Your opinion please.

[ducatiz]

Точное замечено. Он верояÑ,но не подумал Ñ,ого. Удачно я Ñ...иÑ,ро лингуисÑ,ка!!

I bet he is worried about other things right now. 

I grew up in a russian/yiddische home, i just don't have a russian keyboard..

[ducpainter]

<snip> i just don't have a russian keyboard..

neither does he 

[derby]

more on those rape charges...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40556948/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/

[ducatiz]

No condom?  Now we know why its "wikileaks"

[ute]

Villain ..imo

But sure do want to know about the aliens

[ungeheuer]

Regarding the alleged sexual assault, let him go to Sweden to face any such charges before a court if its established there's a case to answer. 

But aside from those serious allegations, as a matter of law has the guy actually committed any offence (as in broken laws which exist on the statute books in any US jurisdiction as of today)??   On the other hand there clearly are criminals within the embarrassingly porous US bureaucracy, stealing and then leaking all this confidential information to his and other news organisations for publication.  Why are those insiders not being so enthusiastically pursued?

[akmnstr]

On the other hand there clearly are criminals within the embarrassingly porous US bureaucracy, stealing and then leaking all this confidential information to his and other news organizations for publication.  Why are those insiders not being so enthusiastically pursued?

+1  As a fed I am aware of strong laws to protect the public from the misuse of personal information.  Hell, I have to take training on it every year even though I have nothing to do with personal information.  Seems to me you can think of this guy as a scum bag or a hero of internet freedom.  It doesn't matter much to me.  The real crooks are the ones leaking out the info.  The leak of the SS#s is a serious crime.

[il d00d]

Are you talking about PFC Manning?  If we are to take the reports at face value -and I do- we've apprehended the insider.

After reading more about him, I think I am changing my answer to villain.  I think what confuses the issue is his weapon of choice - this information he has helped to leak is if nothing else really interesting.  So far they have caused embarrassment, but no seismic political event.  I tended to think no harm, no foul.

On the other hand, Assange does not fly planes into buildings, but he seeks the same kind of outcome which is not dead civilians and leveled buildings but a major disruption of society as we know it.  And even if what he does overlaps with or promotes other ideas I agree with like government transparency, he needs to be judged by his intentions, not by the outcome.  Especially if he has been emboldened by the success of Cablegate.  The fact that the information he provided (so far) is not relatively destructive does not change his status.

While I sometimes, maybe often sympathize with anarchists, they make the worst road builders.  They are also paranoid, use deeply flawed arguments, and typically endorse the same kind of unilateral actions that they rail against.  I don't want either of those kinds of people in power. 

In conclusion, boobies.

[derby]

http://www.ellsberg.net/archive/public-accuracy-press-release

[SacDuc]

It should be noted that Julian Assange has never been charged with a crime in an any jurisdiction anywhere in the world at the local, national or international level for the "rape" charges or his wikileaks dealings. Not one single charge has been filed against him. Anywhere, in any country, for anything. He turned himself in for questioning only. He has not been charged much less found guilty of anything.

Yet people are calling for his imprisonment or even death. Amazon stopped hosting his website. MC and Visa stopped processing donations to wikileaks. A Swiss bank has frozen wikileak's accounts. For . . . well no lawful reason at all.

So much for due process.

sac

[SacDuc]

Even if it wasn't for the 'leaks' the dude has warrants for two rape charges. I'm sure he's a real charmer.

Um, no. No he does not.


Here is what happened:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336291/Wikileaks-Julian-Assanges-2-night-stands-spark-worldwide-hunt.html


So very different than what is being reported in the US, no?

sac

[il d00d]

"Last night, a European Arrest ­Warrant was given by Interpol to Scotland Yard."


Visa, Mastercard and Amazon are under no obligation, legal or otherwise to do anything for Assange.  Is this unfair?  Maybe, depending on where your sympathies lie.  If yes is your answer, I will give you that. 
Are these companies obligated to provide some legal justification for cutting him off?  No, and neither do I think that rape charges, if that's what you were saying, had anything to do with it.  It might be the stated reason, but the real reason is that he is maxima persona non grata with lots of people.

[ducatiz]

Um, no. No he does not.


Here is what ASSANGE SAYS happened:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336291/Wikileaks-Julian-Assanges-2-night-stands-spark-worldwide-hunt.html


So very different than what is being reported in the US, no?

sac

corrected

and never forget the rule "Media reports according to its own interests"

[SacDuc]

"Last night, a European Arrest ­Warrant was given by Interpol to Scotland Yard."


Visa, Mastercard and Amazon are under no obligation, legal or otherwise to do anything for Assange.  Is this unfair?  Maybe, depending on where your sympathies lie.  If yes is your answer, I will give you that.  
Are these companies obligated to provide some legal justification for cutting him off?  No, and neither do I think that rape charges, if that's what you were saying, had anything to do with it.  It might be the stated reason, but the real reason is that he is maxima persona non grata with lots of people.

Yes, there is an arrest warrant. No he has not been charged with a crime. There is a difference. The Swedish authorities want to question him in regards to the allegations. His lawyers have told them he would make himself available for questioning via, phone, email, skype, etc. For some reason, even though he has not been charged with a crime, this was not enough for them. So they issued the warrant so they could have him in custody. He turned himself in less than 24 hours after the warrant was issued. he is not being arrested "on rape charges" "for rape" or anything else that has to do with rape. The thing they want to question him about is whether he coereced one (just one) of the women he had consensual sex with into having that consensual sex without a condom. That is all. And he hasn't even been charged with that.

You are correct, private companies are under no obligation (other than any contracts they have made with their client) to provide services to anyone unless laws specifically order them to do so.

Still can't understand why wikileaks assets were frozen by a Swiss bank. How could there be legal justification for that?

sac

[SacDuc]

corrected

and never forget the rule "Media reports according to its own interests"

Go ahead and read the whole article. I'll wait.

sac