Is Assange being framed?

Is Assange being framed?

  • Total voters
    12
  • Poll closed .
usaloyal2theend said:
Assange is constantly on the move for a reason. He is a shit disturber that believes that nothing trumps getting his message across. Up to and including putting the lives of innocent people at risk. His rights end when he makes a conscience decision to put unknowing people in peril's way to satisfy his insatiable need for revenge.
Click to expand...

he is on the move because there are people out there that are incapable of following the law, especially when they've been embarrassed or caught doing wrong. These people have it in their power to put his life in jeopardy.

I am a shit disturber also, especially when it comes to abused and misused authority. I have no problem ruffling feathers to get a message across when it concerns that issue. Now, lets take a serious look at who is endangering those lives, shall we? According to the pentagon papers case, the 'press' is not liable or in violation of the law when publishing information the government considers classified. That would be the person who is responsible for the safe keeping of this info or the person that unlawfully took it.

I ask you again, do you care about the rule of law or do you prefer the rule of men?
 
I'm new here, what did this guy do to put any body's life in danger?

All I've seen is a bunch of insulting descriptions of some foreign leaders.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
he is on the move because there are people out there that are incapable of following the law, especially when they've been embarrassed or caught doing wrong. These people have it in their power to put his life in jeopardy.

I am a shit disturber also, especially when it comes to abused and misused authority. I have no problem ruffling feathers to get a message across when it concerns that issue. Now, lets take a serious look at who is endangering those lives, shall we? According to the pentagon papers case, the 'press' is not liable or in violation of the law when publishing information the government considers classified. That would be the person who is responsible for the safe keeping of this info or the person that unlawfully took it.

I ask you again, do you care about the rule of law or do you prefer the rule of men?
Click to expand...

So far the only thing we've seen is petty, venal gossip put on the record by self-important bureaucrats who didn't have an ounce of common sense when it came to keeping their pieholes shut.

If anybody dies because of this, it'll be from embarrassment.
 
Mojo said:
I'm new here, what did this guy do to put any body's life in danger?

All I've seen is a bunch of insulting descriptions of some foreign leaders.
Click to expand...

we know you're new, you keep saying it and your join date is to the right of your username...and we can pretty figure out we haven't seen you before...unless of course you're a current or former poster trolling
 
Mojo said:
I'm new here, what did this guy do to put any body's life in danger?

All I've seen is a bunch of insulting descriptions of some foreign leaders.
Click to expand...
If you ignore the previous release of military documents you can squint and pretend that out of the over 100,000 pages of text you've found the only information that might interest people in intelligence. However, if you take all of the wiki releases in context, and gather all the information instead of only reading the funny insults, you can find out when and where people meet, who they speak with, how the military functions, what they will do, etc.

It's like pretending that the first Iraqi Conflict didn't use CNN for telemetry on the scuds they lauched at Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

While the information reported by our media may not have that much gravitas, it is inescapable that information gleaned from all of the releases taken together can put some lives in danger. Does that outweigh that some of this information should never have been classified and it is obvious that the government uses such classifications to hide rather mundane information? Maybe not.
 
I still don't see how any one's life is in danger from this. If any body knows different. please hotlink to the docs.

Ron Paul just said - "In a free society we're supposed to know the truth. In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble, and now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it. This whole notion that Assange, who's an Australian, that we want to prosecute him for treason. I mean, aren't they jumping to a wild conclusion? This is media, isn't it? I mean, why don't we prosecute The New York Times or anybody that releases this?"
 
Yurt said:
we know you're new, you keep saying it and your join date is to the right of your username...and we can pretty figure out we haven't seen you before...unless of course you're a current or former poster trolling
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't see the join date thing. Just thought it would be polite to kind of introduce my self, that's all.
 
Mojo said:
I still don't see how any one's life is in danger from this. If any body knows different. please hotlink to the docs.

