|
Peel posted:Maybe he's planning to wait until we leave the EU and try to escape in the five minutes before there's a new extradition treaty. He'd be arrested by the British police anyway since he skipped bail when he fled to the embassy. Sephyr posted:Ubless she handed them directly to foreign government agents or sold them for cold hard cash, it is. Daniel Ellsberg also broke sensitive state and defense information to the world, in a time of war and with a very vital USSr on the board to capitalize on it, and he's still a whistleblower. Ellsberg was prosecuted too; he likely would have spent a significant amount of time in prison if Nixon hadn't Nixoned him so hard.
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 03:36 |
|
|
duz posted:Plus there's the whole not being charged with anything in the US and not being a US citizen thing. A number of US laws can and would apply to non-US citizens and you can seal an indictment so it's not public until the person is arrested. For example, the US considers conspiracy to import drugs to the United States a crime against the United States even if you're a non-US citizen and have never set foot in the United States - that's why countries can and do extradite drug kingpins to the US. But they'd have easily been able to do it if they'd wanted to. They didn't, because it would have been counterproductive and caused international and domestic blowback. But the UK would have been the perfect partner in extraditing Assange because they're very friendly to the United States and their legal system is even more harsh on leaking state secrets than the US. Specifically the UK has the Official Secrets Act which makes it a crime to report on leaked confidential information, even if the newspaper did not participate in the leak at all. In the United States the Official Secrets Act would likely be a violation of the First Amendment: it is not a crime for a newspaper to report on leaked information and it's quite often said when discussing that that the US does not have an Official Secrets Act. Assange, in the US, could only be prosecuted for conspiracy to commit the leak itself (my vauge recollection is there's enough chatlogs of him encouraging Manning to leak the information to make at least a reasonable case for this, but I don't remember the details). So not only is the UK extremely friendly to the US, but under the UK's legal system Assange's actions are a clear-cut crime, making it impossible to contest extradition on that basis. Frequently there's an exception to extradition for, in effect, things that are not a crime in the extraditing country and could be considered political. One (sort-of) example to this is the US considers the UK's libel laws an impermissible violation of the freedom of the press, and while US courts will enforce most UK court judgments, they will refuse to cooperate with any UK libel judgments, and a similar principle usually applies to extradition. The US, for example, would give the finger to any country that requested extradition for someone accused of writing a pro-democracy newsletter, for example, even if there was an extradition treaty. So some european countries might consider conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act a political crime and refuse to extradite, but the UK certainly wouldn't. So the government would probably cooperate, and the legal system would absolutely cooperate. I don't know what Sweden's legal system is like and if they're a country that would refuse extradition but it couldn't be worse for Assange than the UK's. evilweasel fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Jan 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
US really should step down from their position as world police, they've been doing pretty awful job at it for the past.. forever
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
hillo posted:US really should step down from their position as world police, they've been doing pretty awful job at it for the past.. forever Trump may grant your silly wish
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Trump may grant your silly wish I knew the genie would grant my wishes if I rubbed out enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Trump may grant your silly wish "Maybe we could do without the US military killing a few million people whenever the state department has delusions" "Oh you silly foreigner" A party that got to power on the back of anti-war sentiment and immediately went "you know what, war is actually good". Not morally bankrupt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:"Maybe we could do without the US military killing a few million people whenever the state department has delusions" Is this some feverish claim that the Libya intervention killed millions? Hate to break it to you but Democrats never campaigned on or for pacifism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Is this some feverish claim that the Libya intervention killed millions? Hate to break it to you but Democrats never campaigned on or for pacifism. I'm glad Lybia managed to have a lower body count than most US interventions. That doesn't make it a good track record except in the utterly evil mind of a technocratic gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
JeffClay is an interventionist. He gets in arguments with dove leftists all the time. You can think that's lovely (I sure do!) but it's not hypocritical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:I'm glad Lybia managed to have a lower body count than most US interventions. That doesn't make it a good track record except in the utterly evil mind of a technocratic gently caress. oh good, feelings in response to discussions about facts, a sure sign you know things instead of just feel them
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
Oh no CIA started another war in some poo poo-tier country. Oh they're coming here? what? Why don't they go to the place that coused this? WHAT? IT WAS OUR FAULT?! drat. Ok then. Welcome canadians.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:I'm glad Lybia managed to have a lower body count than most US interventions. That doesn't make it a good track record except in the utterly evil mind of a technocratic gently caress. It also has a lower body count than non-interventions such as Rwanda or the Great African War so therefore interventions are good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:oh good, feelings in response to discussions about facts, a sure sign you know things instead of just feel them There is no fact involved in reducing US interventionism to Lybia as a justification for its potential for good, especially not when it was obvious that I was talking about Iraq, which was a bipartisan boondoggle. quote:It also has a lower body count than non-interventions such as Rwanda or the Great African War so therefore interventions are good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:oh good, feelings in response to discussions about facts, a sure sign you know things instead of just feel them Pyrhhic victories beat flat losses, after all
