41–50 of 321 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if this could backfire. With the "normal" or old guard politicians, this could have been a credible threat. Nobody wanted a scandal. With the new breed, scandals are just life.
Even worse, they thrive on scandals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you believe he has that kind of interesting sensitive information in the first place?
Because reports have him receiving information either directly or indirectly from the Russian government. And they have access to all sorts of sensitive information. John Podesta and Hillary Clinton's emails allegedly found its way to Wikileaks through this path.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is alleged that Assange coordinated with Chelsea Manning and the Russian government to obtain information for Wikileaks. This would make him an active conspirator in breaking the law. Completely different from Facebook, Google, Twitter etc where they merely provide a platform for others to upload content and aren't actively involved in sourcing illegal content.
Authoritarians emphasise the fact he broke laws, everyone else appreciates the moral act.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Authoritarians emphasise the fact he broke laws, everyone else appreciates the moral act.
It's much more tribal than that. For example, Russian authoritarians are pretty happy with him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is alleged that Assange coordinated with Chelsea Manning and the Russian government to obtain information for Wikileaks. This would make him an active conspirator in breaking the law. Completely different from Facebook, Google, Twitter etc where they merely provide a platform for others to upload content and aren't actively involved in sourcing illegal content.
Authoritarians emphasise the fact he broke laws, everyone else appreciates the moral act.
* Sometimes individuals must break the law for greater good. This is called civil disobedience, or civil resistance.
* Just because one is breaking the law for common good, civil servants can't and should not be expected to stop enforcing the law. If you allow that, it's the end of the rule of law based society. The whole idea of just society is that you restrict what individuals in the government can do.
If you decide that civil disobedience is the way and you break the law, you should not ask to be treated differently under the law. Political pardons exist for a reason.
(I'm not taking position on the legality of actions Assage took, or justification of his actions. I'm arguing general principle.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you believe he has that kind of interesting sensitive information in the first place?
Because reports have him receiving information either directly or indirectly from the Russian government. And they have access to all sorts of sensitive information. John Podesta and Hillary Clinton's emails allegedly found its way to Wikileaks through this path.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He is in jail for the offence of jumping bail. That Sweden dropped the charges doesn’t dismiss that offence. The UK spent 10s of millions on policing costs monitoring abscondment. It is entirely right that he is serving a sentence as for reasons of deterrence.
> The UK spent 10s of millions on policing costs monitoring abscondment. They didn't have to. The fact they chose to throw ridiculous amount of money away besieging some guy because US dislikes him, is on them, not on Assange.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because reports have him receiving information either directly or indirectly from the Russian government. And they have access to all sorts of sensitive information. John Podesta and Hillary Clinton's emails allegedly found its way to Wikileaks through this path.
From what I've researched, the Hillary emails were most likely from an internal source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Authoritarians emphasise the fact he broke laws, everyone else appreciates the moral act.
It's not mutually exclusive. * Sometimes individuals must break the law for greater good. This is called civil disobedience, or civil resistance. * Just because one is breaking the law for common good, civil servants can't and should not be expected to stop enforcing the law. If you allow that, it's the end of the rule of law based society. The whole idea of just society is that you restrict what individuals in the g…
Breaking a law you otherwise believe in, in the service of some broader goal, is called direct action, riot, or terrorism, depending on the severity of the law broken, and/or the sympathies of the person describing it.
What ever happened to all that banking information that Wikileaks said they would release? "Wikileaks honcho Julian Assange told Andy Greenberg at Forbes that he was in possession of a trove of documents that "could take down a bank or two." The documents wouldn't necessarily show illegality but they would reveal an "ecosystem of corruption" at one of the biggest banks in the United States. Wikileaks would release it…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Claims_of_upcoming...
TBH, this bit in particular of wikileaks has always felt really scummy/sketchy to me. If you have the docs and have verified them and believe they are journalistically important then release them without delay. In every other scenario, why are you talking about them publicly?