Julian Assange arrested in London

Post by philwelch » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 12:14 PM UTC

ptero wrote: post #400

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> It was already quite disgusting how powerful entities were able to seemingly fabricate sexual charges as needed. The sexual charges really don't look fabricated or to have had any political motive at all. The wikipedia article on the allegations ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#Swedish_sexual_... ) makes it clear that the charges were dropped after Assange was initially questioned by the police, then…

> From my reading anyway, Assange crossed a line, perhaps not realising that what he was doing To me, this points to the fact that there are likely many transgressions of all kinds that each person in the civilized world commits. Those are unlikely to lead to anything beyond an occasional minor fine, but the government prosecutors can use those as ammunition for future cases totally unrelated to original offense. Thi…

Post by olalonde » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 12:15 PM UTC

megous wrote: post #333

_iyig wrote: post #172

In the Afghan War Documents leak, Julian Assange refused to redact the names of Afghans who informed on the Taliban. He referred to them as “spies and traitors” in comments to the media. A reporter for the Guardian claims he said, “Well, they're informants. So, if they get killed, they've got it coming to them. They deserve it.” Nasty way to diss on fellow leakers, in my opinion. I wonder if Mr. Assange feels he hims…

People take real risks when telling on others. That it may be later revealed and their targets may try to take revenge is part of that. There's no clear just way to view the entire situation. Though Assange was unreasonable to call them all "spies and traitors", if that's what he did.

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 12:15 PM UTC

thanatropism wrote: post #377

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> It was already quite disgusting how powerful entities were able to seemingly fabricate sexual charges as needed. The sexual charges really don't look fabricated or to have had any political motive at all. The wikipedia article on the allegations ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#Swedish_sexual_... ) makes it clear that the charges were dropped after Assange was initially questioned by the police, then…

Wait, I know about the top-down reopening of the case, but do we know for a fact that the original accusations were kosher, or is this just presumption of innocence for the girls? (I mean, presumption of innocence is important and too often [the word escapes me... only imperfectly/partially given to] would-be sex offenders. On the grounds that we are judging some random girls it should apply; OTOH on the grounds that…

Post by cpcallen » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 12:16 PM UTC

philliphaydon wrote: post #352

threeseed wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From all accounts it's to do with Assange's behaviour. Helping to elect Trump and being an annoying guest is not something that helps people like you.

Why do people keep saying that he helped elect trump. Because he exposed lies and corruption of another candidate? Are people still bitter and upset at the 2016 elections?

Post by wolco » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 12:16 PM UTC

kmlx wrote: post #366

shrewduser wrote: post #286

I just want to know, from the people who seemed to have turned against Assange, how do you know it's not a concerted disinformation / propaganda campaign to remove all his credibility and reduce public support? By my reckoning It's really hard to know what to even believe about a guy who might credibly be targeted by that.

wikileaks/Assange during the recent US presidential elections. that’s what did it for me. even now, knowing what we now about Russian interference, they still have the “Hillary Clinton email archive” proudly displayed on their homepage. also, there are those rape cases for which he ran away. shady stuff.