|
like, the swedish government handles extradition on a case-by-case basis, subject to veto by britain. this means that swedish constitutionality or whatever doesn't really enter into it - if assange were judged to be non-suicidal and in reasonable health, the brits would not have a problem with that extradition according to the recent verdict. this is according to the swedish prosecution authority, at https://www.aklagare.se/en/news-and-press/media/the-assange-matter/kan-assange-utlamnas-fran-sverige-till-usa/ there is every reason to suspect that considerable effort would be exerted to encourage the swedish government to cooperate. assange's stated fears, unless interpreted in a way which makes no sense, were entirely reasonable at the time and have been clearly shown as such by later developments.
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 16:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:54 |
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:well, this is correct given a hyperspecific and completely unreasonable interpretation of the positions involved, so i'm not surprised to see it advanced He should have faced trial for rape. If you flee trial for rape, you're a piece of garbage
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 16:55
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i personally don't think assange should be tortured to death in prison for exposing the crimes of the american empire even if he is credibly accused of being a big ole creep rape. the word you're looking for is "rape". V. Illych L. posted:also it does bear noting that assange has not actually been convicted of anything and his stated reason for not wanting to face the charges seems to have been vindicated by subsequent events so ymmv on that point as well loving yikes, what is this? "he's never been convicted, AND he was right never to even stand trial!" Fart Amplifier posted:He should have faced trial for rape. If you flee trial for rape, you're a piece of garbage well if you pretend that assange was charged with "being a big ole creep" it makes justifying him fleeing from justice a lot easier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 16:58
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:You mean the completely unsubstantiated claim on the MDP when they said, talk to an attorney if you are creeped out by this guy. MDP sent them an attorney. Attorney found nothing actionable, recommended the students contact Morse to let them know they felt uncomfortable by his actions. MDP then removed that attorney to grant them a new attorney, who helped them write a letter vague enough to pass muster. quote:The same guy who admitted to dating students much younger than him but that's ok but you don't understand LGBTQ? Morse was 29 in the tinder screenshots. That's a gap of 8 years between him and a 21 year old. quote:And then got the wrong student democratic party and said he had the texts to back it up with weird texts that made no sense? This is the strangest defense of the accusations I've read. Which leaked texts made no sense? As far as I know nobody has disputed the leaked chat conversations. quote:Like what 21 year old says I am setting up Alex Morse to get an internship with Neal? A 21 year old that wants an internship with Neal, presumably. For the record, heres how the tinder conversation (that required both Morse and the student to like each other) started:  
Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:02
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:He should have faced trial for rape. If you flee trial for rape, you're a piece of garbage i'm not terribly invested in assange's moral character, but i am invested in journalists being killed for doing journalism the bourgeois state is supposed to guarantee fair trials. when it cannot do this, its ability to provide justice is tainted. this is why it's so important for the evilweasels of the world to pretend that it would've been perfectly safe for assange to go to sweden to face charges, because then the state killing him for doing journalism is somehow justified
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:08
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i personally don't think assange should be tortured to death in prison for exposing the crimes of the american empire even if he is credibly accused of being a big ole creep It's extremely illuminating that the same people who won't stop complaining about rape apologia vis a vis Biden supporters suddenly start handwringing and using softer language when it is their guy who is accused, because it goes to show how thoroughly embedded these toxic attitudes are in our culture. We have a long, long way to go and a lot of progress to make, and it is depressing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:It's extremely illuminating that the same people who won't stop complaining about rape apologia vis a vis Biden supporters suddenly start handwringing and using softer language when it is their guy who is accused, because it goes to show how thoroughly embedded these toxic attitudes are in our culture. We have a long, long way to go and a lot of progress to make, and it is depressing. i have never emphasised the sexual predator angle about biden, so this is not a correct post
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:11
|
|
|
Assange will be punished in the United States whether Sweden wants it or not. Someday. He can’t run forever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:12
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:It's extremely illuminating that the same people who won't stop complaining about rape apologia vis a vis Biden supporters suddenly start handwringing and using softer language when it is their guy who is accused I appreciate the passive insinuation, but I'd prefer if you could read my response to your earlier post first.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:12
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i'm not terribly invested in assange's moral character, but i am invested in journalists being killed for doing journalism You're willing to hand wave away people evading investigations into credible rape accusations. Most people are not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:13
