Extradition of Julian Assange undermines freedom of speech

[bomberfox]

....which was an uprising by the local people against their brutal dictator, who had repeatedly ordered terrorist attacks against the West, supporting terrorist groups across the globe, and which was largely characterized by the lack of serious US intervention.....which is why it ultimate became an even larger mess.

The vast majority of the people “disappeared“ and murdered by the Pinochet regime were guilty of no crime, and therefore, by definition, innocent. Psuedo-fascist thugs like Pinochet were so broad with declaring others to be “communist sympathizers” that the term had absolutely no meaning.

Hell pinochet could even get rid of a disloyal lackey by calling them a communist.

 

[bomberfox]

Gee, that depends. Did Mr. Skirpal deliberately and knowing expose the identity of people working against a vicious terrorist group? No? Then trying to compare him to Assange(who, by the way, is closely connected with Mr. Putin’s regime) holds no water whatsoever. Oh yeah, and then there’s the fact that the Russians actually tried to kill Mr. Skripal, and there is zero evidence whatsoever that the US actually tried to kill Assange.

Sowing fear amongst one man, who helps the Taliban and brutal dictators like Vladimir Putin, who fled to hide in an embassy to wait out the statue of limitations on a crime his actions make it seem pretty damn clear he did, in fact, commit, and who claimed that the people who sheltered him “violated his rights” by asking him to clean up after his cat.

But I get it. To Assange’s fanboys, none of his actions matters— what matters is that he tries to hurt the ”Empire”

It should be stressed that anti americanism which seems to fuel the fanboy hype is not an ideology

 

[Tigerace117]

It should be stressed that anti americanism which seems to fuel the fanboy hype is not an ideology

Hell pinochet could even get rid of a disloyal lackey by calling them a communist.

Yes, that’s pretty much what Pinochet made a habit of doing, although anti Americanism is pretty much an ideology of its own, one which tends to override the traditional left-right divide.

 

[Evilroddy]

So your contention is that its okay for Assange and his stooges to hack into private emails, but its not okay for the US government to do it while trying to bring him to justice? Does the word hypocrisy mean anything to you?

FYI, nothing in those silly articles you linked disproves the CNN article. There were indeed Russians who visited Assange while he was hiding in the embassy, that much is certain.

How's the traffic in Dzerzhinsky Square today, comrade?

PoS:

Julian Assamge hacked nothing. Chelsea Manning and others did (perhaps Russian hackers or the GRU among them). Assange only published information which Wikileaks received from third parties like Manning.

There is nothing extraordinary about state security services acting illegally in the course of their activities. However that makes the information gathered only useful for intelligence purposes. The moment it comes into a court it must be suppressed by an impartial judge if a persuasive case can be made that it was gathered illegally. Those are the rules of evidence designed to assure that the accused gets a fair trial.

The phrase "bring him to justice" is an interesting one. Mr. Assange and Wikileaks operated outside of US jurisdiction and Mr. Assange is not an American citizen. Therefore neither the organisation nor the man are subject to American justice. Bradley/Chelsea Manning was prosecuted for stealing the secrets which Wikileaks published in 2010-2011 because he/she was subject to Ameican law and justice. The NYT, The Guardian, Le Pais and Le Monde did precisely the same thing as Wikileaks and were thus as liable for prosecution as Wikileaks, should the US Government attempt an extra-jurisdictional prosecution. But those institutions have heavy hitting lawyers which, as the Obama Administration Justice Department correctly concluded, would have the case thrown out of court for prosecutorial overreach and trampling on the First Amendment.

The Trump Justice Department is attempting a selective prosecution of the unprotected and low-hanging fruit that is Mr. Assange to get around the fact that these major newspapers should be included as coconspirators in the case against Wikileaks and Assange. They want to get a legal precedent before they turn to tackle the big boys of publishing. If they did include the newspapers the US Government would lose the case and the precedent quashed.

The US Government is also saying that while US laws apply to Mr. Assange, he cannot claim the constitutional protections afforded to all subject to US law by the US constitution. So Assange can't claim first amendment rights or argue that his treatment would amount to cruel and unusual punishment. The US Government wants its cake and to eat it too. No impartial court would allow that. Therefore the US Government has no legal authority to bring him to justice as selective prosecution and severance from constitutional legal protections are against the Rule of Law and extra-jurisdictional prosecution flies in the face of state sovereignty.

