[Prosthetic Conscience]

Does he ever release corruption information on his buddy putin?

The guy is a force for bad in the world anyway.

He did release the Panama papers. So yes, he does.

How is this bad? This is old school journalism. I know it is mostly dead nowadays but back in the day the journalists didn't care for political connections and released anything they could get their hands on. That is how journalism is supposed to work.

You give Assange and Wikileaks undue credit. They didn't release the Panama papers (or Paradise papers); that was the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. Genuine journalists.

Apologies, @Beren, for missing your link - I saw JohnRawls after your link going on about 'old school journalism' so I assumed the actual charge hadn't been established yet. Assange's fans are continuing to paint him in the thread as if he's a non-partisan journalist, rather than a hacker with an agenda.

[JohnRawls]

You give Assange and Wikileaks undue credit. They didn't release the Panama papers (or Paradise papers); that was the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. Genuine journalists.

Apologies, @Beren, for missing your link - I saw JohnRawls after your link going on about 'old school journalism' so I assumed the actual charge hadn't been established yet. Assange's fans are continuing to paint him in the thread as if he's a non-partisan journalist, rather than a hacker with an agenda.

If i still remember correctly they worked with the Consortium during that time. Now come to think of it, why is the Consortium not being prosecuted the same way Assange is? The situation is quite similar to the Manning case? Or releasing state information is somehow worse than private information of banks?

[Rancid]

If i still remember correctly they worked with the Consortium during that time. Now come to think of it, why is the Consortium not being prosecuted the same way Assange is? The situation is quite similar to the Manning case? Or releasing state information is somehow worse than private information of banks?

Basically because the government has the guns and money. national security and all of that....

[Prosthetic Conscience]

If i still remember correctly they worked with the Consortium during that time. Now come to think of it, why is the Consortium not being prosecuted the same way Assange is? The situation is quite similar to the Manning case? Or releasing state information is somehow worse than private information of banks?

As far as I can tell, they had nothing to do with it at all, and were critical of the way the Panama Papers were revealed:

Al Jazeera: The head of the ICIJ - coincidentally is another Australian - Gerard Ryle. I think it's fair to say you're not on great terms. He said that the ICIJ has no plans to release the full data set. He said: "We're not WikiLeaks. We're trying to show that journalism can be done responsibly."

Julian Assange: Yeah that's a concern. We're very pleased about the work that SZ (Suddeutsche Zeitung) - did in the beginning in developing that source. We think that's really good work. The work of the source of course is the most impressive and then pulling together that collaboration is also impressive work.

Saying that you're going to censor and not release a lot of the material, in fact what must be 99 percent of the material, that's a big problem. It's fine to have some kind of staggered release because you want to balance the supply and demand curve. But what I want to hear is that there is a path, a transparent path to publishing the vast majority of that data set because that's what's interesting from a legal perspective, from a historical perspective.

https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/li ... 10398.html

When Novaya Gazeta reported in April 2016 on the 11.5 million documents known as the Panama Papers, which exposed how powerful figures worldwide hide their money overseas, Assange publicly criticized the work. He suggested that reporters had “cherry-picked” the documents to publish for optimal “Putin bashing, North Korea bashing, sanctions bashing, etc.” while giving Western figures a pass.

In fact, news outlets involved in publishing leaks reported on a number of Western figures, including then-British Prime Minister David Cameron.

“For me it was a surprise that Mr. Assange was repeating the same excuse that our officials, even back in Soviet days, used to say — that it’s all some conspiracy from abroad,” Roman Shleynov, a Russian investigative reporter, said in an interview with the New York Times.

WikiLeaks says Assange “didn’t” specifically challenge Novaya Gazeta or the other news outlets that worked on the Panama Papers, despite Assange’s public statements to the contrary.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wi ... -campaign/

And, just to remind you again, the extradition request for Assange is not for "releasing state information", it's for allegedly trying to hack into a computer system.

[Nonsense]

I think that ASSANGE himself revealed that he is a publisher, I have no reason to think otherwise.

To say that he has an 'agenda', well, I think that applies to most people in life, no matter what their vocation is.

Are we saying that he deserves to be villified for his actions in releasing data related to 'illegal' activity by people who act abroad in the name of America?

Or, is it because he did so, knowing that the data belonged to the military?

In either case, kudos to ASSANGE, as exposing illegal activity(the killing of civilians by the military in a civililian area)deserves praise & credit where it is due.

That the data 'belonged' to the military, who operate in the name of America, is equally repugnant for one very simple reason, not exposing it, when one has knowledge of it, whether entitled to that privilege or not, is tantamount to a prima facie case of conspiring to cover-up illegal activity's in a civilian area in a foreign country.

Now, I am not naive, I know that the history of the British Army takes the biscuit for such nefarious treatment of foreign civilians & military personnel.

That is in depth, if not breadth of it's scope of such activities, eclipsed only by the Nazis or Soviet persecutions.

