BF2S Forums Julian Paul Assange arrested in the UK

Kmar wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Kmar wrote:

The progression of civilization from slavery would dictate otherwise

we "progressed" away from slavery? really? last time i checked there were still a lot of de-facto slaves everywhere being worked like beasts of burden to keep so called "global economy" going.

Right.. because the outspoken in those, behind the rest and really havent progressed, countries have been fuking ice axed to death...
lol.. this is getting beyond weird absurd. Like funny as hell absurd.

watwazzat? remind me, when exactly did you abolish racial segregation, o progressive one. and why are blacks still sit at the back of a bus in your fairy land?
pffft. i'm not even going to continue. you are exactly the same as everybody else, mr. candy ass.

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Which is the whole point. This entire thing is bullshit.

Also the Australian PM is a fucking retard.

Aiding in espionage is a crime actually.  Assange has successfully rendered himself as an enemy of the American state.  He can't be charged with treason because he's not an American citizen, but he can be charged with aiding Manning in an act of treason.

The current socialist left government is a thin-skinned bunch of pussies. They don't do a damn thing about defense because they care too much about what the rest of this world thinks of 'em.

Now the U.S. is just every country's bitch they slap around.

Uh, no.  Obama isn't a socialist -- he's a moderate.  He's attempted to push certain socialized policies, but in the end, he's caved to a lot of conservative demands.  This happened long before this most recent election.  He may have certain ideals, but in the end, he's a pragmatist like many other politicians.

Obama isn't a pushover when it comes to foreign policy.  In fact, he's basically Bush lite.  Most of his policies have had about the same end result as Bush's.

DrunkFace wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Which is the whole point. This entire thing is bullshit.

Also the Australian PM is a fucking retard.

Aiding in espionage is a crime actually.  Assange has successfully rendered himself as an enemy of the American state.  He can't be charged with treason because he's not an American citizen, but he can be charged with aiding Manning in an act of treason.

Goody gumdrops. The guys not in America nor an American citizen, your laws don't mean shit.

Am I the only one who think the guy should be given a medal?

Well, if our laws can't get him, our bullets can.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

As much as I dislike Assange, I think the sex charges against him are starting to look more and more like bullshit.

I'd rather he be prosecuted for leaking sensitive documents.

he should have been found in his apartment with an ice axe in his head right after he released his shit the second time. all this comedy with sex charges makes US secret service look like a buch of pussies.

Wow. You're that much of a Stalin admirer that you'd wish Trotsky's death on Assange? You should read Animal Farm sometime...

Honestly, I can't exactly say I'd mind it happening.  Sometimes, you have to make an example out of people.

After investigating the fiasco a bit I believe the root of the problem is that there is no actual guidebook or set of rules to help people determine what should be classified and what shouldn't be. Anyone has to admit that the personal opinions of diplomats and other such gossip are the kind of garbage that should never have a confidential stamp on it.

So what's actually needed is a restructuring of the whole classified category, serving to avoid abuse such as done by the diplomats - make it so that in order to classify information it should be in correspondence with a set of rules / acceptable within a guidebook. Furthermore I believe that judicial investigations of incidents within the military should be made public as much as possible (of course barring stuff taking place in missions that are classified themselves).

This would largely avoid embarrassing things coming out such as the collateral murder videos or that diplomacy dribble. Serving to improve public opinion of government affairs and perhaps giving people more insight into how and why the people involved in incidents such as the collateral murder thing weren't prosecuted, as many regrettably don't understand the video due to the biased editing nor how the justice system works in that regard.

In this all wikileaks has served as a necessary evil. They have brought the problem to light, but should still be held accountable for what they have done. You can't get people walking around flinging classified stuff into the air as if it's nothing and NOT try to prosecute them. That will create more incentive to leak gov. property to possibly disastrous consequences. Furthermore, they have handled the material with irresponsibility, as seen by the leaking of information which can't possibly be used to further "freedom of information" or any good purpose. They bundle it up in one big stack and throw it out there, sometimes censoring material but oblivious to the fact that even if there are no names mentioned there can still be lots of harm done.

The problem in my proposal being: how do you keep a system that happens behind closed doors in check? Do intelligence agencies have to do routine checks of classified information to see if they are in accordance with requirements to make it classified? Making that believable would require them to declassify information on a regular basis but much of the public would undoubtedly still cry about it all being a fluke.

Last edited by dayarath (2010-12-09 07:12:48)

Shahter wrote:

Kmar wrote:

Shahter wrote:

we "progressed" away from slavery? really? last time i checked there were still a lot of de-facto slaves everywhere being worked like beasts of burden to keep so called "global economy" going.

