Karma's a bitch: The Swedish case against Julian Assange is leaked.

[TridenT]

Here's an update on Assange ... now he is attacking both his friends and foes:

"WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange slammed both friends and foes Tuesday as he defended himself against widespread criticism over his conduct and his controversial website's publication of secret documents.

In an interview with the U.K.'s Times newspaper, Assange attacked his media partners at The Guardian newspaper for "selectively" publishing lurid details from the police report on his alleged sexual assault of two women in Sweden. (The Times' website operates behind a pay wall.)

"The leak of the police report to The Guardian was clearly designed to undermine my bail application," he said. "It was timed to come up on the desk of the judge that morning.""


He and Wikileaks illegally releases many thousands of secret documents and he has the gonads to complain about someone releasing his personal info? The guy has gonads ...


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40762653/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security

If they selectively "leaked" things to put the prosecution in favor or something then I would be upset too. :hmm:

 

[Ninjahedge]

Then he should say as much.

Simply say "hey, do what I did and release everything. Don't go cherry-picking to make me look worse in the eyes of the law".

The thing is, he is a slimebag. He does not look to be the type that looks for truth, he is just a pot stirrer. (If the meat burnt at the bottom of the pot, don't start scraping it back up into the rest of it ya moron!).

The only thing I give a rats ass about would be the list of sites. All the rest is just another example of executive idiocy with some politician admitting his deepest darkest thoughts about Amedinijhad and french pastries. If they were so stupid, after so many previous examples of this kind of thing being exposed in the private buisness sector, then they, and unfortunately we for electing them, deserve what they get.

He did not put enough time into the readover. If a news orginization can find, and point out to all the terrorists in the world (TYVM) that there is some good stuff amongst the political General Hospital, in a day (was it a day?) then he could have taken some time to weed that little bit out himself instead of just finding ways to release clumps even if he was taken in (securing his information distribution).

Whatever.

 

[Narmer]

Do you have any solid evidence of that at all? I have friends that don't like America (not the people mind you) because of how we use our military might to push our laws and opinions on countries that really could care less, and then try to claim moral superiority while severely lacking credibility in that area...

We destabilize other countries by assassinating or otherwise removing democratically elected leaders and replacing them with cruel dictators to do our bidding, that is until they stop and we decide to remove them yet again. (see saddam)

Our government claims to be more transparent and yet we are going after this Assange guy because he exposed things that our government wanted to keep hidden? We claim to be a bastion of free speech and then call someone a terrorist for releasing some documents? Hypocritical as fuck.

Let me ask you a serious question. What exactly do other countries have to be jealous of? We don't have government provided health care, we get less time off work and less benefits than many western european countries, our school systems are a mess (besides colleges), college tuition here is rising while other countries have free education, our country is so large and our population growing so fast that our individual votes are becoming meaningless, corruption among politicians is rampant and obvious, corporations are practically allowed free reign to do whatever they wish with minor penalties, and people in this country are so afraid and apathetic that instead of voting in their best interest we get things like a failure to repeal the estate tax and a republican majority.

I like this country but unless people get their shit together and stop emotionally reacting to every inconsequential thing it will be difficult to remain hopeful for the near future.

I stopped reading right there. Tell me, oh Cynicist, of a powerful nation in history that used it's massive power for the good of all peoples. Tell me of a powerful nation that put the interests of others before itself. I want to hear of such a country.

 

[FDF12389]

I stopped reading right there. Tell me, oh Cynicist, of a powerful nation in history that used it's massive power for the good of all peoples. Tell me of a powerful nation that put the interests of others before itself. I want to hear of such a country.

That has nothing to do with what he said.

 

[Narmer]

That has nothing to do with what he said.

Really? So he isn't saying that the United States pushes its interests on others? Why don't you tell me what he said then.

 

[torpid]

Depends on your definition I guess. I consider anyone who collects, edits, and presents news to be a journalist. Assange fits under that category afaik.

So do bloggers and anyone who published anything, really. Whether technically correct according to a dictionary definition or not (haven't looked), I don't think most people consider bloggers or people who publish others' content without editorializing or providing any interpretation of relevance to be journalists.

From what I understand he asked U.S. authorities to help censor sensitive information but they refused, and told him not to leak anything. So instead their editors did the best they could and then released everything. I haven't seen any reports of any fallout due to his approach, besides embarrassing the U.S. government.

Ah, found an article on it here.

If the article is accurate, it does seem like he made some attempt. Good for him. Still, I am not totally on board with the mentality used by him or his site. It still seems based on dubious goals that aren't directly concerned with open government and exposing wrongdoings. If he really were concerned with righting wrongs of governments, he wouldn't even really need his own site with paid donations. A more rational methodology would be to receive the documents, comb through them for items of concern, and then release them to real journalists who have more intelligent thought put into their pieces than that of a trash dump. It is not clear to me that his methodology is based on any remotely altruistic concern for others or any high-minded principle.

 

[dwell]

He and Wikileaks illegally releases many thousands of secret documents and he has the gonads to complain about someone releasing his personal info? The guy has gonads ...

It's the same thing the press did with the cables -- published the good bits. It seems the hypocrite Assange only likes openness of information when it suits his needs.

 

[FDF12389]

Really? So he isn't saying that the United States pushes its interests on others? Why don't you tell me what he said then.

Let me break it down for ya.

He said the military abused power. (push our laws and opinions on countries)
You say "What military used its powers for the good of all mankind"

He never complained that the military wasn't using its power to help all mankind.

I paraphrased for simplicities sake, but you get the picture, right?