There is no room here, in which 'morals' or 'equivalence' have a place on this topic, all are gross violations of UN law & universal rights.

I am in little doubt that the British government has directly acted in bringing this situation about, saying that it's because the Ecuadorian Embassy or that government declared that ASSANGE broke it's rules or conditions is absolutely false in law & we know what happens in foreign embassies don't we?

Equally, for the British government to say that it's about justice, because ASSANGE is delaying it by jumping bail is also B$,. because every day of the week, there are 'bail-jumpers' not appearing at courts or police stations & getting 'away with it'.

Secondly, unlike ASSANGE, they are not under threat of extradition from a government that is unworthy of the name , is desperate enough to do any feat on the world stage that it thinks will rescue it's appalling image throughout the world & does not hesitate to use a 'stooge' by the name of ASSANGE to achieve that pathetic objective .

Now, is anyone that dense, that they think that the 'charges' levied against ASSANGE to pry his rights to european justice from himself, are anything but 'specimen' charges, which will be followed by a plethora of other 'Trumped-up' charges to ensure that he spends a very long time behind American jail bars.

[Rugoz]

Now, is anyone that dense, that they think that the 'charges' levied against ASSANGE to pry his rights to european justice from himself, are anything but 'specimen' charges, which will be followed by a plethora of other 'Trumped-up' charges to ensure that he spends a very long time behind American jail bars.

If at all, Assange will be tried in a civilian court. He will have good lawyers.

I don't think this kind of mistrust in the American justice system is justified.

[colliric]

Assange is both a Hacker and a Journalist. I don't really care much about his hacking at all.

I don't think hacking is at all a major crime like you do. I don't care that he's a hacker and maybe helped Manning succeed.

I only believe hacking is a crime if the person hands the information to a foreign agent maliciously. I don't believe Wikileaks does that.

I think if the US government allowed themselves to be hacked, they allowed themselves to be hacked due to bad security measures. No one else is responsible.

[Igor Antunov]

The worst thing Assange ever did, through his organization, is show us rampant abuse of prisoners and civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq courtesy of leaks in the US military. He's not even a US citizen so you can't make the 'muh treason' argument. Furthermore he and his publishing organization of Wikileaks aren't even the originators of the incriminating evidence.

All the 'muh assange hacked teh emails' is just more Clintonian bullshit. They're still in denial about 2016.

[Atlantis]

Chelsea and Julian are in Jail. History Trembles.

Tonight both Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange are in jail, both over offences related to the publication of materials specifying US war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, and both charged with nothing else at all. No matter what bullshit political and MSM liars try to feed you, that is the simple truth. Manning and Assange are true heroes of our time, and are suffering for it.

If a Russian opposition politician were dragged out by armed police, and within three hours had been convicted on a political charge by a patently biased judge with no jury, with a lengthy jail sentence to follow, can you imagine the Western media reaction to that kind of kangaroo court? Yet that is exactly what just happened in London.

District Judge Michael Snow is a disgrace to the bench who deserves to be infamous well beyond his death. He displayed the most plain and open prejudice against Assange in the 15 minutes it took for him to hear the case and declare Assange guilty, in a fashion which makes the dictators’ courts I had witnessed, in Babangida’s Nigeria or Karimov’s Uzbekistan, look fair and reasonable, in comparison to the gross charade of justice conducted by Michael Snow.

One key fact gave away Snow’s enormous prejudice. Julian Assange said nothing during the whole brief proceedings, other than to say “Not guilty” twice, and to ask a one sentence question about why the charges were changed midway through this sham “trial”. Yet Judge Michael Snow condemned Assange as “narcissistic”. There was nothing that happened in Snow’s brief court hearing that could conceivably have given rise to that opinion. It was plainly something he brought with him into the courtroom, and had read or heard in the mainstream media or picked up in his club. It was in short the very definition of prejudice, and “Judge” Michael Snow and his summary judgement is a total disgrace.

We wrapped up the final Wikileaks and legal team meeting at 21.45 tonight and thereafter Kristian Hrafnsson and I had dinner together. The whole team, including Julian, is energised rather than downhearted. At last there is no more hiding for the pretend liberals behind ludicrous Swedish allegations or bail jumping allegations, and the true motive – revenge for the Chelsea Manning revelations – is now completely in the open.

To support the persecution of Assange in these circumstances is to support absolute state censorship of the internet. It is to support the claim that any journalist who receives and publishes official material which indicates US government wrongdoing, can be punished for its publication. Furthermore this US claim involves an astonishing boost to universal jurisdiction. Assange was nowhere near the USA when he published the documents, but nonetheless US courts are willing to claim jurisdiction. This is a threat to press and internet freedom everywhere.

These are scary times. But those may also be the most inspiring of times.

Now kids, don't post anything rush, or USAF may want to know your location.

[colliric]

The establishment hates him for exposing their crimes and wants to figuratively crucify him(or lock him up)... Just like they hate all the truly great rebels of history. They crucified Jesus for real.