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
This is a good thing, and I enjoy watching a bunch of nerds on the internet who've probably never done a good thing in their life complaining about how the good thing wasn't good enough so it is actually bad. Personally, I've never seen anything out of the Manning leaks that I think qualifies as actual whistle-blowing, and I generally agree active duty military should be held to a different standard for information security than some one like Snowden who was a civilian contractor. That said, there just isn't any justice to be gained by keeping her locked up. She can't commit the crime again, she's already paid an enormous punitive price for her actions, any negative consequences that might have actually come from her actions are nebulous, and her imprisonment has been pretty drat inhumane (which should also be addressed). The only reason to keep her locked up is "we're really loving mad and want her to suffer" and I don't agree with that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:There is no fact involved in reducing US interventionism to Lybia as a justification for its potential for good, especially not when it was obvious that I was talking about Iraq, which was a bipartisan boondoggle. its not obvious at all, considering that the iraq war was driven from the top rather than from the state department, it's lybia where the state department was pushing to intervene, so there was really no scenario where anything you said indicated any connection to facts as opposed to just feelings
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
I sympathize with the ideas behind interventionism, but the problem is that it relies upon the assumption that the government/military will be competent and you're always throwing the dice when, as an un-involved civilian, you try to argue that it's a good idea (and the odds aren't good historically). I don't think I've ever seen anyone explain why regime change in Syria is a good idea while it was a bad idea in Iraq, and the most common argument used is almost the exact same ("Are you trying to say that Saddam/Assad isn't bad?!?"). While there's a difference in terms of there having been an active rebellion in Syria, at the end of the day it's still a tough sell, given we don't have any reason to believe a rebel-lead government would be significantly better (and there are plenty of bad governments in the world). It seems like it has the highest chance of working out well in situations where the rebelling faction (if one exists) has a good chance of winning and the goal is simply to hasten their victory (and minimize casualties in the process). Pushing a side that wouldn't have won (or would have had great difficulty winning) as in Syria seems like a terrible idea, because there's a really high chance of just pointlessly extending the conflict. And in both cases, there's usually not really any reliable reason to believe that the new regime will be significantly better than the old one (unless the old one is literally genociding millions of people), which makes the calculus in favor of intervention even worse. edit: I also understand that someone could argue "well, if we helped more it could end the conflict even faster" but that's another situation where you're really taking a dangerous gamble and assuming that the intervention will be carried out competently. il_cornuto posted:Your insistence that this woman should have been killed is creepy as hell. hakimashou's whole deal seems to be "I'm just making the hard, rational decisions, and sometimes people have to die. That's just the way the world is, you gotta be mature sometimes and accept that death must be dealt. The weak will be consumed by the strong. *vigorously strokes self off*" Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Jan 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
OtherworldlyInvader posted:Personally, I've never seen anything out of the Manning leaks that I think qualifies as actual whistle-blowing, and I generally agree active duty military should be held to a different standard for information security than some one like Snowden who was a civilian contractor. The collateral murder video was rather important to the AP since they wanted to know what happened to their people and the military wasn't going to release it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/01/18/assange-might-stay-put-despite-earlier-extradition-promise-lawyer-suggests.htmlquote:Published January 18, 2017 FoxNews.com
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
I am absolutely startled by this news. Completely unexpected. I have never been more surprised.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
duz posted:The collateral murder video was rather important to the AP since they wanted to know what happened to their people and the military wasn't going to release it. The Collateral Murder video comes closest, but it falls short of the line in my opinion. Despite that, If that was all she had leaked I'd probably give her the benefit of the doubt and call it whistle blowing, since people's judgement is going to differ on these things. Unfortunately it was dwarfed in volume by stuff like the diplomatic cables, which never should have been released to the public. Wikileaks' style of leaking documents serves to do nothing but inflate Julian Assange's ego at the expense of all of us. Important whistle-blowing is overwhelmed by meaningless leaks, and meaningless leaks are pumped up to be earth shattering revelations. In the past, Journalists played an important role in filtering this stuff and giving us context, and if that's not already gone its rapidly being lost. Its a major factor in why we have crazy people shooting-up pizza places over John Podesta's meaningless emails, and the actual legit big news Panama Papers being completely forgotten inside a week.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Taking bets on whether Obama would've commuted her without the transgender angle in the mix.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:53