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:well, this is correct given a hyperspecific and completely unreasonable interpretation of the positions involved, so i'm not surprised to see it advanced it is correct, period. complaining about being "hyperspecific" is complaining that the handwavey nonsense actually got examined and collapsed. assange's case obviously rested on that he did not want to stand trial for rape. that's it. the evidence establishes overwhelmingly that assange's actions were not due to a legitimate fear of extradition to the US - in which case he would never have left Sweden to go to the UK - but due to a legitimate fear that he would be extradited to Sweden and convicted of rape. that's the end of the story. V. Illych L. posted:like, the swedish government handles extradition on a case-by-case basis, subject to veto by britain. this means that swedish constitutionality or whatever doesn't really enter into it - if assange were judged to be non-suicidal and in reasonable health, the brits would not have a problem with that extradition according to the recent verdict. I remembered this but didn't have a source handy so I didn't want to post on a recollection from years ago. But this also definitively disproves Assange's argument. Sitting in the UK, he's extraditable if the UK agrees. Extradited to Sweden to stand trial for rape, he is extraditable if and only if both Sweden and the US agree. By being extradited to face trial for rape in Sweden, he only increases his safety from extradition - because Sweden can disagree or the UK can disagree, and then he's safe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:this is why it's so important for the evilweasels of the world to pretend that it would've been perfectly safe for assange to go to sweden to face charges, because then the state killing him for doing journalism is somehow justified These workarounds for arguments ultimately about why a rapist should not be available to face charges for rape are getting pretty stretchy and bendy, without even addressing the issue of that this is not anywhere near what evilweasel's take on this is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
the allegations against assange are that he's a rapist and i've already said that i find those allegations credible. as a matter of personal principle i don't like to assert that people have done specific crimes for which they haven't been convicted, especially when they're being persecuted by the full force of anglo-american state power. i don't mind that others don't share this principle, but it's telling that the criticism comes in the shape of condemning specific phrasing and rhetorical emphasis rather than engaging on substance
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:16
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:the bourgeois state is supposed to guarantee fair trials. when it cannot do this, its ability to provide justice is tainted. this is why it's so important for the evilweasels of the world to pretend that it would've been perfectly safe for assange to go to sweden to face charges, because then the state killing him for doing journalism is somehow justified yeah see this is why you complain i'm getting "hyperspecific" - because your point is utter nonsense. it would not be "perfectly safe" for assange to go to sweden to face charges because he could indeed have been extradited from sweden to the US. however, the argument that's a valid reason not to go to sweden to face rape charges is nonsense because it is more safe for him to be in sweden than in the UK. take it as a given that the US will seek to extradite. it's reasonable to do so. it remains the case that it is obvious assange's rationale for not going to sweden was a lie. he did not want to avoid going to sweden because it would increase the risk the US would seek extradition - it is plain it would not (and your attempt to do so proved the very opposite). he did not want to go to sweden because did not want to stand trial for rape in sweden. V. Illych L. posted:the allegations against assange are that he's a rapist and i've already said that i find those allegations credible. as a matter of personal principle i don't like to assert that people have done specific crimes for which they haven't been convicted, especially when they're being persecuted by the full force of anglo-american state power. i don't mind that others don't share this principle, but it's telling that the criticism comes in the shape of condemning specific phrasing and rhetorical emphasis rather than engaging on substance nobody's saying he shouldn't have gotten a trial except you because you're justifying why he refused to stand trial
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:it's telling that the criticism comes in the shape of condemning specific phrasing and rhetorical emphasis rather than engaging on substance The criticism has come in both. And I wouldn't even be digging in on the whole "you're just going after my specific phrasing" because the specific phrasing is something worth being critical of ('big ole creep' is not great, and alongside 'i'm not terribly invested in assange's moral character' makes the argument that at least part of your defense of him is because you don't give that much of a poo poo about his being credibly accused of rape.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:26
|
|
|
i, and i think everyone here, would agree that the us should not extradite assange and charge him for publishing things on wikileaks - or, for that matter charge any independent journalist for publishing things critical of the us. that is entirely distinct from the fact that assange refused to stand trial for the unrelated crimes he was credibly accused for in another country. you can defend the principle of independent journalism without specifically endorsing assange fleeing rom justice (while at the same time using the fact that he has fled for justice as evidence of him not being a rapist!)