Ron Paul just said - "In a free society we're supposed to know the truth. In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble, and now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it. This whole notion that Assange, who's an Australian, that we want to prosecute him for treason. I mean, aren't they jumping to a wild conclusion? This is media, isn't it? I mean, why don't we prosecute The New York Times or anybody that releases this?"
Click to expand...

really...then why do we have top secret laws? how did knowing any of this information help? it didn't make us more free at all. now they are going to be more secretive than ever.

if we have a right to the "truth"...then try and compel KFC to give you their recipe....and then try and demand obama's schedule for everyday of the year
 
christiefan915 said:
So far the only thing we've seen is petty, venal gossip put on the record by self-important bureaucrats who didn't have an ounce of common sense when it came to keeping their pieholes shut.

If anybody dies because of this, it'll be from embarrassment.
Click to expand...

He hasn't endangered anyone, it is the standard national security card that is always pulled when the elites want to cover their shit up.
 
Mojo said:
I still don't see how any one's life is in danger from this. If any body knows different. please hotlink to the docs.

Ron Paul just said - "In a free society we're supposed to know the truth. In a society where truth becomes treason, then we're in big trouble, and now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it. This whole notion that Assange, who's an Australian, that we want to prosecute him for treason. I mean, aren't they jumping to a wild conclusion? This is media, isn't it? I mean, why don't we prosecute The New York Times or anybody that releases this?"
Click to expand...

because there is supreme court precedent that says the media has a 1st amendment right to print this, therefore they cannot be prosecuted.
 
I don't get it, KFC isn't our government, and no body has leaked their recipe.

Assange is Australian, so he isn't a traitor, and he didn't do any thing except embarass Hillary that I can see.
 
Yurt said:
really...then why do we have top secret laws? how did knowing any of this information help? it didn't make us more free at all. now they are going to be more secretive than ever.

if we have a right to the "truth"...then try and compel KFC to give you their recipe....and then try and demand obama's schedule for everyday of the year
Click to expand...

None of that stuff was marked top secret, the highest designation was secret and that was a very small proportion of the total. If this stuff is so important then they should take more care of it, embarrassment is not an excuse to trump up charges against Assange. I am fairly sure that the sex charges were the result of dirty work by a US agency using a classic honey trap.
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
I don't get it, KFC isn't our government, and no body has leaked their recipe.

Assange is Australian, so he isn't a traitor, and he didn't do any thing except embarass Hillary that I can see.
Click to expand...

KFC, Coca Cola et al seem to be able to take greater care of their secrets maybe the US Diplomatic traffic should be handed over to them for safekeeping?
 
tom prendergast said:
He hasn't endangered anyone, it is the standard national security card that is always pulled when the elites want to cover their shit up.
Click to expand...

I read that 500,000 people had access to the documents. Half a million! But they want us to believe the docs were so secret lives were at risk?

Somebody needs to dream up a better story than that in order to persuade me.
 
tom prendergast said:
None of that stuff was marked top secret, the highest designation was secret and that was a very small proportion of the total. If this stuff is so important then they should take more care of it, embarrassment is not an excuse to trump up charges against Assange. I am fairly sure that the sex charges were the result of dirty work by a US agency using a classic honey trap.
Click to expand...

what benefit have we reaped from the release of these documents?

all i can see harm.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
he is on the move because there are people out there that are incapable of following the law, especially when they've been embarrassed or caught doing wrong. These people have it in their power to put his life in jeopardy.

I am a shit disturber also, especially when it comes to abused and misused authority. I have no problem ruffling feathers to get a message across when it concerns that issue. Now, lets take a serious look at who is endangering those lives, shall we? According to the pentagon papers case, the 'press' is not liable or in violation of the law when publishing information the government considers classified. That would be the person who is responsible for the safe keeping of this info or the person that unlawfully took it.

I ask you again, do you care about the rule of law or do you prefer the rule of men?
Click to expand...

I amswered you. That you don't like my answer is the problem.
 
christiefan915 said:
I read that 500,000 people had access to the documents. Half a million! But they want us to believe the docs were so secret lives were at risk?

Somebody needs to dream up a better story than that in order to persuade me.
Click to expand...

Nobody has explained how a lowly private could access 1/4 million documents and it is not noticed, no wonder they are embarrassed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top