publishing with the sole intent to hurt a government is a war crime against that government.
|
On December 08 2010 00:20 hifriend wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 00:17 KhrisKruel wrote:On December 08 2010 00:15 Nizaris wrote:On December 08 2010 00:06 garmule2 wrote:
Anyone else feel like this is just proof that it's already over for us? Us as in normal people. We can see this circus happening in full global view, knowing it's all crap and that governments are lying and acting immorally, and there's _absolutely_ _nothing_ we can do. Assange is going to get convicted by these obvious lies while millions of us stand around shocked. I honestly expect protests in the streets in Europe is they deport him to the US. I know i'll be there. Well since they're dumb enough to protest in the streets about how all education should be free (it is, it's called a library), then they'd probably protest the justified extradition of a war criminal to the united states. Wat? College education is free in most european nations. How is he a fucking war criminal anyway lol.
he's a terrorist you know. according to the us govt.
|
On December 08 2010 00:12 McDonalds wrote:
Not terrorism: shooting journalists
Terrorism: Releasing the video of journalists being shot
I love this quote, very well said.
BTW if more of our 'journalists' did their job in the first place we wouldn't need a place like Wikileaks.
|
On December 08 2010 00:22 KhrisKruel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 00:16 Consolidate wrote:On December 08 2010 00:09 KhrisKruel wrote:On December 08 2010 00:06 garmule2 wrote:
Anyone else feel like this is just proof that it's already over for us? Us as in normal people. We can see this circus happening in full global view, knowing it's all crap and that governments are lying and acting immorally, and there's _absolutely_ _nothing_ we can do. Assange is going to get convicted by these obvious lies while millions of us stand around shocked. What we, as normal people are going to see, is a man with skewed views on how global progress works and is going to jail for crimes against the global community that borders on terrorism. What are these 'crimes' you speak of? Care to be more specific? Acquiring classified information in any unauthorized form is illegal, and not just to the US. It's illegal in the UN, which is considered the face of global community. The EU has laws against it as well, since America and the EU's economies are linked and they are our ally, which makes cooperation imperative in upholding law. Publishing illegally obtained information is a crime. Publishing with the sole intent to hurt a government is a war crime against that government.
its called journalism. you know something that every government except totalitarian have no problems with. The NYT called on Supreme Court and was allowed to publish the documents it had received. You don't even know what you are talking about, but that was obvious.
On December 08 2010 00:12 McDonalds wrote:
Not terrorism: shooting journalists
Terrorism: Releasing the video of journalists being shot
Well said.
|
On December 08 2010 00:22 KhrisKruel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 00:16 Consolidate wrote:On December 08 2010 00:09 KhrisKruel wrote:On December 08 2010 00:06 garmule2 wrote:
Anyone else feel like this is just proof that it's already over for us? Us as in normal people. We can see this circus happening in full global view, knowing it's all crap and that governments are lying and acting immorally, and there's _absolutely_ _nothing_ we can do. Assange is going to get convicted by these obvious lies while millions of us stand around shocked. What we, as normal people are going to see, is a man with skewed views on how global progress works and is going to jail for crimes against the global community that borders on terrorism. What are these 'crimes' you speak of? Care to be more specific? Acquiring classified information in any unauthorized form is illegal, and not just to the US. It's illegal in the UN, which is considered the face of global community. The EU has laws against it as well, since America and the EU's economies are linked and they are our ally, which makes cooperation imperative in upholding law. Publishing illegally obtained information is a crime. Publishing with the sole intent to hurt a government is a war crime against that government.
Might want to read up on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_States
|
This was active several months before the documents were announced to even exist. This isn't relevant at all to the release of these documents.
|
|
|
On December 07 2010 22:16 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 21:59 Sufficiency wrote:On December 07 2010 21:58 tnud wrote:On December 07 2010 21:56 Sufficiency wrote:
How come this thread has been derailed into talking about freedom in America now?
The OP mentioned UK, Sweden... No US although. Cause it's (mainly) america who is after him? oO Speculations. Please. Half of the US calls for Assange's arrest or head on a platter, and by total coincidence at the same time a Swedish rape case turns up, hosting websites across the globe start dropping Wikileaks, banks and credit companies terminate Assange's accounts, Australia distance themselves from their own citizen, countries that offered asylum withdraw it. Yeah, I'm sure the US government applied no pressure at all to get any of these.
This is a good reason why the people of the US haven't done much about it. Anyone who stands up is fish food. And attempting to lead an underground organization against it is like thinking you can beat the CIA at its own game.
The situation is ridiculous. I personally want the insurance key.
|
Funny how these "incidents" of sexual crimes came up after all of the leaks hit the net. This is just revenge on the man who embarassed the government. And there's no better way to discredit a man than to make him out to be a sexual predator.
|
It's scary to see once again that your life doesn't matter if the government doesn't like you. This has been extremely public but let's face it, this is not the first time and not the last time people get killed/framed/etc for doing the right thing. It's just crazy that they can do it when the entire world is watching and that there will be no repercussions. Even crazier, they have plenty of people on their side eager to see an innocent person go through this.
Live your life as a sheep and don't bother trying otherwise or face the consequences. I don't blame people that have access to similar information as him for not doing what he does. Why put yourself in the crosshair if you can avoid it?
On December 08 2010 00:26 Liquin wrote:
This was active several months before the documents were announced to even exist. This isn't relevant at all to the release of these documents.