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:30
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:as a matter of personal principle i don't like to assert that people have done specific crimes for which they haven't been convicted, especially when they're being persecuted by the full force of anglo-american state power. 1) He could have faced his accusers in court and did not 2) You've literally asserted that Obama was going to have Assange executed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:32
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:the allegations against assange are that he's a rapist and i've already said that i find those allegations credible. as a matter of personal principle i don't like to assert that people have done specific crimes for which they haven't been convicted, especially when they're being persecuted by the full force of anglo-american state power. i don't mind that others don't share this principle, but it's telling that the criticism comes in the shape of condemning specific phrasing and rhetorical emphasis rather than engaging on substance This you? V. Illych L. posted:honestly i prefer to be wrong on the side of not killing people for journalism and then using unrelated alleged crimes to justify it. weird that this is so controversial It really feels like you're just on the line of calling that rape victim a liar and using increasingly convoluted language to justify or simply hide that fact. How about you deal with the plain and simple issues on the ground instead of being vague?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:34
|
|
|
Are the mods going to change the thread title or get the thread back on track at all?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:40
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:That discussion in particular was about my characterization of people who argued that Assange was in no danger of US extradition. "They" is entirely appropriate in that discussion. Breaking my own rule here, but I said you were questioning the "righteousness" of people who were mad that Assage is a rapist. (Can you say Assange is a rapist? Sex pest seems like a dodge.) I was pointing out the hypocrisy of doing that, because it's bad when people do it about Tara Reade and it's bad when you do it. You're the one who brought up some nefarious motives and a whole discussion about extradition that I do not loving care about because he's a rapist and that's the part I'm mad about. When I start talking about how I desperately want him to be sent to the US and tortured, you can talk about that poo poo, which is not going to happen because I do not believe he should. So yes you're not replying to me you're using the Assange raping several women as a means to fight years old forum fights and that's loving gross. quote:I believe it's both. Greenwald has been blacklisted from major stations and would prefer to reach more people on more stations. He also has a friendship with Tucker Carlson that encourages him to go on when he gets the chance. He has a friendship with Tucker Carlson because he's a white supremacist. quote:My point about Robert Caruso isn't whataboutism, it's pointing out that there is no morality behind preventing him & other less objectionable Intercept writers (genuine question because I dont watch much television: how often has Ryan Grim been on MSNBC or CNN? He's broken several major stories and he has no Fox News ties) from appearing on mainstream channels. Because they will evidently platform a crazy unemployed man who spends his spare time alternating between demanding we bomb more countries, stalking & abusing his exes, and threatening the Bruenig family on Twitter, when he is saying things convenient for their biases. He was also on Fox News, in case one believes that was Greenwald's Achilles Heel. Again I'm not here to defend the moral authority of other news outlets, but here you are ready to explain that argument in more sentences than you give white supremacist and subject of this thread GG going on the most popular white supremacist show in the world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:41
|
|
|
a Loving Dog posted:Are the mods going to change the thread title or get the thread back on track at all? temporary glenn greenwald + assange thread
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
Aruan posted:temporary glenn greenwald + assange thread That's all I'm asking!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:48
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Breaking my own rule here, but I said you were questioning the "righteousness" of people who were mad that Assage is a rapist. Can you say Assange is a rapist? Sex pest seems like a dodge. I was pointing out the hypocrisy of doing that, because it's bad when people do it about Tara Reade and it's bad when you do it. Neurolimal posted:Is this really something you need to waste your time on? Assange is a rapist, he raped women. Are you finally secure that I am not a super secret rape apologist attempting to pull the wool over your eyes? Neurolimal posted:And "sex pest" is also a word I've not shied away from, often when describing rapists. I dont have platinum so I cant search through my SA posts for usages, but if we're going to get into a character study of me & my subconcious motivations then I submit this to the docket: quote:You're the one who brought up some nefarious motives and a whole discussion about extradition that