Breaking news: Julian Assange arrested in London

if he survives that long, its a shame people seem to forget about him already here

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...ion-judge-refuses-request-for-delay-wikileaks
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-london-westminster-magistrates-a9164781.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/21/wik...-at-hearing-struggles-to-recall-name-age.html

 

The memory, short term and long term, of the American public is notoriously deficient and selective. It's easy to understand why, as their perceptions have been manipulated for decades at least.

 

I wonder if he's wearing striped clothing

 

Expose the incompetence or corruption of the rich and powerful at your peril.

 

Yes, only courageous persons do that. Manning, Assange, Snowden, Kiriakou, Ellsberg, Serpico, Rowley and many more.

 

Agreed. But the others all got off lightly - only JA will die slowly but surely in Bellmarsh. I put my curse on all of those who have conspired to destroy his life, and to never see his kids again.

'Hell hath no fury like charlatans exposed'?

 

I'm quite sure Julian has no children.

 

...bit of a hackneyed soundbite don't you think....isn't that what happens everyday, I mean there's always scandal and innuendo circulating about all sorts of people all the time...Assange is just some moronic keyboard warrior that believed is own press. Maybe if he'd be a bit more nuanced in how he dealt with the information he obtained then he wouldn't be in this mess he's made for himself.

 

Assange has more dignity, honesty and courage in his little toe than you have in your entire body. At great personal expense he has stood for the truth and against criminal governments.

You, on the other hand, are a cheerleader for criminal government. A Highlander you are not.

 

The supreme court already ruled that he is free to publish. Remember Nixon and the NYT?

 

It’s an interesting thought, however, I approach this from a different angle in that enticing others to break the law by stealing proprietary information and then publishing such leaves one open to sanction. Whatever dignity or honesty he may have possessed has been abrogated by encouraging theft and dishonesty in others and infringing the rights of privacy to the holders of such privileged information - be they “criminal governments”, non-criminal governments or otherwise.

 

Encouraged?
Quaint

 

I don't think you can compare this to ordinary stealing, in the typical sense of the word, because it was information that was stolen. That's not really a physical thing, and when it is taken, it does not really deprive the owner of that thing, because the owner still has it. (i.e. it was actually a copy that was taken, to be more technically accurate)
As for "honesty", I find it ironic that you would use that word, since the aim of Wikileaks was to publicly share information and hold government accountable. Certainly you must agree that when it comes to concealing information which is a matter of public importance, versus making information known to all, the latter does seem to be closer to the concept of "honesty".
Using the words "theft" and "dishonesty" are not really fair here.

Again, Assange would argue that the information in this case was of such a nature that the public should have a right to it. Which is basically the mirror image of the government's argument that they should have a right to keep it concealed.

I do not see how you can argue in this case that government had an unquestionable right to privacy, in a moral/ethical sense.
Unless your argument is a purely legal right. But that would very much change the foundational nature of your argument.​

 

Oh I thought he did. Good thing he hasn't then, given the circumstances.

 

I would love to grab hold of Adam Schiff and put him into a few months of interrogation too.

 

Thank you to a person that actually does understand this situation.

 

How can you hold on the one hand data from Assange as totally true then accuse him of bullshit when he explains where his data came from? Prior to a question from you, know this. Democrats do not allege the data from Assange is not true, only that he had no business with data that damaged Clinton. And got from her own party records.

 

Spot on. He did nothing other than to expose how inept and corrupt they were/are - and that amounts to embezzling from the public purse? - and for doing that, they'll never forgive him; we should be praising his courage rather than defending the wrongdoers, which is what seems to be the main argument of his critics, and that doesn't make moral sense to me. But hey, 'It takes all kinds to make a world' as the saying goes.

 

I only wish he had more damning secrets to reveal. I'm sure there are much worse things that went on that the public does not know about.

 

I disagree. Information is a much material as is physical possessions. If you have no right to forward proprietary information to unauthorised persons

Again I disagree everyone including government has a right to maintain privacy of certain types of information both from a moral and legal perspective

 

It's information which should be in the public arena, because the ineptitude or corruption could lead to loss of life, especially in the military and intelligence services sense.

 

I suspect that if Assange and Wikileaks had only release evidence of criminality and corruption, he wouldn't be in this mess. The problem is that the stated purpose of Wikileaks is to release literally everything and anything (not that I'm convinced it follows through with that).

 

He had to provide convincing examples of their 'shortcomings' though, didn't he?

 

It doesn't really matter where we draw the line. The point is that Wikileaks recognises no line (in theory). There was material they leaked which was alleged to have identified intelligence agents and informants, putting them at risk. Other people argued back and forth as to whether this was the case but nothing suggests Wikileaks or Assange themselves cared either way.

 

Well that would be the west's narrative, wouldn't it! To demonize Assange?