In your version of this, just like America has a right to prosecute Assange and suppress his legal rights, so would Chinese or Russian courts have those powers with respect to American persons and institutions. So those states would have a legal right to prosecute American publishers or journalists or anyone else who they deemed harmed them. Thus Russia or China could prosecute the authors of the CNN article for writing and publishing what Russia, China, or what other state would define as lies based on illegally obtained and American Government paid-for evidence. Extra-jurisdictional prosecution cuts both ways. Imagine George Bush Jr. sitting in the same plexiglass docket that Saddam Hussein sat in, facing an Iraqi court for ordering the 2003 invasion of Iraq. That's where this is leading.

The CNN article was literally and by the article's own admission based on the dossiers compiled by UC Global, the same company which discussed with US agents the kidnapping or poisoning of Mr. Assange. UC Global refused to comment on the article, likely because they are being prosectuted for their role in this illegal operation. So, yes, the CNN article was only as reliable as those dossiers and those dossiers are highly unreliable from a legal standpoint.

It's sunny but still a bit wet in my part of Canada. Never been to Russia and while Putin is in power, I will never visit that country. The man is a contemptible megalomaniac and a completely bent villain. I wish him all the ill I can muster.

I am no Putin fanboy. I am a Rule of Law fanboy.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[bomberfox]

Yes, that’s pretty much what Pinochet made a habit of doing, although anti Americanism is pretty much an ideology of its own, one which tends to override the traditional left-right divide.

I’d say if anti-americanism is an ideology, its very incoherent to the point of silliness which is the point of saying its not an ideology.

 

[Evilroddy]

I’d say if anti-americanism is an ideology, its very incoherent to the point of silliness which is the point of saying its not an ideology.

Bomberfox:

Is American exceptionalism an ideology? That concept seems to run strongly in the background of this thread's debate.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[Tigerace117]

[/QUOTE]

Bomberfox:

Is American exceptionalism an ideology? That concept seems to run strongly in the background of this thread's debate.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

Willingness to excuse the exposure of those working against the Taliban has nothing to do with “American exceptionalism“......unless of course you think they are “collaborators” who have it coming for working with the US.

 

[Tigerace117]

I’d say if anti-americanism is an ideology, its very incoherent to the point of silliness which is the point of saying its not an ideology.

Anti-Americanism is rather silly and incoherent, with many mutually exclusive positions, yes. However, the hate is very real and is common to both extremes, but particularly the far left.

 

[bomberfox]

Bomberfox:

Is American exceptionalism an ideology? That concept seems to run strongly in the background of this thread's debate.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

I dont see the usual American exceptionalism much in this thread. Its mostly about Assange’s complete lack of responsibility which has consequences and a lot of whataboutery from the op.

 

[Evilroddy]

Willingness to excuse the exposure of those working against the Taliban has nothing to do with “American exceptionalism“......unless of course you think they are “collaborators” who have it coming for working with the US.

Yes, yes Tigerace, you prattle on if you please about Taliban this and holocaust that. Just please excuse me if I ignore your background drone and many detours.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[Evilroddy]

I dont see the usual American exceptionalism much in this thread. Its mostly about Assange’s complete lack of responsibility which has consequences and a lot of whataboutery from the op.

Bomberfox:

I think the issue is who should be meting out the consequences. The notion that America has claimed the right (power?) to prosecute anyone, anywhere in this world and to do so while not prosecuting Americans who did identical acts of harm with equal irresponsibility, smacks strongly of exceptionalism to me. But then that's only my opinion. The fact that this claim comes from the same US Administration which has abjured and threatened foreign and international tribunals and jurists with economic, legal and forceful reprisals should they attempt to prosecute American agents or agents closely allied with America heightens my sense of exceptionalism being at play here.

John Bolton threatens war crimes court with sanctions in virulent attack

US national security adviser calls ICC illegitimate and says ‘we will let it die on its own’

www.theguardian.com

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[PoS]

PoS:

Julian Assamge hacked nothing. Chelsea Manning and others did (perhaps Russian hackers or the GRU among them). Assange only published information which Wikileaks received from third parties like Manning.

