Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

oh wow i thought means were everything

we can't copy ruthlessness msh that makes us alt-right by proxy

The leaks are justified. Assange is very probably a rapist and/or Russian proxy and yet he remains in the right regarding this. Certainly Manning is a hero for standing up against what is turning out to be a lifelong grudge from the state that will most likely end in her murder.

If your ideology is not one of supreme state power and that state's ownership of your own life and death, then you are required to recognize the law as being a tool and nothing more or else have a gaping hole in your position. And that means that the law has limits and points of failure which should be celebrated rather than condemned. If all the evil shit the US has gotten up to doesn't qualify as that, then probably nothing will.

Stop cheerleading the state, damnit. Y'all want to pride yourselves as independent thinkers but I find you all on here half the time stringing out the government line, and that's when the current government is Trump. Don't you understand that it'll be you in the crosshair someday?

[Gentlefish]

Dude I'm saying the actions were illegal but if they're found innocent by jury then hell yeah he should be free. But hacking happened and that's illegal regardless of ends.

Manning was used and she should be free. She was the whistleblower, not Assange.

[Egan_BW]

The government isn't the president. We're drifting farther towards that particular dystopia every four years, but not yet.

[SalmonGod]

Stop cheerleading the state, damnit. Y'all want to pride yourselves as independent thinkers but I find you all on here half the time stringing out the government line, and that's when the current government is Trump.

It should be recognized what it means that it's Trump's administration going after him, too, and how quickly Trump abandoned his vocal support as soon as the opportunity presented itself.

Trump's an authoritarian.  Assange is anti-authoritarian.  Trump knows that Assange/Wikileaks became a liability to him as soon as he gained power.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Unfortunately I just can't bring myself to join the "burn everything down" camp.

It's ironic that you keep describing me with those words given that the people who want to "keep together" are actually literally going to burn everything.

The government isn't the president. We're drifting farther towards that particular dystopia every four years, but not yet.

In functional terms the entire government is founded on Trump's ideology and mannerism, in both Congress and SCOTUS. The are not perfect dogs and Trump is bad at what he does but they are aligned beyond warranting separation. 

[Dunamisdeos]

I agree with Metal in regards to the leaks.

Not to be a broken record here, but we were gunning down unidentified civilians from a helicopter. I feel like that level of wrongdoing needs to be focused on. We have a system that allows things like this to happen with zero consequence to both the individuals involved and, perhaps more importantly, the folks in power whose job it is to prevent these things and are instead actively supporting them.

I don't even have to delve into morality here. If the law sustains and supports illegal actions then the law is by definition in the wrong and needs to be subverted. In that case, and that case alone, criminal action is in fact the correct action. To try and head off a potential tangent, this is a highly conditional conclusion unique to this situation. You aren't a revolutionary hero absolved from wrongdoing if you break laws you don't like because you don't like them, or use the law to attack people for your own benefit. This, by the way, is also my argument against Assange taking the same measures to support his own political ideology during the last election.

[SalmonGod]

I feel like we're conflating trial with punishment here. If, as a society, we would have the rule of law apply to everyone and also have people avoid punishment for crimes that we want them to commit, arguably the way to do that is to prosecute everyone for crimes for which factual grounds for prosecution exist and then find the ultimately beneficial ones not guilty. If our justice system is so broken that trial is itself punishment, we've got way more problems than cases like this.

For one, this wonderful statement still applies (in regards to Dunamisdeos). The question of legality and the question of warranted punishment are two different things. The law should not enshrine the idea that the ends justify the means. That is for a jury to decide.

This sentiment does not address the government's ability to be selective about its efforts to bring a suspect to court.  If everyone suspect of a crime were subject to enforcement efforts proportionate to their crime in a consistent manner, then there would be much less problem with these statements.  But Assange has been subject to incredibly extraordinary efforts.  Compare to enforcement efforts against people who committed the crimes Wikileaks provided proof for.  This is how authorities can choose how to bend the arc of history, enabled by shallow notions of faith in how the justice system operates in theory.

Edit:  I suppose it could be framed that part of my outrage regarding this case is it's an example of the rule of law not applying to everyone consistently, thereby contradicting the initial premise being "If, as a society, we would have the rule of law apply to everyone"

[LordBaal]

I'm pretty sure gunning down civilians from a helicopter is pretty much impossible to justify, but there's some context to it? Or where the soldiers drunk at the moment? Not trying to justify it even remotely,  just genuinely interested in knowing how NOT to become one of such civilians if you guys come here before I run away.

[SalmonGod]

I'm pretty sure gunning down civilians from a helicopter is pretty much impossible to justify, but there's some context to it? Or where the soldiers drunk at the moment? Not trying to justify it even remotely,  just genuinely interested in knowing how to become one of such civilians if you guys come here before I run away.

