How will Assange be punished for attempting to advance democracy?

How will Assange be punished for attempting to advance democracy?

  • Give Assange a heart attack.

    Votes: 3 15.0%
  • Have Assange die in a plane crash.

    Votes: 2 10.0%
  • Have Assange commit suicide.

    Votes: 4 20.0%
  • Put Assange in Jail for decades for a crime not related to his work.

    Votes: 11 55.0%

  • Total voters
    20

nirakar

( i ^ i )
Registered Senior Member
How will Assange be punished for attempting to advance democracy?

The "International Community" (of public ambassadors to global elite criminality) must deter any attempt to transform crippled dysfunctional democracy into vibrant real democracy because real democracy is a threat to the status quo.

Anybody who has the clarity to be suspicious of governments and corporations and the audacity to attempt to advance democracy as a force held by the people needs to get the message that bad things will happen to you if you proceed down this path.

An example will be needed to be made of Assange but the sheeple must not come to know what has been done. The example is to send a message to the non-sheeple.

(This is probably fool hardy as lovers of democracy don't respond to intimidation in the same way that the high powered criminals the International community is used to dealing with do but the "International Community"* is probably too set in it's ways to treat Assange differently than how they treat each other in their squabbles for power.

"International Community" is what the collective agents of genteel criminality wish to be called by the sheeple.
 
He'll probably become implicated in something entirely unrelated to wikileaks. Either that or wikileaks will be brought under the Patriot Act.
 
He'll probably become implicated in something entirely unrelated to wikileaks. Either that or wikileaks will be brought under the Patriot Act.

Hasn't he already been accused of child pornography or something insidious like that?
 
Last edited:
You've loaded the question with a premise that what he is doing advances democracy.

Yes I made this thread BuffaloRoam style.

But what do you think he thinks he is doing? He is not some cartoon character who does evil because he is evil.

The global forces for status quo will do what they can in their propaganda campaign against Wikileaks.

I am extremely confident that what Wikileaks is doing does advance the cause of democracy.

WikiLeaks (not the ridiculous Tea Party movement) is at the modern cutting edge of movement that made the Boston Tea Party to pursuit liberty.
 
From: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...l-ellsberg-wikileaks-julian-assange-in-danger

An interview with Daniel Ellsberg
Daniel Ellsberg: Will it embarrass diplomatic relationships? Sure, very likely—all to the good of our democratic functioning. The embarrassment would be our awareness that we are supporting and facilitating dictators and corrupt and murderous governments, and we are quite aware of their nature.

An example would be surrounding a visit of Hamid Karzai to this country…where he is given a special audience with the president. We know that privately he is seen realistically. We know that because of the leak, which I think started out of this investigation. We know that because of the leak from Ambassador Eikenberry. He describes him as irredeemably corrupt, not an appropriate partner for a pacification program, and cannot change.

They would regard this as very embarrassing, [since publicly they’ve been] saying, he is a perfectly suitable partner for pacification, working on corruption…Ha ha….Bullshit.

Do you think Assange is in danger?

I happen to have been the target of a White House hit squad myself. On May 3, 1972, a dozen CIA assets from the Bay of Pigs, Cuban émigrés were brought up from Miami with orders to “incapacitate me totally.” I said to the prosecutor, “What does that mean? Kill me.” He said, “It means to incapacitate you totally. But you have to understand these guys never use the word ‘kill.’”

Is the Obama White House anymore enlightened than Nixon’s?

We’ve now been told by Dennis Blair, the late head of intelligence here, that President Obama has authorized the killing of American citizens overseas, who are suspected of involvement in terrorism. Assange is not American, so he doesn’t even have that constraint. I would think that he is in some danger. Granted, I would think that his notoriety now would provide him some degree of protection. You would think that would protect him, but you could have said the same thing about me. I was the number one defendant. I was on trail but they brought up people to beat me up.

You believe he is in danger of bodily harm, then?

Absolutely. On the same basis, I was….Obama is now proclaiming rights of life and death, being judge, jury, and executioner of Americans without due process. No president has ever claimed that and possibly no one since John the First.

What advice would you give Assange?

Stay out of the U.S. Otherwise, keep doing what he is doing. It’s pretty valuable…He is serving our democracy and serving our rule of law precisely by challenging the secrecy regulations, which are not laws in most cases, in this country.

He is doing very good work for our democracy. If [the alleged leaker, Bradley Manning] has done what he is alleged to have done, I congratulate him. He has used his opportunities very well. He has upheld his oath of office to support the Constitution. It so happens that enlisted men also take an oath to obey the orders of superiors. Officers don’t make that oath, only to the Constitution. But sometimes the oath to the Constitution and oath to superiors are in conflict.