Right.. because the outspoken in those, behind the rest and really havent progressed, countries have been fuking ice axed to death...
lol.. this is getting beyond weird absurd. Like funny as hell absurd.

watwazzat? remind me, when exactly did you abolish racial segregation, o progressive one. and why are blacks still sit at the back of a bus in your fairy land?
pffft. i'm not even going to continue. you are exactly the same as everybody else, mr. candy ass.

Relativley soon by comparison.

The Fuck... blacks are still stuck at the back of the bus? Jesus, you'de think our president would have something to say about that..lmfao
Race relation advice from a russian "double tap, dig fast".

Turquoise wrote:

Kmar wrote:

Shahter wrote:

manning didn't put that shit up on internetz for everybody to go "zomg".

I believe that was his intent.. Assange was merely the vehicle. there are thousands of other people who would have done the same thing as Assange. There is nothing special about that man. With a leak you want to target the source.

I'd argue you want to target both.  Eliminate the source and eliminate the vehicle.

Established vehicles aren't a threat, because they know better.  If Manning had handed over his documents to the New York Times, they would've censored themselves on this and released only bits and pieces.  They only released a massive amount after Wikileaks already did its damage.  At that point, self-censorship was a moot point.

Of course they would, they love Obama. If Bush was still the President they would've leaked it in it's entirety just to embarrass him.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmar wrote:

I believe that was his intent.. Assange was merely the vehicle. there are thousands of other people who would have done the same thing as Assange. There is nothing special about that man. With a leak you want to target the source.

I'd argue you want to target both.  Eliminate the source and eliminate the vehicle.

Established vehicles aren't a threat, because they know better.  If Manning had handed over his documents to the New York Times, they would've censored themselves on this and released only bits and pieces.  They only released a massive amount after Wikileaks already did its damage.  At that point, self-censorship was a moot point.

Of course they would, they love Obama. If Bush was still the President they would've leaked it in it's entirety just to embarrass him.

And if they had, I would have called for some of their heads to roll just the same.

Galt, the government is our employee, I agree - but it's pretty universally applicable that power corrupts. Allowing people with the ability to classify material to do so at will leads to abuse of that power. By opening up more it will give the public more insight into government affairs, which I believe may lead to a more effective democracy. Ofcourse though to do so you need a set of rules to protect actually -potentially- harmful material.

At first I was really opposed to the whole of Wikileaks but I had to admit that some of the things dubbed classified are in that category for probably questionable reasons to say the least. Not that I support them now, infact, I still believe it's a horrible idea and they've got it on the wrong end.

Last edited by dayarath (2010-12-09 07:27:54)

JohnG@lt wrote:

Oh, I agree that more stuff should be unclassified. I was disagreeing with your assessment about the prosecutions and repercussions. Governments as a whole have become far too secretive.

I wouldn't say 'has become' because as compared to any period in history, I believe there's more transparancy now than ever.

A good slap on the wrists is what I'd give them, not an actual trial to assisting treason. It's still an offense to unlawfully obtain classified information, allowing it gives off a bad example.

Especially considering some of the stuff that has been released - the 'vital locations for the US economy', concerns and revelations about diplomatic relations with other countries, revealing classified military operations and the like.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Transparency happens to be one of the major things Obama campaigned on and he's generally been even more secretive than the Bush administration was. Appointing Clinton as SecState certainly didn't help transparency issues, she's one of the most secretive and Machiavelian people on the planet.

If that's the case I doubt he'll survive a second term.

Last edited by dayarath (2010-12-09 07:32:56)

dayarath wrote:

Galt, the government is our employee, I agree - but it's pretty universally applicable that power corrupts. Allowing people with the ability to classify material to do so at will leads to abuse of that power. By opening up more it will give the public more insight into government affairs, which I believe may lead to a more effective democracy. Ofcourse though to do so you need a set of rules to protect actually -potentially- harmful material.

At first I was really opposed to the whole of Wikileaks but I had to admit that some of the things dubbed classified are in that category for probably questionable reasons to say the least. Not that I support them now, infact, I still believe it's a horrible idea and they've got it on the wrong end.

I really, in all honesty, can not tell where you are going. You seem like a man torn.


And again.. I haven't seen the big revelation. We had to give up critical infrastructure targets to get this information?

Kmar wrote:

I really, in all honesty, can not tell where you are going. You seem like a man torn.


And again.. I haven't seen the big revelation. We had to give up critical infrastructure targets to get this information?

It's a good thing they released personal assessments of diplomats on other countries leaders, and in a sense showing that there are major problems with the 'classified' system.

It's a bad thing they're releasing everything they get their hands on.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not pro-Wikileaks. As I said, I see them as having acted as a necessary evil - yet people should admit that they've helped bring up a whole new issue, not condemn them entirely.

Next to that, they weren't allowed to obtain the information they did in the first place, and handled it without proper care. That should be enough to get them in a courtroom.

Last edited by dayarath (2010-12-09 07:42:04)