I do not loving care about because he's a rapist and that's the part I'm mad about. When I start talking about how I desperately want him to be sent to the US and tortured, you can talk about that poo poo, which is not going to happen because I do not believe he should. I am discussing motives and extradition because, on this Assange subject, within Debate and Discussion, that is all that exists to debate. Assange is a rapist, we agree, what exactly do you want to say from there? Should we take turns saying how bad it is that he's a rapist? quote:He has a friendship with Tucker Carlson because he's a white supremacist. hosed up if true. quote:Again I'm not here to defend the moral authority of other news outlets, but here you are ready to explain that argument in more sentences than you give white supremacist and subject of this thread GG going on the most popular white supremacist show in the world. What exactly should I say to "Glenn Greenwald is a white supremacist"? Focusing on what lead to a longstanding working relationship between Carl Tuckerson and Green Glennwald is significantly more interesting and ripe for discussion than intuiting whether or not the jewish guy is a hyper-racist or merely a liberal-racist.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:49
|
|
|
Julian assange has not actually been convicted in a court of law so to avoid semantic arguments let's all agree to refer to him as an alleged big old creep
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:49
|
|
|
a Loving Dog posted:That's all I'm asking! move both glenn greenwald threads into a temporary subforum "the green zone"
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:50
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I am discussing motives and extradition because, on this Assange subject, within Debate and Discussion, that is all that exists to debate. Assange is a rapist, we agree, what exactly do you want to say from there? Should we take turns saying how bad it is that he's a rapist? You should probably not use him being a rapist to fight ages old forum wars where you question the validity of people's feelings around rape like I have said at least 3 times right now. But yeah if you don't want to stop doing that you would need to keep changing the subject like you're doing. quote:What exactly should I say to "Glenn Greenwald is a white supremacist"? Focusing on what lead to a longstanding working relationship between Carl Tuckerson and Green Glennwald is significantly more interesting and ripe for discussion than intuiting whether or not the jewish guy is a hyper-racist or merely a liberal-racist. Well one thing to not do is immediately change the subject to, again, another forum war that you want to fight, but here you are doing it. You could also not post if you had nothing further to had, but that might not be an option for you!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 17:58
|
|
|
pieuvre armement posted:Julian assange has not actually been convicted in a court of law so to avoid semantic arguments let's all agree to refer to him as an alleged big old creep I have my doubts that someone who said "They are collaborators, they deserve to die" about Afghani civilians helping the US and dumped the private conversations of Turkish citizens with little-to-no redactions of names (and when called on it called the accusers "Edrogan Apologists") is not a creep, but fair enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:00
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:You should probably not use him being a rapist to fight ages old forum wars where you question the validity of people's feelings around rape like I have said at least 3 times right now. Very little of the conversation around Assange, since the Embassy debacle started, has been about whether or not Assange is guilty. It's entirely been about extradition, and how much the UK and Sweden can be trusted not to extradite Assange to the US. It's hard not to 'fight ages old forum wars' when discussing Assange, seeing as we are witnessing, in real time, the conclusion to those old debates. I understand being angry at the insinuation that posters might exploit rape charges to beat down those concerns, but I'm not sure how one can deny such when, even in this very thread, there have been several posters incompetently soothsaying wording to declare people Rape Apologists. quote:Well one thing to not do is immediately change the subject to, again, another forum war that you want to fight, but here you are doing it. We're in a thread for discussing Glenn Greenwald, the subject of a protracted forums quarrel dating back to when he mocked Russiagate, dating even further back when he questioned Obama's foreign policy. Glenn Greenwald is the final boss of D&D forum wars, and you should know what you're getting into when discussing him. quote:You could also not post if you had nothing further to had, but that might not be an option for you! I have plenty about Greenwald to post about, just not on palm-reading whether or not the jewish guy with a hispanic family is a nazi, or just an old-libertarian racist. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:14