Assange has taken the position that all information should be out there. Do you agree?

He has talked about not holding anything back. I wouldn’t agree with that. Some judgments should be made. Frankly, I don’t know whether he would really act on that.

In your opinion, not everything should be released.

Yes, there are things that should be kept secret for some period of time. It’s a matter of time that it can be kept. To say that there are no such things is unrealistic and doesn’t stand up under much thought. [Assange] is taking a position there that on its face is not sustainable, but he might well not keep it. He’s obviously a very competent guy in many ways. I think his instincts are that most of this material deserves to be out. We are arguing over a very small fragment that doesn’t. He has not yet put out anything that hurt anybody’s national security.

And what about these cables in particular?

On the question of those 260,000 diplomatic cables, it is not my position that nothing in them could deserve to be secret, that nothing deserves to be secret. I don’t know. I haven’t read them. Having read a hell of a lot of diplomatic cables, I would confidently make the judgment that very little, less than one percent, one percent perhaps, can honestly be said to endanger national security. That’s distinct [from the percentage that could cause] embarrassment—very serious embarrassment, [if people] realize that we are aware of highly murderous and corrupt operations by people and that we are supporting them. It is very seriously embarrassing.

............ more at the website.
 
Below from http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/873...iran-website-wikileaks-united-states-red-.htm

By SreeRam Banda | December 1, 2010 1:33 AM EST

Interpol has issued a "Red Notice" for Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. France-based international police organization charged Assange of sex crimes and put him on its most wanted list. The 39-year-old Australian was wanted for questioning over rape allegations against him. The Notice is likely to make his international travel more complicated. Meanwhile, Ecuador President denied reports of offering residency to Assange.



The warrant against him was issued by the International Public Prosecution office in Gothenburg, Sweden. It isn't an international arrest warrant but it asks people to contact the police if they know his whereabouts. The District Court of Stockholm was recently urged to detain Assange, claiming that they have not been able to meet him to accomplish the interrogations.

A Swedish woman appealed to the court accusing the 39-year-old Australian of raping her during his visit to the country in August. A warrant was issued against him in the same month but was later dropped as the prosecutors claimed he was no longer a suspect in the case.

But in September, the case was re-opened after the public prosecutors maintained that there was 'reason to believe a crime has been committed' and it could be classified as rape. He was not detained then and was allowed to travel freely outside the country.

Meanwhile, Ecuador's President Rafael Correa stated that he did not approve any offer of residency made to the Wikileaks founder following the latest leaks. Earlier on Monday, Kintto Lucas, the Deputy Foreign Minister welcomed Assange to live and lecture in the country unconditionally. Sweden had already turned down his application for residency and Australia is launched an investigation if the whistle-blower website broke any local laws.

Wikileaks has dismissed the allegations against Assange as part of a smear campaign.

.... more
 
He'll probably become implicated in something entirely unrelated to wikileaks. Either that or wikileaks will be brought under the Patriot Act.

You mean like this:

Interpol has issued a red notice for the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. The notice is an international 'wanted poster' that the agency hopes will lead to the extradition of the wanted person to the country that originally filed the arrest warrant.

The notice is now appearing on Interpol's website, saying that he is wanted for " sex crimes." The charges come from an alleged incident in Sweden.


The investigation stems from separate encounters Assange had with two women during his August visit to Sweden, where he was applying for Swedish residency and attempting to secure the protection of Swedish free-press laws for his secret-spilling website. According to local news reports, the women told investigators the sexual encounters began as consensual, but turned non-consensual. One woman said Assange ignored her appeals to stop when the condom broke.

Assange has denied any wrongdoing, and hinted that the complaints are the result of a U.S. "smear campaign" targeting WikiLeaks -- leading some supporters of the group to publicly investigate the two women and their families.​


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/30/interpol-julian-assange-r_n_790157.html



The rape accusations came soon after the last document dump.

Convenient, isn't it?
 

Ellsberg is a washed up fool, and what Assange is doing is not comparable to the Pentagon Papers, no matter how much Leftists and the Media want to make that link.

But what do you think he thinks he is doing?

I think he probably believes his own bullshit, just like a lot of people. But the reality is I think he is a hacker, anarchist with a huge ego who is exploiting a niche to get headlines and stroke his juvenile "tear the world up" feelings.

He is not some cartoon character who does evil because he is evil.

I don't think he's evil. See the above.

The global forces for status quo will do what they can in their propaganda campaign against Wikileaks.

One doesn't need propaganda, which Assange himself engages in quite a bit, to take issue with what he is doing.

I am extremely confident that what Wikileaks is doing does advance the cause of democracy. ... WikiLeaks (not the ridiculous Tea Party movement) is at the modern cutting edge of movement that made the Boston Tea Party to pursuit liberty.

