121–130 of 160 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s the third option of him leaving in a diplomatic bag: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_bag
Assange isn't a document or an article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is sort of the problem with secret indictments though, they are secret. So absence of proof is not the same as proof of absence.
In 2013 (i.e. after these emails came out), US officials denied there was a sealed indictment against him. Lots has happened since but this talk of indictment has been going on for 8 years and nothing has happened. And again, the actual question is 'what would they charge him with and what could you prove against him in court?'. The notion that the US just can't wait to get their hands on Assange seems to come mostly…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is sort of the problem with secret indictments though, they are secret. So absence of proof is not the same as proof of absence.
No, but there's a spectrum between "oh, this is leaked truth", and "even in the leak, there's just one person with no connection to the DOJ saying 'shh, we have a secret indictment against him!'."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't even a UK case. What do they care if Sweden wants to drop it?
Him skipping bail is a UK crime he has committed and is wanted for.
The resource-usage is wasteful to the point of irresponsible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're implying that Wikileaks did not release everything they have. Is this an assumption or is there evidence of this?
https://www.wired.com/2016/07/wikileaks-officially-lost-mora... Stating that Assange hoped that the leaks of the DNC emails would hurt the Clinton campaign clearly shifts WL from being 'just a conduit' for leaked material to being a political operator in its own right. An organization devoted to transparency should not have an agenda of its own, this in contrast to Assange's previous claims that he did not have a fav…
Of course it's hard to prove existence of what they didn't publish. And it is plausible their personal opinions would influence their publication decisions. But that's simply an allegation, not evidence of it happening.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.wired.com/2016/07/wikileaks-officially-lost-mora... Stating that Assange hoped that the leaks of the DNC emails would hurt the Clinton campaign clearly shifts WL from being 'just a conduit' for leaked material to being a political operator in its own right. An organization devoted to transparency should not have an agenda of its own, this in contrast to Assange's previous claims that he did not have a fav…
The Wired article makes Wikileaks look bad in other regards but does not contain evidence that material was not published. You implied that Wikileaks has a selective publication policy. I still don't see any evidence of that. Of course it's hard to prove existence of what they didn't publish. And it is plausible their personal opinions would influence their publication decisions. But that's simply an allegation, not…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Him skipping bail is a UK crime he has committed and is wanted for.
How many other wanted criminals or bail-runners could the UK police have caught for 10M+£? The resource-usage is wasteful to the point of irresponsible.
Agreed, but that's not how the law works. The law should prosecute everybody they have on their lists, regardless of the economics, it should be a matter of principle rather than one of cost-benefit analysis.
Not saying that this isn't how it often turns out to be, but that's how it should be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stop spreading FUD. Wikileaks has not actively participated in any attacks. Wikileaks has exposed some of the most horrific crimes committed by the Unites States and others yet we are still trying to kill the messenger.
Serious question, what crimes has Wikileaks exposed? I'm sure there are some, but off the top of my head the most serious crimes the US has committed in recent history have been exposed by Snowden or Congressional investigations.
They also released tons of military files relating to the Iraq / Afghan war and Gitmo that confirmed a lot of popular theory about the goings on over there - torture, Geneva violations, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question, what crimes has Wikileaks exposed? I'm sure there are some, but off the top of my head the most serious crimes the US has committed in recent history have been exposed by Snowden or Congressional investigations.
They leaked the Baghdad airstrike video that got people mad for a few days before not doing anything about it. They also released tons of military files relating to the Iraq / Afghan war and Gitmo that confirmed a lot of popular theory about the goings on over there - torture, Geneva violations, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Him skipping bail is a UK crime he has committed and is wanted for.
How many other wanted criminals or bail-runners could the UK police have caught for 10M+£? The resource-usage is wasteful to the point of irresponsible.
It appears that Assange can be tried for "Bail, failure to surrender"[1][2]. (Maximum 3 months sentence unless sent for trial.) I'm not aware that he's be charged with anything else, so, on the face of it, the money could have been more usefully dispersed to protect the public.
[0] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36024690
[1] https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/item/bail-fail...