Can we talk about Julian?

Post Reply New Topic

I am surprised no one here seems to be talking about the plight of Julian Assange. Is it a taboo subject because it is before the courts? Maybe this is the case so best not to go there here.

His is a subject that already been talked to death. Use the search box on this page for the name "Assange".

I tried that doing a search but nothing came up but a bunch of ads. No individual posts. That is what surprised me and prompted my post.

viewtopic.php?t=375171 Here you go!

More:

viewtopic.php?t=232822

viewtopic.php?t=146011

viewtopic.php?t=145173

viewtopic.php?t=187793

viewtopic.php?t=335816

viewtopic.php?t=152955

Like I said, "Talked to death".

Yes I remember him

Thank you fellow Wrong Planeters. I will have a look at your links. If i needed another clue that Julian has Aspergers it was when i saw on this message board how much Aspergians love cats. A cat has been Julian's constant companion while he has been holed up in the embassy for almost seven years. Only an Aspergian could live like that.

I've just had a quick look at earlier posts about Julian and i love how opinions of him are so divided. Bottom line is whether what he has done is right or wrong. A characteristic of Aspergers is black and white thinking. Hmm. I am interested in Julian's Aspergian characteristics one of which is a strong sense of social justice. Tick! Is it fair that he is being punished simply for being Aspergian? I know this is a very simplistic take on the situation. But i feel sorry for the bloke. He is just being Aspergian in my eyes.

He is not being punished for being aspergian. He is guilty of breaching the UK Bail Act 1976. He is accused of rape in Sweden. He also aided and abetted the activities of that traitor Manning in America.

Whether or not he is "Aspergian" is irrelevant. Asperger's Syndrome is neither a prosecutable offense nor a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card. Julian Assange is a criminal who outlasted his welcome at the Ecuadorian embassy, where he was hiding from prosecutions for crimes he knows he committed -- a cowardly act in itself.

Julian Assange is a most worthless piece of work if I have ever seen one.

Well said.

When he hid I still had some naive support for Wikileaks. Now I don't really. Their failure to responsibly redact the documents that Chelsea Manning sent them endangered lives and led to her imprisonment. Meanwhile Assange hid from the rape charges that would probably have led to him spending several years in prison, and actively spread misinformation in an attempt to influence the US Presidential Election.

The world is probably a better place as a result of Manning's leaks but I really wish she'd sent them to the Guardian or the New York Times or any journalist really, not that criminal Assange.

How would she know that those papers would run it ?

That's exactly what papers DO! Manning new exactly what the papers would do with the stolen information. How could anyone be so naive as to think otherwise?

DUH!

Because, and how could anyone be so naive as to think otherwise: newspapers are SELECTIVE. They don't automatically carry any item you want them to. They serve their own and their owners' agendas to portray the world in a certain-angled way

Maybe in YOUR reality, but in this reality ALL news outlets are self-serving and interested only in readership, sponsorship, and the bottom line. To this end, anything worth vetting is worth publishing.

Sure, they're selective, but if a news piece gives them a 24-hour lead on the competition, then they'll run it, and and previous ethical considerations be damned!

I think the truth is somewhere in between.

Yes, a newspaper who considered the publications very disadvantageous might not run them. But in reality I think even the most cynical would think, "wow, this is a great story, hold the front page!"

In the cases of the two papers I named, they both have a long history of publishing leaked material that is unfavourable or even embarrassing to Western governments, and have won awards for it. I accept that Manning might not have known that but it's a virtual certainty that they'd publish it.

That's sheer and utter B.S. They didn't endanger anyone's lives. And there are no rape charges. Firstly the sex was consensual. Secondly it began with the first prosecutor who questioned Julian and dropped the case. One of the women at least said that the police made up the charges. Then a politically motivated second prosecutor was put on the case when Assange was in the UK. Assange agreed to go to Sweden to be questioned AGAIN, only if they guaranteed he wouldn't be extradited to the US (because that's what it's all about, nothing to do with sexual activities. Given that the same parasites after Assange were fine with Abu Ghraib where US soldiers raped Iraqi children and played their screams to their mothers to torture them via sleep deprivation). Assange agreed to be questioned in the Embassy but the UK said no. Ecuador was giving him safe and and lawful asylum and then a new government took over that got billions in loans from the IMF.

The people that shot up Iraqi civilians (including 2 Reuters journalists) and laughed and then shot up people trying to rescue the injured, got away with it. The people who exposed the Nazi like crimes are rotting in prison.

Stop spreading fake information and propaganda straight from the Pentagon that could endanger the life of someone who probably is on the spectrum. IT IS DISGUSTING.