It's a bold claim and I'd be curious to see you try to defend it. I mean, what has wikileaks done to further liberty or democracy? Or what effects that advanced either were achieved through these releases?
 
One woman said Assange ignored her appeals to stop when the condom broke.

Seriously? That constitutes rape?

countzero said:
I mean, what has wikileaks done to further liberty or democracy

Well for one thing it will be interesting to see how, after admitting they think Karzai is both corrupt and vile, they expect him to be a "suitable" partner in Afghanistan. I think both the soldiers dying in Afghanistan and the people of Afghanistan would like to know why such a man enjoys the public support of all these governments.
 
It's a bold claim and I'd be curious to see you try to defend it. I mean, what has wikileaks done to further liberty or democracy? Or what effects that advanced either were achieved through these releases?

Everything Wikileaks has done has furthered democracy. Making more information available furthers democracy. Anything that makes governments more fearful of taking actions that their people would disaprove of furthers democracy.
 
Seriously? That constitutes rape?

Having sex with a woman who tells you she doesn't want to have sex is rape, yes. Obviously. Even if she wanted to have sex with you before that, or might again in different circumstances.

What do you imagine it takes for an act to be "rape," if not a clear expression of nonconsent? Do you have to beat a woman over the head and drag her into a dark alley for it to count, or what?
 
Having sex with a woman who tells you she doesn't want to have sex is rape, yes. Obviously. Even if she wanted to have sex with you before that, or might again in different circumstances.

What do you imagine it takes for an act to be "rape," if not a clear expression of nonconsent? Do you have to beat a woman over the head and drag her into a dark alley for it to count, or what?

Up to what point? If she orgasms first and then doesn't want the guy to continue is it still rape?

What do you imagine it takes for an act to be "rape," if not a clear expression of nonconsent?

I guess I haven't thought that much about it. While I fully accept that either party can change their mind at any time, I think once both parties have noncoercively agreed to the sexual act itself, then changing your mind midstream because of a faulty condom seems to be poor grounds for rape. After all they are both adults, not just the man.
 
Last edited:
Up to what point? If she orgasms first and then doesn't want the guy to continue is it still rape?



I guess I haven't thought that much about it. While I fully accept that either party can change their mind at any time, I think once both parties have noncoercively agreed to the sexual act itself, then changing your mind midstream because of a faulty condom seems to be poor grounds for rape. After all they are both adults, not just the man.

Consent is second to second, it can be withdrawn at ANY time, that's the law. As for them both being adults your correct. If he changes his mind mid stream and she continues that's ALSO rape
 
Consent is second to second, it can be withdrawn at ANY time, that's the law. As for them both being adults your correct. If he changes his mind mid stream and she continues that's ALSO rape

Well its discriminatory because it assumes that men and women are physiologically identical when it comes to the sex act
 
It's a simple principle, SAM: sex without consent is rape.

Most people can understand the principle.
 
And yet, the Swedish government had thrown out the arrest warrant before the wikileaks debacle. So clearly, its not something that is as cut and dried as "most people" would claim
 
Swedish prosecutors told AOL News last week that Assange was not wanted for rape as has been reported, but for something called "sex by surprise" or "unexpected sex."

Let us guess, he asked them to close their eyes and when they opened them, they had his uncovered penis inside them. Surprise!!

"In the case of Ardin it is clear that she has thrown a party in Assange's honour at her flat after the 'crime' and tweeted to her followers that she is with the 'the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing!'" he wrote.

"The exact content of Wilén’s mobile phone texts is not yet known but their bragging and exculpatory character has been confirmed by Swedish prosecutors. Niether Wilén’s nor Ardin’s texts complain of rape," Catlin said.

Maybe they discovered the broken condoms later and retrospectively decided not to have sex with him
 
Well for one thing it will be interesting to see how, after admitting they think Karzai is both corrupt and vile, they expect him to be a "suitable" partner in Afghanistan. I think both the soldiers dying in Afghanistan and the people of Afghanistan would like to know why such a man enjoys the public support of all these governments.

Come on, Sam. Anyone who reads the NYT knows this. They have run multiple stories about the Karzais. And you're not so dense. You know the US and others work with him because they have to.

Everything Wikileaks has done has furthered democracy. Making more information available furthers democracy. Anything that makes governments more fearful of taking actions that their people would disaprove of furthers democracy.

That's not an answer, because it's inaccurate for starters. I see no government "fearful" of much of anything. Nor is saying more of something is necessarily good. Aristotle preached moderation thousands of years ago. And having covered policymaking, I can tell you there is quite a lot that should be left out of the reporting.
 
Back
Top