Assange is one of Australia's true heroes.

[Igor Antunov]

Australia doesn't deserve heroes. Canberra is happy to throw him under the bus, and most Australian drones here are happy to believe the media narrative that he made the orange bad man win.

[Nonsense]

It is rank hypocrisy for government's like America to prosecute recipients of what it classes as 'state-owned' property, whether civil,military or security, when it is the state's primary duty to protect it's own assets.

America, like many 'expansionist' or 'hegemonist' states, spies on other states, aquiring foreign state - owned data illegally, it's, 'pot-calling-kettle-black' when America gets pawned by a 'blue-on-blue' strike, if you don't want your dirty washing globally exposed, then act legally & responsibly in the manner in which a true 'democratic' state should do on the world stage.

Any system is only as strong as it's weakest link, that 'honour' goes to the original taker of the data-MANNING & he has served 'his' time for 'his' crime.

At best, ASSANGE is a 'fence' in receiving that property, as opposed to a purveyor of stolen property, which is what the American government alleges by claiming that ASSANGE 'requested' MANNING obtain data for publication by Wikileaks.

None of which proves that he did so, it's his word against MANNING's, proving that allegation is much more difficult than alleging it.

In terms of 'hacking', I see no evidence of that by ASSANGE, he is as entitled as anyone else to 'hack'; his own computer, he is not responsible for the information or data that arrives on it, whether by a USB stick, e-mail, he wouldn't know specifically what was on any device carrying data,as a publisher, if he did, he wouldn't need to receive it in the first place would he.

'Hacking' is often a term mis-understood, in terms of computing, there are may variations or methods, it's also used outside of computing for entirely legitimate purposes, such as in the after-market auto trade.

[Nonsense]

Australia doesn't deserve heroes. Canberra is happy to throw him under the bus, and most Australian drones here are happy to believe the media narrative that he made the orange bad man win.

That says more about the type of politicians that people elect, than it does of the people whom they should support, it's politicians vs the people, that's the world we live in.

[Beren]

All the 'muh assange hacked teh emails' is just more Clintonian bullshit.

It's not exactly Clintonian bullshit since Barr explicitly mentions WikiLeaks in his summary of the Mueller Report. According to which WikiLeaks didn't hack anything, the Russians did and disseminated the Clinton emails via WikiLeaks among others. WikiLeaks and Assange will say they got the emails from Seth Rich, who was just a mediator and a Russian agent most likely, like Assange himself (and Snowden too).

[Rugoz]

WikiLeaks and Assange will say they got the emails from Seth Rich, who was just a mediator and a Russian agent most likely, like Assange himself (and Snowden too).

Eh what?

[Beren]

Eh what?

Only dupes believe Snowden lives happily ever after in Moscow without ever having done anything for the Russians or having cooperated with them at least, his exit must have been carefully pre-planned too. Assange also clearly needed real big shots behind him to avoid extradition for so long, however, the time for his grandest acting in a theatre play just has come. As to Seth Rich, I'd believe he was killed by the Russians rather than the Clintons to neaten the edges.

[Rugoz]

Only dupes believe Snowden lives happily ever after in Moscow without ever having done anything for the Russians or having cooperated with them at least, his exit must have been carefully pre-planned too. Assange also clearly needed real big shots behind him to avoid extradition for so long, however, the time for his grandest acting in a theatre play just has come. As to Seth Rich, I'd believe he was killed by the Russians rather than the Clintons to neaten the edges.

Snowden was a huge propaganda victory for Putin. Any intelligence Snowden could provide would pale in comparison.

Ecuador's Correa was anti-US, obviously, that's why he granted Assange asylum.

Also, watch Citizenfour.

[QatzelOk]

Talk about biting the hand that feeds ya.

Not really.

The "hand the fed" Julian Assange was Rafael Correa, the former leftist president of Ecuador. He is currently hiding from "freedom and democracy" in Belgium.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... -election/

The current president, Lenin Moreno, is one of the IMF-borrowing, western base inviting, multinational-friendly rightwingers who swept across Latin America in a series of western-backed coups and opportunistically imprisoned leftists.

He is currently selling his country to the highest bidder, which happens to be non-Ecuadorians. He is thus "not an issue" in commercial media.

[B0ycey]

The Empire strikes again. There is no escaping its fangs even in the furthest reaches of the planet. Nobody is safe! Who's next? I hope Snowden doesn't get thrown under a bus.

To some extent I agree with your sentiment as publishing state crimes should be celebrated rather than punished. Although we need to remember he was evading rape charges and is more likely to be sent to Sweden than America today as the case looks like being reopened. If he was innocent he should have stood trial rather than hide and use the trial to showcase hypocrisy. He deserves his downfall for not facing justice and instead hid in his own personal prison for seven years.

Nonetheless here is a meme that typifies who the true enemies of the state should be...

[colliric]

Assange's beard


Reminds me of:


Only white....