Are You Glad Julian Assange Has Been Arrested?

At least they're honest. :shock:

On principle I find it is a good thing when a person who has violated his given word and the conditions of his bail, and who is a fugitive from justice, is apprehended.

LeoVlaming said:

On principle I find it is a good thing when a person who has violated his given word and the conditions of his bail, and who is a fugitive from justice, is apprehended.

Click to expand...

Would you hold to this principle if he was charged with blaspheming Mohamed and the punishment was death? More generally: does the principle hold regardless of the nature of the charge?

Suppose I could prove to your satisfaction that Mr. Assange will be extradited to the US, summarily convicted in America's most infamous "rocket docket" court (Eastern District of Virginia, infamous for never having found a national security defendant not guilty), harshly sentenced, and never heard from again, for what amounts to good journalism exposing war crimes committed by prior US administrations.

Hypothetically, supposing I could prove this, would you still stand by your principle?

COTO said:

Would you hold to this principle if he was charged with blaspheming Mohamed and the punishment was death? More generally: does the principle hold regardless of the nature of the charge?

Suppose I could prove to your satisfaction that Mr. Assange will be extradited to the US, summarily convicted in America's most infamous "rocket docket" court (Eastern District of Virginia, infamous for never having found a national security defendant not guilty), harshly sentenced, and never heard from again, for what amounts to good journalism exposing war crimes committed by prior US administrations.

Hypothetically, supposing I could prove this, would you still stand by your principle?

Click to expand...

I don't have to prove anything. Explain to me why you believe people who are accused of rape should be allowed to skip bail and flee from justice?

LeoVlaming said:

I don't have to prove anything. Explain to me why you believe people who are accused of rape should be allowed to skip bail and flee from justice?

Click to expand...

If Mr. Assange was being extradited to Sweden (where all indications are that he'd walk away from the rape charges, but regardless), you'd have a valid complaint.

Do you want to place your bets now as to which nation's extradition request will ultimately be honoured?

COTO said:

At least they're honest. :shock:

Click to expand...

Bueno.

I was going to comment on this but after watching the video posted by COTO in post #201 I am laughing too hard and in full agreement with the video. Sufficed to say, No, this extradition attempt is bad for whistleblowing, for journalism, for independent media, for transparency in governance and for informed democracy.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Tangmo said:

Republicans / Conservatives post as if Putin were minding his own business which he is not doing. It seems to be a rule over there never to post about Putin. The hope is of course that out of sight out of mind.

Click to expand...

Evilroddy said:

I was going to comment on this but after watching the video posted by COTO in post #201 I am laughing too hard and in full agreement with the video. Sufficed to say, No, this extradition attempt is bad for whistleblowing, for journalism, for independent media, for transparency in governance and for informed democracy.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Click to expand...

Assange and Wikileaks are a propaganda and operations arm of the Russian government and the GRU Russian military intelligence in particular. Assange is an operative of Putin and is an America hater to begin with. Putin gave Assange a one hour national talk program on Russian television, the last taped program of which ran as Assange was in Sweden on the run from police there.

You are in your fantasy dream world while the Putin-Trump Fanboys are in the real world of defending Putin-Trump knowing exactly who each is, how, why and what their agenda is. The agenda is to make the USA more like Putin's Russia than the other way around. The Putin-Trump Fanboys do this because they have become what we once fought against and won, i.e., in the Civil War and World War II.

The common ground now is that you and the Fanboys post the same stuff. It's just that you go overboard and OTT with it. The Fanboys know conversely to stay closer to the scent of the beast rather than to do aerial flying stunts with the flag attached to the tail of your spiffy demo Suck-35 fighter jet.

Tangmo said:

Assange and Wikileaks are a propaganda and operations arm of the Russian government and the GRU Russian military intelligence in particular. Assange is an operative of Putin and is an America hater to begin with. Putin gave Assange a one hour national talk program on Russian television, the last taped program of which ran as Assange was in Sweden on the run from police there.

You are in your fantasy dream world while the Putin-Trump Fanboys are in the real world of defending Putin-Trump knowing exactly who each is, how, why and what their agenda is. The agenda is to make the USA more like Putin's Russia than the other way around. The Putin-Trump Fanboys do this because they have become what we once fought against and won, i.e., in the Civil War and World War II.

The common ground now is that you and the Fanboys post the same stuff. It's just that you go overboard and OTT with it. The Fanboys know conversely to stay closer to the scent of the beast rather than to do aerial flying stunts with the flag attached to the tail of your spiffy demo Suck-35 fighter jet.

Click to expand...

Tangmo:

Not really factual but interesting nonetheless. Nice imagery too. You and Mr. Assange seem both to be in the propaganda game. Mr. Assange and the Putin Regime may have common interests and might be cooperating at times but that does not mean that either Julian Assange of Wkileaks are creations or creatures of the Kremlin.

