Like Karl Rove?
i[/i][/SIZE]
But do you honestly trust your government enough to give them the power to hide their secrets? Aren’t we supposed to be able to choose our governments with the most information possible? If they just hide all their blemishes we can’t exactly make an informed, intelligent decision.
Wonder how many walks on the Appalachian Trail* there are hidden under the cloak of “secret information”…
I’m just trying to see why someonerandm is so against revealing these documents but is a person who, to me, values intelligence and rationality but would choose to stay in the dark and make ignorant and misinformed decisions knowingly.
People, he was arrested for those sex crime charges, not for the leak.
… right?
Almost absolutely not. As I said before, the charge is that a condom broke and he knew and did not tell his partner. It’s no reason to strong arm companies like Amazon.com and Paypal into blacklisting his accounts, it’s not a reason to get Interpol involved, and it certainly isn’t a reason to hold someone in jail without bail on remand.
It’s a cover so they could get their hands on him, almost positively. If not, this is one of the poorest conducts concerning one of the smallest offenses in recent memory.
There were actually 4 charges of sex crimes, the thing is that the law over there makes it so that consent can be retroactively removed.
where is it? sweden?
Yes, Sweden.
There are unfair laws as there are unfair men.
Remember that the people that made this law is exactly the people that are protected by that law to do whatever they want in secret.
Yep.
I understand the idea that governments need to have secrets. To not see that is just to idealistically blind yourself to reality. I don’t really care that he leaked the documents. However, I think the government should have laws to prevent these kinds of things, before he leaks something that gets someone killed. I don’t like the idea of being in the dark, but I also don’t like the idea of going to war, but I recognize the necessity of it.
I realize that, but I meant the reason they gave for arresting him. Despite of anything else, the only thing I’ve heard is that he’s in custody on suspicion of sex crimes, or something.
Yeah, the reason given was the whole condom thing, which really makes no sense.
I think of it like what happened with Al Capone (though I’m in no way comparing the two people): He wasn’t caught out on all the other criminal activities but on tax evasion.
Perhaps they’re just trying to get SOMETHING on Mr. Assange.
I think it smells fishy, if you ask me.
I would be inclined to agree, but as I said above, he really deserves some punishment for screwing over quite a bit of diplomatic maneuvering, and he has become a role model for a lot of idealistic idiots who may leak something a bit more dangerous. His punishment, if it comes, to my mind will be deserved.
I disagree. What he released wasn’t classified. It’s not illegal to embarrass someone.
I believe at least some of it was. The stuff that wasn’t doesn’t matter.
I think the main problem I have with your attitude is this, Someonerandm.
You come in here assuming that this guy has revealed some sort of military intelligence, or at least something that compromises US security. This, according to you, is good enough reason to kill him. This by itself seems a bit closed minded.
We tell you it had nothing to do with national security, which is corroborated by the press secretary, so you say execution is a bit over the top, but whatever punishment he gets is deserved.
Then we tell you most of it wasn’t even classified, and you state that you still believe it is.
It’s like, if this guy was unjustly killed for the crimes he didn’t commit, you wouldn’t have even asked questions. You wouldn’t have cared. You would have sat idly by unaware of the fact that your liberties are taking it in the ass all in the name of, ironically, patriotism. Its an attitude mirrored everywhere and it sort of makes me sick, to be honest. I think people should educate themselves before simply deciding that someone deserves to die.
I at no point said he should be executed. Imprisonment≠Execution. I said if leaked info result in human death, then he should be executed, but I never said the leaked documents had or would. I said this from the start. Some of the documents were classified, from the start. Therefore my argument has remained the same from the start.
I recognize the temptation to make stuff up is strong, but this is the internet. Everything we say is recorded. You cannot falsify reality.
No, you did not say that he should be executed. And I did not say you did. I repeated what you did say; that if he had released something that compromised US security (aka someone dies) that it was a good enough reason to.
Which, I continued, was a relatively close minded position to have when you don’t have all the facts. I stand by what I wrote and invite you to point out where I misrepresented your position in detail
Wark is right here.
Like it was said before, if government had decency in choosing what should and what should not be kept in secret, everything should be ok. But murder of Iraqi civilians and not taking the murderers to court should obviously not be hidden from everyone. Most people think the war is justified by 9/11, but it has commercial reasons, and that just can’t stay in the dark.
Now, as various companies are boycotting Wikileaks, come on, does this really look like a civilized action? Is it democracy? They arrest him of something completely unrelated, deny bail and agreement? If what he did is a crime, then prosecute him of the crime he committed, don’t use a small felony as an excuse to keep him in prison.
I don’t know you guys, but, to me, this looks like China.
My opinion is that, if all documents that were leaked are revealing unethical or unmoral behavior, then Assange is not guilty of anything.