421–426 of 426 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have no objection to Amnesty observing the extradition hearing and I don't see a good reason that they should be excluded, but Assange should not have skipped his bail and run away to the Ecuadorean embassy. Everyone sucks here?
Please tell me this is a joke? Why should anyone be holed up in an Embassy for years?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> lack of news seems very odd. Why does it seem odd? Go watch/read news from a variety of sources. You'll notice that "news" is quite different from country to country and region to region. The same goes for history. The BBC is a government funded state propaganda machine. They cover and then spin whatever benefits the state. Easily the best in the world with reach in almost every one of their former slave colonies w…
The BBC is not government funded, and it regularly, in fact constantly, reports things that do not benefit the government
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_Un...
But you probably knew this already.
> and it regularly, in fact constantly, reports things that do not benefit the government
And? I said it was government funded "state propaganda". Government != state. Also, the best propaganda superficially "reports" on government to create an illusion of impartiality. It great a duping the dumb masses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do people say ‘nation states’ when they mean countries? Neither the UK nor the US are ‘nation states’. They’re both examples I would give of things that are not nation states in fact.
Because it sounds cooler and makes them sound like they know what they're talking about.
I don't think that the phrase "sovereign states don't have rights" is even controversial at all. I also think think that any adult that has gone through any decent education will probably be familiar with the phrase or concept, even if they can't ELI5 it, the same way we are familiar with or have heard of other related concepts like democracy, separation of powers, habeas corpus, human rights, individual rights, sovereignty, etc. In fact, sovereignty is perhaps where the debate should live because sovereignty is, after all, the right of a "state" over itself, which seems to contradict the idea that sovereign states have no rights (it doesn't). Anyway, enough of that.
My first comment was short because it was simply intended as a nudge or reminder that hey, before we go down the road of overthinking why the USA has a right to hold some secrets, let's just remember that the idea itself is difficult to defend, especially in a democracy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because Scotland is a country, and its part of the UK
Doesn’t this just emphasise that the UK is not a nation state? ‘Country’ is an informal term. ‘Nation state’ is weirdly specific and doesn’t even apply!
I should've said sovereign state. Let's not get caught up in semantics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If one knows one has a deadly communicable disease and is willfully negligent knowing that your actions are likely to cause particular harm then it would be assault. Rarely people with HIV have _chosen_ to spread it through intercourse, if someone purposefully chose to give you HIV would you say you had fully consented to that sexual act, given you were entirely ignorant to their infection and their choice? How would…
Is there any evidence at all to suggest that is the case? Of course not, it's a ridiculous allegation with no basis in fact. A baseless allegation that would have rightly been completely ignored by police if it wasn't Assange.
I assume from what you're saying that Assange did not have (or have reason to believe he had) HIV at the time of the alleged rape? Which would of course rule out this love of reasoning in this case, but would not make my response to the OC incorrect.