Incidentally, publishing truthful documents illegally obtained by others is not propaganda but good investigative journalism. While selectively releasing some documents while withholding others may be propaganda mongering. However generating and disseminating propaganda is not a criminal act or many media moguls from Hearst to Murdoch would be in the lock-up. Hating America is not a criminal act either although it is foolish and myopic. Having digital communications with a journalistic source is not a crime. Advising a source on how to avoid detection is not a crime. Being unable or unwilling to help a source acquire documents by breaking a partial password is not a crime. Being an independent journalist specialising in assisting whistleblowers is not yet a crime and should remain legal as it shines light on the secret workings of states and makes the electorate better informed. US law does not apply to foreign nationals operating in foreign countries doing nothing illegal in the first place.

Journalists the world over help their sources, counsel them on how not to be detected, protect their source's identities and publish their sources' disclosures, even when those supporting documents are illegally obtained by the source. Mr Assange and Wikileaks are under no obligation to protect American state secrets. US voters and the Electoral College elected Mr. Trump to your highest public office, not Julian Assange, not Wikileaks and not Mr. Putin's Kremlin. Did the Russians try to influence and interfere with the 2016 US Presidential Election? Sure they did and they have done so in the past and will continue to try and do so in the future. They are no different from the US Government which routinely influences and interferes with other sovereign states' elections, including Russia's elections. It's America's responsibility to detect and counter foreign influence/interference in US elections, not Julian Assange's, Wikileaks' or anyone else's responsibility.

So, no, the extradition attempt is not a good thing as it is an oblique and thinly disguised attack on independent media freedom and on whistleblowing, both of which keep democratic states accountable to their better informed electorates.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Evilroddy said:

Tangmo:

Not really factual but interesting nonetheless. Nice imagery too. You and Mr. Assange seem both to be in the propaganda game. Mr. Assange and the Putin Regime may have common interests and might be cooperating at times but that does not mean that either Julian Assange of Wkileaks are creations or creatures of the Kremlin.

Incidentally, publishing truthful documents illegally obtained by others is not propaganda but good investigative journalism. While selectively releasing some documents while withholding others may be propaganda mongering. However generating and disseminating propaganda is not a criminal act or many media moguls from Hearst to Murdoch would be in the lock-up. Hating America is not a criminal act either although it is foolish and myopic. Having digital communications with a journalistic source is not a crime. Advising a source on how to avoid detection is not a crime. Being unable or unwilling to help a source acquire documents by breaking a partial password is not a crime. Being an independent journalist specialising in assisting whistleblowers is not yet a crime and should remain legal as it shines light on the secret workings of states and makes the electorate better informed. US law does not apply to foreign nationals operating in foreign countries doing nothing illegal in the first place.

Journalists the world over help their sources, counsel them on how not to be detected, protect their source's identities and publish their sources' disclosures, even when those supporting documents are illegally obtained by the source. Mr Assange and Wikileaks are under no obligation to protect American state secrets. US voters and the Electoral College elected Mr. Trump to your highest public office, not Julian Assange, not Wikileaks and not Mr. Putin's Kremlin. Did the Russians try to influence and interfere with the 2016 US Presidential Election? Sure they did and they have done so in the past and will continue to try and do so in the future. They are no different from the US Government which routinely influences and interferes with other sovereign states' elections, including Russia's elections. It's America's responsibility to detect and counter foreign influence/interference in US elections, not Julian Assange's, Wikileaks' or anyone else's responsibility.

So, no, the extradition attempt is not a good thing as it is an oblique and thinly disguised attack on independent media freedom and on whistleblowing, both of which keep democratic states accountable to their better informed electorates.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Click to expand...

Your post word count limits my reply. I don't want to edit or cut your post because its flaws are both spectacular and extensive. For instance your second paragraph is LCD tripe.

Julian Assange is not a journalist. He never was a journalist. Assange is an agent of the GRU which is Russian military intelligence. Putin gave Assange a tv talk show in Moscow broadcast nationally. Assange has no interest in democracy or in a free press/media.

The highlighted in blue shows you are trying to normalize Russian involvement in USA elections which simultaneously reveals your nefarious purposes and goals. Nonetheless and as you complimented my writing sans solicitation allow me to compliment yours, i.e., you remind me that I have not encountered many rightwingnuts who sound normal in saying their rightwingnut stuff. Which also means you're a Putin-Trump Fanboy who could sound instead like a mild mannered neutral centrist.

Beyond all of this it needs to be said directly and plainly that we over here are the good guys and them those over there are the bad guys. Until you get to white hat black hat you're nowhere if not in Putin's back pocket.