And it looks like they indeed got hacked information from Russian intelligence sources, so it means they were acting as more willing tools of a foreign power. And that is enough to get Assange arrested.

 

[iguanaman]

More citizens per capita rot in American prisons than any western democracy, many of which on minor and even trumped up marijuana charges. What truly rots is the American judicial system and the police which keep it functioning. The blonde plaited guards act like something from Ravensbrück when dealing with visitors to Latino and Black inmates.

You are right about us having far too many citizens in jail. The privatization of prisons has made more and longer prison sentences a matter of profits for shareholders and it must end. However that does not mean people like Assange do not belong in jail. He is an agent of Putin and a traitor. Haven't you ever wondered why nothing about Russia has ever been published by Wikileaks? They are among the most corrupt countries on Earth.

 

[iguanaman]

Iguanaman:

A passionate diatribe for sure but not a sound legal case at all. Why should Mr. Assange rot in jail for life while the editorial boards of the New York Times, The Guardian, Le Pais, Le Monde, etc. not face the same fate, because they were partners with Assange's Wikileaks and also published the very same articles for public review? This is selective and extrajurisdictional prosecution both of which are against the Rule of Law.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

Assange should be jailed because he has acted as the conduit for the GRU hackers trying to subvert western democracies while lying about it. That is not what the other publications did.. He has never once published a leak from the Russians because he is in their employ. Rather than being a beacon in the efforts to bring accountability in Govt. he has helped one of the most corrupt Govts. on Earth in their illegal and clandestine efforts to undermine democracies all over the world. Surely you do not support that,

 

[bomberfox]

Bomberfox:

I think the issue is who should be meting out the consequences. The notion that America has claimed the right (power?) to prosecute anyone, anywhere in this world and to do so while not prosecuting Americans who did identical acts of harm with equal irresponsibility, smacks strongly of exceptionalism to me. But then that's only my opinion. The fact that this claim comes from the same US Administration which has abjured and threatened foreign and international tribunals and jurists with economic, legal and forceful reprisals should they attempt to prosecute American agents or agents closely allied with America heightens my sense of exceptionalism being at play here.

John Bolton threatens war crimes court with sanctions in virulent attack

US national security adviser calls ICC illegitimate and says ‘we will let it die on its own’

www.theguardian.com

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

the issue of who should be meting out the consequences is a valid one i agree.
The subject of debate is Julian Assange, not whatever other random act anyone can pull out of the ether. John Bolton is a contemptible megalomaniac who has no care about the people he wants to send to the meat grinder. That however is separate from the irresponsible mess Assange created. “Just putting it out there” is about as convenient as the “im just asking questions” retort of holocaust deniers in my book.

 

[Evilroddy]

And it looks like they indeed got hacked information from Russian intelligence sources, so it means they were acting as more willing tools of a foreign power. And that is enough to get Assange arrested.

PoS:

Again, so what? The media outlets which published the Steele Dossier received their information from a retired MI-6 officer who used British Intelligence sources to compile his report and who was a foreigner. Neither the media outlets who published the dossier nor he who was a willing tool of a foreign power were prosecuted. Your position is not consistent with law. Publishing information which is correct and unaltered in peacetime is not yet a crime, even if that information comes from a hostile state or entity.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[Evilroddy]

You are right about us having far too many citizens in jail. The privatization of prisons has made more and longer prison sentences a matter of profits for shareholders and it must end. However that does not mean people like Assange do not belong in jail. He is an agent of Putin and a traitor. Haven't you ever wondered why nothing about Russia has ever been published by Wikileaks? They are among the most corrupt countries on Earth.

Iguanaman:

Julian Assange is a traitor? To what country is he a traitor? Non-citizens of America cannot be a traitor to America and America is not in a declared state of war, which is a prerequisite for American treason laws to come into effect.
So to what entity is Julian Assange a traitor?

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[swing_voter]

Assange worked for the Russians.

We think we have a case against him. Let's let the courts decide.

I know he's a hero for you foreigners, but he just might be a criminal too.

