I used to like him, but then it became obvious he was strategically leaking information to aid Russia. I'm all for leaking stuff, but not when it's to aid your political side.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Ecuador withdrawing asylum for Julian Assange
- Thread starter BWoog
- Start date
You literally try and tell us that exposing war crimes doesn't even matter.
Tell that to Iraqis. Tell them that war crimes committed against them don't matter.
Maybe don't go around downplaying war crimes like they don't matter.
Did you look at my response to you about in this thread about how most of the emails were after Clinton had basically already won the primary (per the Washington Post article I quoted from, which I pulled from the wikipedia article you cited) and that they were most likely from frustrated DNC staffers venting? Why are you ignoring that point?
Do you have a single source that I can look at to back up anything you're saying?
This became clear when Wikileaks refused to help filter the leaked Manafort texts for public consumption.
They jumped at the chance to do this with America's cables and the DNC leak tho. Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
Dude's been carrying a lot of water for Assange and conspiracy theories in there.
This was in the wikipedia article that you cited. The Washington Post article I quoted from earlier is citation 22.
I literally just cited wikipedia.
Can you name a single conspiracy theory I am carrying water for?
Give me a fucking break. I explicitly said what he did in that instance was good, just that you ignore everything bad for it.
If anybody is downplaying anything it's you. The excuses for the murder of an airplane full of people, the antisemitic statements, the leaking of names of rape victims and homosexuals in a country like Saudi Arabia. You just dodged those and focused on the single good thing you could give him credit for.
User banned (3 days): thread derailment, conspiracy theories, and relitigating the 2016 primaries
Why is it listed on wikipedia then with over 100 sources?
Why did all the heads of the organization resign?
I didn't dodge a single thing actually.
All I've said is I think he should get a trial.
Can you show me a single post in here where I said those don't matter, or they're not true?
Assange was fucking over Ecuador. I get that Ecuador granted him asylum due to US hostility towards them. It was a dumb move but I get it as an Ecuadorian myself. However, sooner or later you would know a guy like Assange would be shitting where he's hiding at some point and he was doing that with Ecuador by hacking into them.
User Banned (3 days): drive-by posting, conspiracy theories, relitigating the 2016 primaries
WikiLeaks and Assange being 'stooges' of the Kremlin is even less convincing than the claim Comey was to blame for Trump's election. Odd that a Hillary-centric critique of that organisation has survived post election, especially considering the shenanigans orchestrated by the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
For some on this forum, everything is seen through a Russian prism and it's really tiring.
For some on this forum, everything is seen through a Russian prism and it's really tiring.
This is the most ridiculous thing I've read in a while, including trumps tweets.
Do you not understand what dodging means?
And lol @ he should get a trial. He was free to get one, instead he ran away from it and was hiding from it for years.
It was listed on Wikipedia with a single source. The rest of that article had over 100 sources but the conspiracy theory had a single one and even Wikipedia couched it in doubt by framing it as "suggested" instead of confirmed.
I just don't understand...
SURELY he knew this was coming?
So why didn't he just shave his head and open the window and take his chances outside?
Or even just fucking bail and run RIGHT NOW?
SURELY he knew this was coming?
So why didn't he just shave his head and open the window and take his chances outside?
Or even just fucking bail and run RIGHT NOW?
Then can you explain to me why Wikileaks publically supported Russia in their propaganda campaign deflecting blame from seperatists supplied by Russia to Ukraine for the shot on the Netherland airplane? Just for fun? Although all information points to those seperatists and Russia is proven to have faked evidence in that incident?
If this happens perhaps the British may get to interrogate Assange in regards to Brexit and Farage.
What you linked from Wikipedia is just details of the events surrounding the DNC hack, not confirmation of a rigging conspiracy. Multiple people have responded to you how that hasn't been shown to be the case, even Bernie knows it wasn't actually rigged. Emails showing a preference for a candidate is not "blocking the will of the voters."
Not a fan of Assange, but... also not a fan of sending him to prison for the wikileaks stuff.
Not gonna be so awesome when this sets a precedent for journalists getting sent to prison for publishing dubiously obtained data.
Not gonna be so awesome when this sets a precedent for journalists getting sent to prison for publishing dubiously obtained data.
Journalists curate their data if needed before releasing it. Wikileaks just dumps everything that suits their agenda without a single thought of harm done to innocent bystanders.
Why is Loose Change listed on wikipedia with over 70 sources if it's not true? Answer me that, fancy pants! /s
How much curation will a journalist have to demonstrate in court to be protected as a journalist?
He's a criminal who will eventually see justice. He will have the right to arbitration.
Presumably at the very least enough to not endanger lives would be my guess.
I never understood what Ecuador's endgame was after the symbolic gesture of protecting him from perceived US imperialism.
I don't think the Ecuadorans had it figured themselves and just wanted to save face by maintaining the status quo.
I don't think the Ecuadorans had it figured themselves and just wanted to save face by maintaining the status quo.
Yeah but you see, rapist boy not automatically being scot-free if he ever leaves that embassy means he doesn't have rights.
I cannot fight such bullet proof logic. Damn, even PizzaGate is on there, with sources.
new game: what's the wildest conspiracy theory you can find on Wikipedia that has even a single source?
Do they work for a news outlet? Do they publish actual stories? That's usually enough.
Mueller has some of the leading legal scholars on his team. If they do decide to charge Assange/Wikileaks, I'm sure that they can find a way to tailor the charges in a way that protects journalists and whistleblowers doing legitimate journalistic endeavors. With Wikileaks, consider the fact they have evidence that Assange actively solicited hacked info about the Democrats from the GRU with the express purpose of hurting the Clinton campaign:
(from this Lawfare article)
I could easily see him being charged as a conspirator in the conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States that the Russian GRU members have been charged with. This avoids charging specifically for leaking information, which is something that legitimate journalistic outlets do in the course of their work.
Have the courts ruled on citizen journalist protections ever? Not saying that would apply in this case, but it's just a question I thought of.
trump is a moron and a russian puppet who constantly abuses his authority and wants to be dictator instead of president, which is why i'm glad that his notoriously abusive justice department gets to go to town on this one particular guy with no accountability
I hope this is true, but the article here is pretty biased. Acts like we don't know who hacked the DNC, doesn't mention Assange hacking the embassy as a possible reason for redrawing his asylum, doesn't mention anything about Assange's collaborating with the Trump campaign, etc.
I'll wait for more sources before I believe.
I'll wait for more sources before I believe.
I'd have to look it up to be honest. If you're working freelance you're protected, I know that much.
Don't worry. It will probably instead go off the existing precedent that being an intelligence agent of a foreign country is bad.
User Banned (3 Days): conspiracy theories
The case was dropped a long time ago because it was obvious bs fabricated to get him into the US.
Just a reminder for anyone who thinks Wikileaks doesn't have Russia's hand up their ass.
I've poked around quickly, but found this Yale article from 2012 arguing that there should be protection to civilian journalists after an incident in 2006 where a man was sent to prison, but I didn't see anything quickly to suggest that legislation was ever passed to cover civilian journalists. In fact, the last bill to protect them on a federal level died in committee in 2013. Looks like some states have laws that protect them (though they still need to be done through traditional news outlets).
https://ylpr.yale.edu/sites/default/files/YLPR/turner_30.pdf
Just a reminder for anyone who thinks Wikileaks doesn't have Russia's hand up their ass.
Also, the anti-Semitic stuff. Unless the pro-WikiLeaks posters here just think of that as speaking truth to power.