Tangmo said:

Julian Assange is not a journalist. He never was a journalist. Assange is an agent of the GRU which is Russian military intelligence.

Click to expand...

What evidence can you cite?

His TV show in Russia and what else? Provide us with a resource you consider definitive and trustworthy.

"His TV show in Russia" pretty much damns any claim he might make to being anything but a Russian catspaw at best.

COTO said:

What evidence can you cite?

His TV show in Russia and what else? Provide us with a resource you consider definitive and trustworthy.

Click to expand...

I welcome the occasion to provide you with sources I trust overall. You are free of course to do with 'em as you please.


CIA director brands WikiLeaks a 'hostile intelligence service'

Mike Pompeo said WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange portrays himself as a crusader but in fact helps enemies of the United States, including Russia

CIA director brands WikiLeaks a 'hostile intelligence service' | US news | The Guardian






How did WikiLeaks become associated with Russia?


But the Russia-WikiLeaks connection goes back further than the 2016 election cycle. Russia and WikiLeaks, in some ways, have long had goals that could work in tandem.

Pompeo said in July that Russia has been at election meddling a "hell of a long time," long before the 2016 election, and former CIA Director James Clapper said on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday that Russian President Vladimir Putin is "committed to undermining our system or democracy, and our whole process."

From WikiLeaks' conception, WikiLeaks foundation Julian Assange said he wanted to use it to expose hidden information to "reveal illegal or immoral behavior" in government, and major businesses.

One of the first public relationships between Russia and WikiLeaks emerged in April 2012, when the Russian-government funded RT — forced this week to register with the U.S. as a foreign agent — gave Assange his own talk show. The show didn't last long, ending in summer 2012, but it's one of the first public signs of connections between WikiLeaks and Russia. The January 2017 U.S. intelligence report mentions the Kremlin's connection with WikiLeaks through RT.

"The Kremlin's principal international propaganda outlet RT (formerly Russia Today) has actively collaborated with WikiLeaks," the report said. "RT's editor-in-chief visited WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London in August 2013, where they discussed renewing his broadcast contract with RT, according to Russian and Western media. Russian media subsequently announced that RT had become 'the only Russian media company' to partner with WikiLeaks and had received access to 'new leaks of secret information.' RT routinely gives Assange sympathetic coverage and provides him a platform to denounce the United States."

How did WikiLeaks become associated with Russia? - CBS News





The following is by Dr. Tom Nichols, professor and chairman of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College, Newport RI and an adjunct professor in the Harvard Extension School. @RadioFreeTom.

Julian Assange Is A Russian Front-Man, Not A Freedom Fighter

Assange’s dissemination of others’ secrets has nothing to do with democracy and transparency, and everything to do with the sordid underworld of international espionage.

Julian Assange Is A Russian Front-Man, Not A Freedom Fighter


Nichols takes the words right out of my mouth.

Tangmo said:

I welcome the occasion to provide you with sources I trust overall. You are free of course to do with 'em as you please.

CIA director brands WikiLeaks a 'hostile intelligence service' | US news | The Guardian

How did WikiLeaks become associated with Russia? - CBS News

Julian Assange Is A Russian Front-Man, Not A Freedom Fighter

Click to expand...

I see where all of them indict Mr. Assange for attacking America and the West almost exclusively, but the only one who suggests any kind of formal relationship between Mr. Assange and the Russian government is Mr. Nichols, and he makes his position clear: "Despite Assange’s fiery posing, he and WikiLeaks exist at the Russians’ sufferance. Think of Vladimir Putin and his intelligence chiefs as something like a board of directors, and Assange as their CEO: while the board may not direct day-to-day operations, Assange and his staff nonetheless know what’s required to keep their funding stream, their freedom of movement, their access to the media, and perhaps even to maintain their own safety."

Essentially, that Mr. Assange is only able to operate so long as he doesn't antagonize the Kremlin, which I don't think anyone is disputing. His servers and a good chunk of his business operate out of Russia. This doesn't make him "an agent of the GRU". It could just as easily mean he's a journalist whose goals align with the Kremlin's so long as the dirt he's exposing is America's.

Back home, journalists' job is to expose dirt so long as the dirt they're exposing isn't America's. Wouldn't you say, therefore, that Mr. Assange--with Moscow's blessing--helps Americans get a more balanced, holistic view of their government?

COTO said:

I see where all of them indict Mr. Assange for attacking America and the West almost exclusively, but the only one who suggests any kind of formal relationship between Mr. Assange and the Russian government is Mr. Nichols, and he makes his position clear: "Despite Assange’s fiery posing, he and WikiLeaks exist at the Russians’ sufferance. Think of Vladimir Putin and his intelligence chiefs as something like a board of directors, and Assange as their CEO: while the board may not direct day-to-day operations, Assange and his staff nonetheless know what’s required to keep their funding stream, their freedom of movement, their access to the media, and perhaps even to maintain their own safety."