 

[Tigerace117]

Yes, yes Tigerace, you prattle on if you please about Taliban this and holocaust that. Just please excuse me if I ignore your background drone and many detours.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

You may not care about the people working against the Taliban who Assange put in danger, or the fact that he exposed them and their families to potentially being murdered by a psychotic terrorist group, but a lot of people do. It really just goes to show how incredibly hypocritical your whining about his “persecution” is.

 

[Evilroddy]

Assange should be jailed because he has acted as the conduit for the GRU hackers trying to subvert western democracies while lying about it. That is not what the other publications did.. He has never once published a leak from the Russians because he is in their employ. Rather than being a beacon in the efforts to bring accountability in Govt. he has helped one of the most corrupt Govts. on Earth in their illegal and clandestine efforts to undermine democracies all over the world. Surely you do not support that,

Iguanaman:

Is acting for a foreign power with whom the USA is not in a declared state of war a crime? If so why are diplomats, lobbyists and other pro-Russian intermediaries not also being prosectuted? Nothing Wikileaks and Julian Assange has published has been altered or is fake/forged documents. Their authenticity is verified by both Wikileaks and even the state's which have been harmed by their release. The released documents have revealed war crimes, felonies and misdemeanors committed by many governments including the US and UK Governments. So the person who reports the crimes is being prosecuted while those who committed the crimes are immune from prosecution? Does that not bother you at all?

To your point about Julian Assange and Wikileaks not publishing harmful information about Putin's Russia, your claim is only partially true. Early in its operations Wikileaks did publish damaging information about Russia but then stopped around 2008. That is the same year that the Obama Administration started interfering with Wikileaks' operations and began a smear and false-document baiting campaign to undermine Wikileaks' credibility. Assange knew he was now in the crosshairs of the American juggernaut and I suspect he made a calculation to stop antagonising the Russians in case he needed a bolthole to protect himself from the global hegemon's wrath. That is supposition, I admit, but given things that both Assamge and other Wikileaks staffers have said in interviews, I think my supposition is accurate.

Now why is Julian Assange and Wikileaks to be answerable to American law and American courts? He is not a citizen of the United States and owes no allegience or loyalty to America. He did nothing which you have objected to on American soil. He published no falsehoods and has served the public interest by informing media and citizens of Western countries of the crimes being committed in their names by their own governments. If he has cooperated with a foreign government as you say, what harm has he done. The "Collateral Murder" and the diplomatic cables Wikileaks were not fakes and the crimes they revealed were not his. The DNC e-mails which Wikileaks published were not forged or altered and they revealed in DNC staffers own words the Tweedism, the corruption and the criminal manipulation of the American nomination and electoral process. Did Wikileaks or Julian Assange commit any of these underhanded or criminal acts? No he didn't, Americans did.

So rather than whining about Russian interference in domestic elections and nasty Julian Assange spilling the beans on American war crimes, regular crimes and domestic corruption, why not prosecute the Americans who did these things under American law? If Mr. Assange has committed a crime, then let the Icelandic, the German or the Australian governments prosecute him as the UK did for his bail jumping. America is not the policeman, the prosecutor, the judge and the jury in a world-spanning legal system.

In short, America is overreaching to punish someone and an institution which has successfully and effectively revealed its dirty laundry and its agents very real crimes abroad and domestically. But rather than prosecuting the agents America speaks to silence Mr. Assange and Wikileaks while establishing a precedent to intimidate and prosecute more of the "free press" for publishing truthful but damaging documents. That is not the Rule of Law. That is the Might of raw State Power. Courts should not be involved in projecting the Might of raw State Power, even if the target of the might is viewed by many including me as a bit of an arse-wipe.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[Evilroddy]

You may not care about the people working against the Taliban who Assange put in danger, or the fact that he exposed them and their families to potentially being murdered by a psychotic terrorist group, but a lot of people do. It really just goes to show how incredibly hypocritical your whining about his “persecution” is.

Tigerace117:

Oy Bucko. What Government decided to supply the Afghan wackos with arms in the summer of 1979 in order to force the USSR into its own private Vietnam quagmire and thus set off the chain of events which led to the rise of the Mujihadfin, the rise of Al Qaeda, the slaughter of more than a million Afghans by Soviet forces and Afghan auxiliaries, the rise of the Taliban, the dreadful attacks of 9/11 and the US 2001 invasion which required those informants and agents to be in peril in the first place. Don't blame others for the mess that you Americans and your Soviet (now Rusdian) rivals have been making all around the globe. Clean up your own acts rather than beating up on those who expose your (American and Russian) heinous crimes.