Don't be a halfwit

 

[dud]

It's the same thing the press did with the cables -- published the good bits. It seems the hypocrite Assange only likes openness of information when it suits his needs.

That was my point of posting this thread. Whether you love, hate, admire or despise Assange ... he is simply a hypocrite who thinks he's a god.

Assange seems to revel in chastising US Government officials about how "bad" they are ... yet when information is leaked about how imperfect he is ... he freaks.

The guy is a tool.

 

[AMDZen]

Back in my day when a woman didn't want a creepy guy to do creepy things to her, they didn't fuck him and then sleep naked next to him

This.

People don't think this story through logically.

 

[TridenT]

This.

People don't think this story through logically.

Yeah... This is why I am skeptical about all these claims about him doing what seems to be very harassing actions that would surely make any woman not have the man stay around.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

LOL WTF?

So, girl 1 gets her clothes ripped off and says it's going too fast. Obviously thinks this guy is too much for her. THEN SHE SAYS, "FUCK IT, I'LL PAY FOR YOUR $16 TICKET TO MY PLACE WHERE WE CAN FUCK."

LOLOL WHAT?

Yeah, and she was a horse too, who lived in Russia during the prohibition! I don't get it either but that could be because both you and me make shit up in our minds rather than reading what is extremely clearly written.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

If they selectively "leaked" things to put the prosecution in favor or something then I would be upset too. :hmm:

They leaked the police report and they have published all comments from Assange regarding this.

But naturally, it's a HUGE conspiracy just like 9/11 involving both civilians in Sweden, two courts in Sweden, two courts in the UK, the Scotland Yard and Swedish police, the Swedish and UK DA's offices, interpol and Europol....

Nothing in this is uncommon, you get charged with a crime you get to stand trial, i REALLY don't see how that is so extremely difficult to understand.

Except that Julian has tried to make all of this about WikiLeaks from the get go so he would get support and guess what, people are stupid enough to actually think that it's a big conspiracy. People even buy the complete bullsheit about being extradited to Sweden is a step in being extradited to the US crap he's been screaming about because he doesn't want to stand trial for his actions... This while everyone with half a brain knows that it's FAR easier for the US to get him extradited from the UK than it is from Sweden where it would be impossible as long as he's charged with a crime and hard if he's freed of the charges.

This has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH WIKILEAKS! Get it, got that, remove tinfoil hat, sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up now.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

This.

People don't think this story through logically.

Back in my day and today we didn't force ourselves on women and excused it by saying that it was her fault.

Of course, we are men, not disgusting pieces of shit who don't understand what no means.

If you don't get it, kill yourself, you are going to rape someone if you don't understand this because you think it's a mans right to have unprotected sex against the womans will, it's not, a no is a no regardless of what reason she says no for.

 

[Narmer]

Let me break it down for ya.

He said the military abused power. (push our laws and opinions on countries)
You say "What military used its powers for the good of all mankind"

He never complained that the military wasn't using its power to help all mankind.

I paraphrased for simplicities sake, but you get the picture, right?

Don't be a halfwit

And I never said "military". I said country. That can encompass many things. Considering that many of our wars are either UN-sanctioned or have a plethora of active or passive allies, it seems like many of our wars (and interests) have broad support in the international community. That must be why almost every international organization that counts was created with strong American backing. Also, as I've said before, I see nothing wrong with America looking out for America (whether or not we have allies, which we have a lot of).

 

[FDF12389]

And I never said "military". I said country. That can encompass many things. Considering that many of our wars are either UN-sanctioned or have a plethora of active or passive allies, it seems like many of our wars (and interests) have broad support in the international community. That must be why almost every international organization that counts was created with strong American backing. Also, as I've said before, I see nothing wrong with America looking out for America (whether or not we have allies, which we have a lot of).

Replace military with country. Point still stands, what you said, had nothing to do with what he said.

 

[Narmer]

Replace military with country. Point still stands, what you said, had nothing to do with what he said.

Actually it does, you twit. He's accusing us of abusing our power. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. This is even more so considering so many other countries support our military adventures.

 

[FDF12389]

Actually it does, you twit. He's accusing us of abusing our power. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. This is even more so considering so many other countries support our military adventures.

Let try this again.

He complains about country doing X
You say "Show me a country in all of history that has done Y"

Arguing in extremes, analogy fail, etc.

 

[Narmer]

Let try this again.

He complains about country doing X
You say "Show me a country in all of history that has done Y"

Arguing in extremes, analogy fail, etc.

Is he or isn't he arguing that America abuses it's "military" power?

 

[FDF12389]

Is he or isn't he arguing that America abuses it's "military" power?

So you respond asking him to show you a country that has done the other extreme? I'll play. Switzerland doesn't abuse their power.

 

[Narmer]

So you respond asking him to show you a country that has done the other extreme? I'll play. Switzerland doesn't abuse their power.

You have a hard time reading, don't you? You've misquoted me again. Is English your second language? I said "powerful" nation. Switzerland is private banks, hot chocolate, and easy women.

 

[nublikescake]

Tell me, oh Cynicist, of a powerful nation in history that used it's massive power for the good of all peoples. Tell me of a powerful nation that put the interests of others before itself. I want to hear of such a country.

Here you go. Don't listen to us left-wing nutters, listen to one of the world's leading intellectuals explain how the U.S. government has helped the world in the past and continues to do so, purely out of unselfish concern for the welfare of others.

 

[FDF12389]

You have a hard time reading, don't you? You've misquoted me again. Is English your second language? I said "powerful" nation. Switzerland is private banks, hot chocolate, and easy women.

First off. That was sarcasm. Second off, you're still asking him to show you a country doing the other extreme, not just abstaining from what he was mentioning.