Essentially, that Mr. Assange is only able to operate so long as he doesn't antagonize the Kremlin, which I don't think anyone is disputing. His servers and a good chunk of his business operate out of Russia. This doesn't make him "an agent of the GRU". It could just as easily mean he's a journalist whose goals align with the Kremlin's so long as the dirt he's exposing is America's.

Back home, journalists' job is to expose dirt so long as the dirt they're exposing isn't America's. Wouldn't you say, therefore, that Mr. Assange--with Moscow's blessing--helps Americans get a more balanced, holistic view of their government?

Click to expand...

As I'd said, Dr. Nichols at the U.S. Naval War College took the words right out of my mouth.

You seem to think that when you say the same kind of words (in blue) they don't come out the opposite end and side. You need to know that that's from where the words you speak do emanate.

Based on observation over decades, and since Putin's return to the presidency in 2012 as the new global leader of reactionary conservatism, I go further than Dr. Nichols seems willing to go in his public statements. That is, I see Putin-Trump Fanboys who want to make the USA more like Putin's Russia than the other way around. The Fanboys reason of course is that they have become what we once fought against, first in the Civil War then in World War II. The Fanboys hate the Constitution and they've always hated it. They're working unrelentingly to destroy it. You see, the Fanboys didn't like the European Enlightenment either.

COTO said:

I see where all of them indict Mr. Assange for attacking America and the West almost exclusively, but the only one who suggests any kind of formal relationship between Mr. Assange and the Russian government is Mr. Nichols, and he makes his position clear: "Despite Assange’s fiery posing, he and WikiLeaks exist at the Russians’ sufferance. Think of Vladimir Putin and his intelligence chiefs as something like a board of directors, and Assange as their CEO: while the board may not direct day-to-day operations, Assange and his staff nonetheless know what’s required to keep their funding stream, their freedom of movement, their access to the media, and perhaps even to maintain their own safety."

Essentially, that Mr. Assange is only able to operate so long as he doesn't antagonize the Kremlin, which I don't think anyone is disputing. His servers and a good chunk of his business operate out of Russia. This doesn't make him "an agent of the GRU". It could just as easily mean he's a journalist whose goals align with the Kremlin's so long as the dirt he's exposing is America's.

Back home, journalists' job is to expose dirt so long as the dirt they're exposing isn't America's. Wouldn't you say, therefore, that Mr. Assange--with Moscow's blessing--helps Americans get a more balanced, holistic view of their government?

Click to expand...

This is a pretty good summary/clarification of Assange's supposed misdeeds and his acts of legitimate journalism:

Interesting. Responses seem to not be evenly devided along party lines, as most everything else is. I wonder, however, if there would be much of anyone on the left cheering for Assange's arrest if WikiLeaks had revealed Donald Trump's emails instead of the DNC's. I feel the results of the election and the DNC emails' part in that outcome tug at the emotions of people who might otherwise see things in a completely different light.

I personally don't care what kind of man Assange is, or what his motivations were/are. I don't care where his information comes from or the motives of his informants . . . only that the information is accurate. Whether or not he's a propagandist is completely irrelevant to me when it comes to the question of whether or not he should be apprehended.

We on the left often critize the president as a wannabe dictator for things like a planned 'emergency' and his attempt at deligitimizing the press, so it confuses me that some would turn around and then applaud the apprenhension of guy who published things that happened to be politically inconvienant for folks who normally critisize the president for such things.

I'm kind of done with accepting national security, or even the security of our soldiers as an arguement for coming down harshly on whistle-blowers and those who publish leaked information. This is setting a bad precedent that will prove to be a gift to authoritarians.

Surrealistik said:

This is a pretty good summary/clarification of Assange's supposed misdeeds and his acts of legitimate journalism:

Click to expand...

What say you to this, my good 'mo (a.k.a. Tangmo)?

It provides some counterfactuals to your claim that Wikileaks never publishes documents harmful to Russia or Russian allies. It also highlights some of the more critical leaks by Wikileaks in recent years, including graft, murder, and war crimes committed by the US government. Is exposure of these things not indispensable to an informed electorate?

I honestly don't know enough about it. Sometimes we just don't have the right information to give a fair assessment. I don't really have the patience to figure it out.


Sometimes I wish we had two separate prison systems.

One that is brutal for psychotics,

and the other for people who must be arrested, but get more freedom... because they acted on a moral conscious.


I tend to think political activists should get nicer prison cells, than rapists and child molesters.

Maybe they make mistakes, and we have to uphold the law, but lets not do it in a cruel or inhumane way.