Wikileaks took great care to protect these people, much to the chagrin of it's mainstream media partners who wanted a faster vetting process and the US Government under oath during the Manning trial was forced to admit that they could provide no proof that anyone acting as such an agent was killed or harmed by the Wikileaks disclosures. So your whole thesis about harming Afghan informants is a fabricated sham. You're the one whining about a crisis that never was, about the Taliban, about the holocaust, etc. Anything but the matter at hand in order to derail the debate.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

 

[iguanaman]

Iguanaman:

Is acting for a foreign power with whom the USA is not in a declared state of war a crime? If so why are diplomats, lobbyists and other pro-Russian intermediaries not also being prosectuted? Nothing Wikileaks and Julian Assange has published has been altered or is fake/forged documents. Their authenticity is verified by both Wikileaks and even the state's which have been harmed by their release. The released documents have revealed war crimes, felonies and misdemeanors committed by many governments including the US and UK Governments. So the person who reports the crimes is being prosecuted while those who committed the crimes are immune from prosecution? Does that not bother you at all?

To your point about Julian Assange and Wikileaks not publishing harmful information about Putin's Russia, your claim is only partially true. Early in its operations Wikileaks did publish damaging information about Russia but then stopped around 2008. That is the same year that the Obama Administration started interfering with Wikileaks' operations and began a smear and false-document baiting campaign to undermine Wikileaks' credibility. Assange knew he was now in the crosshairs of the American juggernaut and I suspect he made a calculation to stop antagonising the Russians in case he needed a bolthole to protect himself from the global hegemon's wrath. That is supposition, I admit, but given things that both Assamge and other Wikileaks staffers have said in interviews, I think my supposition is accurate.

Now why is Julian Assange and Wikileaks to be answerable to American law and American courts? He is not a citizen of the United States and owes no allegience or loyalty to America. He did nothing which you have objected to on American soil. He published no falsehoods and has served the public interest by informing media and citizens of Western countries of the crimes being committed in their names by their own governments. If he has cooperated with a foreign government as you say, what harm has he done. The "Collateral Murder" and the diplomatic cables Wikileaks were not fakes and the crimes they revealed were not his. The DNC e-mails which Wikileaks published were not forged or altered and they revealed in DNC staffers own words the Tweedism, the corruption and the criminal manipulation of the American nomination and electoral process. Did Wikileaks or Julian Assange commit any of these underhanded or criminal acts? No he didn't, Americans did.

So rather than whining about Russian interference in domestic elections and nasty Julian Assange spilling the beans on American war crimes, regular crimes and domestic corruption, why not prosecute the Americans who did these things under American law? If Mr. Assange has committed a crime, then let the Icelandic, the German or the Australian governments prosecute him as the UK did for his bail jumping. America is not the policeman, the prosecutor, the judge and the jury in a world-spanning legal system.

In short, America is overreaching to punish someone and an institution which has successfully and effectively revealed its dirty laundry and its agents very real crimes abroad and domestically. But rather than prosecuting the agents America speaks to silence Mr. Assange and Wikileaks while establishing a precedent to intimidate and prosecute more of the "free press" for publishing truthful but damaging documents. That is not the Rule of Law. That is the Might of raw State Power. Courts should not be involved in projecting the Might of raw State Power, even if the target of the might is viewed by many including me as a bit of an arse-wipe.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

Any "good" that wikileaks may have done for transparency in Govt. has been destroyed by Assange's cowardly surrender to Putin. Unless you approve of Putin's aggression towards the western democracies you would want Assange jailed as much as me. There is no middle ground here. It really is us or them. I would hope you choose democracy over tyranny.

 

[ClaraD]

PoS:

Julian Assamge hacked nothing. Chelsea Manning and others did (perhaps Russian hackers or the GRU among them). Assange only published information which Wikileaks received from third parties like Manning.