The targets in the notorious video were a team of journalists.  The official excuse was that the personnel involved mistook their camera for a rocket launcher.

Here is the original content if you want to decide for yourself.

And an interview with a soldier who was close to the incident who has spoken out about it.  How it relates to the scene presented by the Wikileaks video is mixed.

Content warnings, obviously.  But you don't see anything in great detail.

[Trekkin]

This sentiment does not address the government's ability to be selective about its efforts to bring a suspect to court.  If everyone suspect of a crime were subject to enforcement efforts proportionate to their crime in a consistent manner, then there would be much less problem with these statements.  But Assange has been subject to incredibly extraordinary efforts.  Compare to enforcement efforts against people who committed the crimes Wikileaks provided proof for.  This is how authorities can choose how to bend the arc of history, enabled by shallow notions of faith in how the justice system operates in theory.

This is absolutely true, but arguing that Assange should not be prosecuted gets us farther from that ideal, since it's arguing for the government to have more discretion in which crimes they choose to care about on moral grounds rather than less. They should absolutely be tried as well. Going after Assange makes it easier to do that.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I'm pretty sure gunning down civilians from a helicopter is pretty much impossible to justify, but there's some context to it? Or where the soldiers drunk at the moment? Not trying to justify it even remotely,  just genuinely interested in knowing how NOT to become one of such civilians if you guys come here before I run away.

Context: War is genocidal by nature. Where do think the half a million or greater dead Iraqis came from? Their army? Insurgents? I can barely help but laugh when I look back. Such sweet lies an invader gets to place on their plate.

It was no different in Vietnam, except we got to hear about it, and the government came so close to a true domestic crisis that they vowed never to let the public see inside the box again.

And I'll tell you something else LB: You are completely divorced with reality if you really do want the USA to invade your county or even sponsor insurgents. If you do not die, your family will die. If your family does not die, the toll will be spread around all those you have ever known. And even if you don't care about that, the vengeance of the American slaughterhouse will make sure Venezuela falls and does not rise again for three generations, as a method and as a message to the world.

The Vietnamese number among the very few such targeted peoples who came out on top, and even they paid a heavy price. War is murder, and anybody who doesn't understand that doesn't have any right to their opinion on it.

[Dunamisdeos]

I don't think the current system allows him to be properly prosecuted. I don't think we have specific laws/exceptions in place to ensure it within reason.

How possible is it to ensure a fair trial when the system he exposed is the same one holding power over his trial? I'm not saying he shouldn't be tried, he DID break the law after all, and he DID take actions that can be easily construed as motivated by personal benefit after the fact. But is there any possibility whatsoever that he isn't going to be found guilty of literally every possible related crime and sentenced was harshly as possible?

You want him tried fairly? Bring him to international court.

[Trekkin]

But is there any possibility whatsoever that he isn't going to be found guilty of literally every possible related crime and sentenced was harshly as possible?

Yes. Barring absolutely everything else, jury nullification can make that happen.

[SalmonGod]

Was it, though? I don't recall the specifics of the extent of which the US was attempting to have Assange arrested and tried (and surely now that he has been, getting accurate details of such will prove next to impossible)

Interpol listed him as one of their most wanted international arrest warrants very quickly after the allegations were made in Sweden.  Unprecedented doesn't being to describe this behavior in relation to a sex crime.

Then the UK monitored the Ecuadorian embassy 24/7 for 7 years and spent over $10,000,000 in the process waiting for a chance to arrest him.

Evidence of there being a sealed indictment waiting in the U.S. was out as early as 2012, and the Snowden leaks included evidence that the U.S. was pressuring its allies to pursue him -- (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#United_States_criminal_investigation).

it never seemed disproportionate to the extent that he was antagonizing the very people who were pursuing him

Well... yeah... that's the problem, isn't it?  The justice system shouldn't be influenced by the extent to which powerful people feel antagonized.

[LordBaal]

Well metal, the answer I was asking was more in the lines of what salmon delivered.

I know war is genocide by nature, and it's part of its process and goals.

I already had the lives of my biological father and a brother taken by what could be described as a asymetrical war. As well as friends and acquaintances. Im not divorced from reality of I want it to end.

Now, nowhere did I say I would like that, Sudan would be a perfect example but that wont happen here because there are a lot of different angles and interests.

I'll tell you however that at this point most people here are seeing a international military intervention as the only way out and even ask outright for it, even on twitter directly to Guaido's account.

When this country claimed it's independence from the Spanish crown we did it against all odds with barefoot soldiers crossing the Andes... and liberated not only this but 4 other countries too. The ideal thing would this to happen again of sorts. The world is not ideal..