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Taking bets on whether Obama would've commuted her without the transgender angle in the mix. Far less likely that he would have, and far fewer people would care. It really is a relevant consideration given how it contributed to her suffering in prison though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Taking bets on whether Obama would've commuted her without the transgender angle in the mix. Over/Under is 6.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Taking bets on whether Obama would've commuted her without the transgender angle in the mix. Cis Manning probably wouldn't have tried to off himself as much, and then been thrown in solitary for suicide attempts. So he probably would've been in the news less
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I am absolutely startled by this news. Completely unexpected. I have never been more surprised. I have died from shock. I am dead now. My ghost is writing this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
AARO posted:http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/01/18/assange-might-stay-put-despite-earlier-extradition-promise-lawyer-suggests.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Obama's going to be giving his final press conference shortly. Pretty good odds he'll be asked about this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:The other funny thing is he wants to be extradited directly to the US, skipping that whole "Sweden" place. He hasn't been charged with anything in Sweden. He is merely wanted for questioning. The entire reason for his refusal to go there has been because they will not agree to non-extradition with the US.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
AARO posted:He hasn't been charged with anything in Sweden. He is merely wanted for questioning. The entire reason for his refusal to go there has been because they will not agree to non-extradition with the US. Wrong. He hasn't been charged with anything in Sweden because the questioning is a necessary part of charging someone with a crime under Swedish law. The only people who believe this are idiots, for the reasons I outlined before: if the US had wanted to extradite Assange at the time the UK was the perfect country for him to be in. He made that concern up to evade the rape charges.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
AARO posted:He hasn't been charged with anything in Sweden. He is merely wanted for questioning. The entire reason for his refusal to go there has been because they will not agree to non-extradition with the US. Congratulations for reading justice4assange.com. 1) He is not wanted for questioning; he is wanted for arrest. Swedish criminal procedure requires an arrest prior to the charge being made. The British courts not only agreed the warrant was valid, but also that the actions alleged were rape under British law. 2) The Swedish government cannot constitutionally guarantee non-extradition, as it would be an executive overreach into an independent judiciary. Regardless, any extradition request served to Sweden whilst he is in Swedish custody requires both the consent of the UK and Sweden. Honestly, think about it: if the US wanted to extradite Assange, why didn't they send the request straight to the UK, instead of using the Swedes accuse him of a crime that is notoriously hard to prosecute, especially when the UK is happier to extradite based on political offences than Sweden?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Taking bets on whether Obama would've commuted her without the transgender angle in the mix. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
TinTower posted:
This is obviously also a plot to smear him. This guy exposes the most powerful Government in the world of war and other crimes. Do you not think they are out to get him? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
AARO posted:This is obviously also a plot to smear him. This guy exposes the most powerful Government in the world of war and other crimes. Do you not think they are out to get him? Must be a hell of a smear if his defence counsel doesn't contest the alleged actions happening, but rather the lawfulness of those actions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Congratulations for reading justice4assange.com. Critical thinking is hard! Your post reminded me that there were some rumors that Assange had been compromised and/or assassinated last week. I never found out the source of those rumors. Can anyone point to some information about that? Or is it just the November rumors re-kindled?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
https://www.buzzfeed.com/talalansari/president-obama-final-news-conference?utm_term=.qtBVb3qkm#.awawGmLjdquote:President Obama addressed his commutation of most of Chelsea Manning’s prison sentence at his final press conference on Wednesday.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:https://www.buzzfeed.com/talalansari/president-obama-final-news-conference?utm_term=.qtBVb3qkm#.awawGmLjd Can't say I really get the part about the disproportionate sentence given that it was a bigger leak than most.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
On one hand It's good but on the other she's being released into the wilds of Trump's America as a widely hated trans-person while her civil liberties are in extreme danger of being stripped away in an egregious fashion. I don't imagine her life going in a great direction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
bag em and tag em posted:On one hand It's good but on the other she's being released into the wilds of Trump's America as a widely hated trans-person while her civil liberties are in extreme danger of being stripped away in an egregious fashion. I don't imagine her life going in a great direction. Question is, is her dishonorable discharge going to follow her past the name change (is her name even changed legally yet?)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 03:36 |
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:Question is, is her dishonorable discharge going to follow her past the name change (is her name even changed legally yet?) It's not like she's an ordinary private figure. Every publicized detail of Chelsea Manning's life, from the leak to the discharge to the suicide watch, will follow her forever. Doesn't really matter if the dd214 is correct.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 21:03
|
|