There is nothing extraordinary about state security services acting illegally in the course of their activities. However that makes the information gathered only useful for intelligence purposes. The moment it comes into a court it must be suppressed by an impartial judge if a persuasive case can be made that it was gathered illegally. Those are the rules of evidence designed to assure that the accused gets a fair trial.

The phrase "bring him to justice" is an interesting one. Mr. Assange and Wikileaks operated outside of US jurisdiction and Mr. Assange is not an American citizen. Therefore neither the organisation nor the man are subject to American justice. Bradley/Chelsea Manning was prosecuted for stealing the secrets which Wikileaks published in 2010-2011 because he/she was subject to Ameican law and justice. The NYT, The Guardian, Le Pais and Le Monde did precisely the same thing as Wikileaks and were thus as liable for prosecution as Wikileaks, should the US Government attempt an extra-jurisdictional prosecution. But those institutions have heavy hitting lawyers which, as the Obama Administration Justice Department correctly concluded, would have the case thrown out of court for prosecutorial overreach and trampling on the First Amendment.

The Trump Justice Department is attempting a selective prosecution of the unprotected and low-hanging fruit that is Mr. Assange to get around the fact that these major newspapers should be included as coconspirators in the case against Wikileaks and Assange. They want to get a legal precedent before they turn to tackle the big boys of publishing. If they did include the newspapers the US Government would lose the case and the precedent quashed.

The US Government is also saying that while US laws apply to Mr. Assange, he cannot claim the constitutional protections afforded to all subject to US law by the US constitution. So Assange can't claim first amendment rights or argue that his treatment would amount to cruel and unusual punishment. The US Government wants its cake and to eat it too. No impartial court would allow that. Therefore the US Government has no legal authority to bring him to justice as selective prosecution and severance from constitutional legal protections are against the Rule of Law and extra-jurisdictional prosecution flies in the face of state sovereignty.

In your version of this, just like America has a right to prosecute Assange and suppress his legal rights, so would Chinese or Russian courts have those powers with respect to American persons and institutions. So those states would have a legal right to prosecute American publishers or journalists or anyone else who they deemed harmed them. Thus Russia or China could prosecute the authors of the CNN article for writing and publishing what Russia, China, or what other state would define as lies based on illegally obtained and American Government paid-for evidence. Extra-jurisdictional prosecution cuts both ways. Imagine George Bush Jr. sitting in the same plexiglass docket that Saddam Hussein sat in, facing an Iraqi court for ordering the 2003 invasion of Iraq. That's where this is leading.

The CNN article was literally and by the article's own admission based on the dossiers compiled by UC Global, the same company which discussed with US agents the kidnapping or poisoning of Mr. Assange. UC Global refused to comment on the article, likely because they are being prosectuted for their role in this illegal operation. So, yes, the CNN article was only as reliable as those dossiers and those dossiers are highly unreliable from a legal standpoint.

It's sunny but still a bit wet in my part of Canada. Never been to Russia and while Putin is in power, I will never visit that country. The man is a contemptible megalomaniac and a completely bent villain. I wish him all the ill I can muster.

I am no Putin fanboy. I am a Rule of Law fanboy.

Cheers and be well.
Evilroddy.

possession and dissemination of hacked materials is a crime. He placed troops in direct danger...he needs to face the music on this one...it isn't free speech to endanger troops or place information on the net that was not legally obtained...he isn't being punished for his speech, he is being punished for violating the law.

 

[Jean-s]

Assange worked for the Russians.

We think we have a case against him. Let's let the courts decide.

I know he's a hero for you foreigners, but he just might be a criminal too.

That the Russians liked to see American war crimes exposed does not mean Julian Assange worked for them.
So it is "we" who have a case against him, really? Don't you think it would have been more honest of you to let us know you are a State Department agent before now, Swing Voter? In any case, it has already been made clear by Evilroddy that the USA has no jurisdiction over Julian Assange even though Americans are exceptional in their own minds.

 

[Jean-s]

possession and dissemination of hacked materials is a crime. He placed troops in direct danger...he needs to face the music on this one...it isn't free speech to endanger troops or place information on the net that was not legally obtained...he isn't being punished for his speech, he is being punished for violating the law.

Spilling dirty American government secrets is a good thing.