Yeah, they always make international cases of minor crimes.
|
On December 08 2010 00:22 KhrisKruel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 00:16 Consolidate wrote:On December 08 2010 00:09 KhrisKruel wrote:On December 08 2010 00:06 garmule2 wrote:
Anyone else feel like this is just proof that it's already over for us? Us as in normal people. We can see this circus happening in full global view, knowing it's all crap and that governments are lying and acting immorally, and there's _absolutely_ _nothing_ we can do. Assange is going to get convicted by these obvious lies while millions of us stand around shocked. What we, as normal people are going to see, is a man with skewed views on how global progress works and is going to jail for crimes against the global community that borders on terrorism. What are these 'crimes' you speak of? Care to be more specific? Acquiring classified information in any unauthorized form is illegal, and not just to the US. It's illegal in the UN, which is considered the face of global community. The EU has laws against it as well, since America and the EU's economies are linked and they are our ally, which makes cooperation imperative in upholding law. Publishing illegally obtained information is a crime. Publishing with the sole intent to hurt a government is a war crime against that government.
There's a lot of wrong things in this post, but I'll focus on the bolded part.
1. Harm against the government is not the sole intent behind the publishings.
2. Even if it was, it's not a war crime.
By your reasoning, any piece of propaganda (done by every nation, including a richly-celebrated history of smear between political parties in our very own USA) is a war crime. If you honestly believe that, I guess I understand why the rest of your reasoning is so silly.
|
On December 08 2010 00:35 RiotSpectre wrote:
Funny how these "incidents" of sexual crimes came up after all of the leaks hit the net. This is just revenge on the man who embarassed the government. And there's no better way to discredit a man than to make him out to be a sexual predator.
If you were a sexual predator, would you wait until the political scene surrounding you clears up so everyone knows for a fact that you are an asshole or would you use that to get away with your sexual desires?
|
Man, this is such bullshit. I mean, clearly the women just wanted to get in his pants too, only they were hoping it would be a recurring event. You don't see them getting charged. TBH, I find legal systems in general are skewed in favor of women for this kind of thing.
Don't get me wrong, there are some cases where I could see this as a valid claim, but come on... given their (the 2 women) statements in the articles I've read, it was clearly a consensual act. You don't want the other person to run off the next day after you fuck? Don't fuck on the first date!
|
On December 07 2010 21:49 SlyinZ wrote:
That's what happends to defenders of the thruth...
If you want to fight with the big boys, you need to have the cleanest slate of them all. They will still spin a web of intrigues, but it will be much harder. Assange violated the golden rule: don't sleep with any surprisingly willing girls you just met while you're the target of political vendettas.
|
On December 08 2010 00:12 McDonalds wrote:
Not terrorism: shooting journalists
Terrorism: Releasing the video of journalists being shot
ohoh nice @:D
|
On December 08 2010 00:35 hp.Shell wrote:
I personally want the insurance key.
I personally want Assange to tell us how he managed to "harass" the woman and the next morning she make breakfast and buy him a train ticket. yeeeep i want to know that.
|
On December 08 2010 00:37 KhrisKruel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 00:35 RiotSpectre wrote:
Funny how these "incidents" of sexual crimes came up after all of the leaks hit the net. This is just revenge on the man who embarassed the government. And there's no better way to discredit a man than to make him out to be a sexual predator.
If you were a sexual predator, would you wait until the political scene surrounding you clears up so everyone knows for a fact that you are an asshole or would you use that to get away with your sexual desires?
What does this even mean?
|
Although I believe rape is a legitimate crime, this goes to show just how biased the courts can be against men when it comes to prosecuting charges of rape.
|
On December 08 2010 00:38 Dugrok wrote:Man, this is such bullshit. I mean, clearly the women just wanted to get in his pants too, only they were hoping it would be a recurring event. You don't see them getting charged. TBH, I find legal systems in general are skewed in favor of women for this kind of thing. Don't get me wrong, there are some cases where I could see this as a valid claim, but come on... given their (the 2 women) statements in the articles I've read, it was clearly a consensual act. You don't want the other person to run off the next day after you fuck? Don't fuck on the first date!
Yeah there are some pretty ridiculous things in these type of cases. A woman you had consensual sex with can declare rape with 0 proof and ruin your entire life for no reason if she doesn't like you. People have gotten kicked out of universities, had their careers ruined and of course their reputation destroyed by doing absolutely nothing except being the target of such acts.
But to me, this seems even worse. They pretty say it was consensual. Are every sports stars/actors/etc going to start getting thrown into jail for the same thing? Plenty of women want to latch on to these people for the same reasons.
|
On December 08 2010 00:42 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 00:37 KhrisKruel wrote:On December 08 2010 00:35 RiotSpectre wrote:
Funny how these "incidents" of sexual crimes came up after all of the leaks hit the net. This is just revenge on the man who embarassed the government. And there's no better way to discredit a man than to make him out to be a sexual predator.
If you were a sexual predator, would you wait until the political scene surrounding you clears up so everyone knows for a fact that you are an asshole or would you use that to get away with your sexual desires? What does this even mean?
If you can't read, it means he's using his political sensationalism to take advantage of his raping tendencies.
I find it sick that everyone dismisses a rape allegation just because you agree with his political ideologies.
Donnie Darko had it right. When that asshole was shown to be a child porn reader, his biggest supporter immediately dismissed his child porn allegations as political hogwash. That's what is going on with all of you
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
