Julian Assange - What a tosser.

[Mr Mystery]

A fair point, all those responsible should be held accountable, but certainly not by Julian Assange.



They didn't want it done properly, they wanted it done as quickly and cheaply as possible, which is why, like all cowboy builders, they made a massive mess of it and left it worst than it was before.



The Empire did more than it's fair share of native exploitation, but like the Romans it also bought a lot of benefits for those living under it's control. And it's not like many of them have exactly prospered since we gave them rule of their countries back.

And what have the Romans ever done for us?? (sorry, couldn't resist. Plus it's all getting a smidge serious over an egotistical bellend who looked like Mr Humpries on his stupid balcony)

[Grailkeeper]

Haven't been following the thread, but I once met Julian assange (very briefly). He wasn't very nice.


Edit: you can't really tell from the pics (or maybe you can) but his main feature in real life is he is very strikingly tall- 6'6 if not more.

[Mr Mystery]

He strikes me as the potential result of firing Arnold Judas Rimmer and John 'Mr Humphries' Inman in opposite directions on the Large Hadron Collider....

[DarkLink]

I'm frankly disappointed in Eldargal's position. I expected better from her.

There are two extremes here, one of total transparency (and transparency is absolutely vital for a free government) and one of secrecy to protect those risking their lives for our sake. Both are vital, but complete transparent and complete secrecy are mutually exclusive. Any rational individual should understand a balance must be kept.

I fully encourage transparency, something Obama has not done in practice. Obama has punished more whistleblowers than all previous presidents in history combined, and there are some things that should absolutely be exposed. Assage, however, included all the documents that could have, and likely did, get people killed, both members of the military and intelligence communities as well as many foreigners working with our government.

[Wildeybeast]

He strikes me as the potential result of firing Arnold Judas Rimmer and John 'Mr Humphries' Inman in opposite directions on the Large Hadron Collider....

Ha ha! Those pictures are brilliant.

[eldargal]

DarkLink, it is about perspective. Maybe Assange got some people killed. But our governments institutionalsied torture, which doesn't work, and lied about it. They knew they were killing scores of civilians in Pakistan and other countries with drone strikes, and lied about. This sort of hypocrisy led to the leak to Assange in the first place and is far more damaging to our efforts in the MidEast than Assange publishing proof of what most of the Islamic world already suspected.

I can't feel particularly worked up about Assange possible getting people killed when our governments have been responsible for far, far more deaths though sheer incompetence and they are never held to account.

I'm note defending Assange, I'm just pointing out it is somewhat hypocritical to try and turn him into some kind of boogieman and it only feeds his ego and paranoia and that of his followers who have blownthis thing out of all proportion in the first place.

[DarkLink]

I see what you're saying. I think we're talking about slightly different things.

Let's say we've got Mohammed Doe, who gives us some intel to some Army SF that helps them track down a terrorist leader. Wikileaks finds those documents, leaks them, and Mohammed gets his head chopped off on the internet.

Then we've got your example, of abuse of prisoners. The leak here is obviously a good thing.

Let's say we've got our diplomats arguing with Iran over nukes. One stupid aide makes a vaguely anti-muslim remark, something a Westerner would find socially acceptable (more or less). Iran finds out because of Wikileaks, and they threaten to nuke the Infidel. Again. Once they eventually get around to building the nukes they claim not to be building.



There's absolutely a line to be drawn. But the person drawing that line has to be very careful about where it is drawn. Assange is not capable of that. Not that he's really a threat anymore, or even that he was a big threat to begin with. But my point isn't really about Assange. He can rot in some embassy freaking out over extradition just as miserably as he could rot in prison. I'm just saying that sometimes, secrecy is absolutely, genuinely, important.


On another note, secrecy doesn't have to last forever. When we killed Osama, Obama was immediately on the air. Not that I'll denigrate him for making the call, but if he had just waited even a couple of days, the military intelligence community could have acted on all of that operational intelligence they gathered. But Obama went on air, and al Quaeda would have immediately taken steps to mitigate the intelligence damage done by the raid, preventing us from taking advantage of our new-found intel. Either Obama felt his re-election was more important, or he lacked the discipline to make the smart call.




And not only has Obama authorized all of those drone strikes (which "officially" haven't killed any civilians), but he's actually targeted American citizens without trial. Not that these individuals would have had much of a trial, they were openly members of various terrorist organizations, but we have the Justice Department to deal with citizen's crimes for a reason. One more reason I don't like Obama.

[eldargal]

Do you remember those Iranian opposition riots from a couple of years ago? That film of a shot female protestor dying went all over the internet and Obama even gave a press conference about it. On that same day (as the press conference) a drone strike in Pakistan killed dozens and dozens of civilians. I don't have any time for Obamas hypocrisy either, it is precisely why I think making a fuss over Assange is so silly.

What you say about Assange is precisely why I don't feel the need to pursue him particularly vigorously. He isn't a threat anymore, and what damage he did do is mostly hypothetical. If he was responsible for lives lost it still pales in comparison to the mistakes our military/guvmint makes every week. Every time we blow up a wedding or party in Pakistan or Afghanistan we infringe uponthe sovereigtny of their government, make them look weak and make ourselves even more unpopular, feeding radical Islam in the process.

This can be quite objectively proven to have happened, whereas whatever Assange may have been responsible for is much more nebulous. He can't be charged with espionage as he didn't steal the documents and he can't be charged with treason as he isn't a US citizen. He would no doubt claim protection under freedom of the press laws for disclosing information received. Send him to Sweden, send him to Ecuador, but let's stop feeding his ego.

[Psychosplodge]

And what have the Romans ever done for us?? (sorry, couldn't resist. Plus it's all getting a smidge serious over an egotistical bellend who looked like Mr Humpries on his stupid balcony)

[URL="http://youtu.be/ExWfh6sGyso"]The aquaduct?[/URL]

He strikes me as the potential result of firing Arnold Judas Rimmer and John 'Mr Humphries' Inman in opposite directions on the Large Hadron Collider....

Nah, theres no charge on A Rimmer, or an Inman...

[Wildeybeast]

. But our governments institutionalsied torture, which doesn't work, and lied about it.

I don't know about the Yanks, but I'm pretty sure that calling the odd isolated incident (which is usually grunts on the ground having 'fun') institutionalised torture by the British government is stretching it somewhat.

What you say about Assange is precisely why I don't feel the need to pursue him particularly vigorously. He isn't a threat anymore, and what damage he did do is mostly hypothetical.

He needs to be pursued as vigorously as any other criminal, if we make a special case for him we might as well give up on the notion of justice altogether. The only way our legal system can work is if no one is beyond it.