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:As an aside, people seem to express a lot of skepticism over the idea that Greenwald accepts whatever TV appearances he's allowed, and seem to scoff at the idea that United States media would hold biases in a way that would cause them to blacklist Greenwald (or that the blacklist is a moral one resulting from his statements). I would ask those people how Robert Caruso ends up on Reuters, MSNBC, Politico, the Boston Globe, BuzzFeed, Business Insider, the Daily Beast, and a few others to demand we bomb more people, despite having literally no credentials and a history of stalking & abuse. Is there any actual evidence of Greenwald being blacklisted from everywhere but Fox?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:14
|
|
|
Papercut posted:Is there any actual evidence of Greenwald being blacklisted from everywhere but Fox? Who else would host him?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:18
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Very little of the conversation around Assange, since the Embassy debacle started, has been about whether or not Assange is guilty. It's entirely been about extradition, and how much the UK and Sweden can be trusted not to extradite Assange to the US. most assange defenders at the time were definitely saying that the US/CIA/what-have-you manufactured the rape charges. that has, now, largely dissapated but it was very definitely a big thing at the time. it remains indisputable that assange fled to the embassy to avoid extradition to sweden for rape, not extradition to the united states. it was indisputable then, it is indisputable now, which is why i am puzzled you are not only trying to claim it is disputed but claim it has been resolved in your favor when you cannot come up with any possible rationale why it was actually about the US.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:25
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:most assange defenders at the time were definitely saying that the US/CIA/what-have-you manufactured the rape charges. that has, now, largely dissapated but it was very definitely a big thing at the time. Cool, those people suck, and should be probed if they repeat such now. quote:it remains indisputable that assange fled to the embassy to avoid extradition to sweden for rape, not extradition to the united states. it was indisputable then, it is indisputable now, which is why i am puzzled you are not only trying to claim it is disputed but claim it has been resolved in your favor when you cannot come up with any possible rationale why it was actually about the US. Because the UK did get ahold of Assange, and then immediately the US requested that he be extradited. This should have been painfully obvious at the time by the UK's reaction to the charges, compared to how Europe usually reacts to famous people being pedophiles or rapists in other countries. As I've already said, it's entirely possible for Assange's publicly stated fears to have been motivated by a desire to escape punishment for being a rapist, while at the same time turning out to be true. All of this "ah, but it was the UK who immediately went about extraditing him to the US, not Sweden!" means next to nothing, as far as I'm concerned, unless there existed a trick for Assange to be extradited to Sweden without being apprehended by UK authorities.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:32
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Very little of the conversation around Assange, since the Embassy debacle started, has been about whether or not Assange is guilty. It's entirely been about extradition, and how much the UK and Sweden can be trusted not to extradite Assange to the US. Oh here we are yet again, you wanting to fight forum wars instead of owning that what you said was gross. Over and over. quote:We're in a thread for discussing Glenn Greenwald, the subject of a protracted forums quarrel dating back to when he mocked Russiagate, dating even further back when he questioned Obama's foreign policy. Glenn Greenwald is the final boss of D&D forum wars, and you should know what you're getting into when discussing him. Constantly trying to pivot from discussion of GG being a white supremacist to other subjects has no context in this discussion of disingenuous tactics that GG defenders use! It's just vitally important we talk about whether or not Buzzfeed has had a lovely guest. Because everyone here was very very into defending the honor of various news networks. quote:I have plenty about Greenwald to post about, just not on palm-reading whether or not the jewish guy with a hispanic family is a nazi, or just an old-libertarian racist. So yeah the whole "not posting" is definitely not an option for you I can see that. Also, you're really going with "how could this jew be a nazi" in a world where stephen miller exists?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:37
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Because the UK did get ahold of Assange, and then immediately the US requested that he be extradited. This should have been painfully obvious at the time by the UK's reaction to the charges, compared to how Europe usually reacts to famous people being pedophiles or rapists in other countries. Eh, when he sold himself out to the Russians, pretty openly, to help seed his leaks with Russian disinfo docs, he basically sold his soul. Between that and the rape, nobody should be siding with Assange on anything. It was so bad Wikileaks employees were leaving in protest. He openly promoted both Seth Rich and Clinton conspiracies because "He hated Hillary Clinton"
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Cool, those people suck, and should be probed if they repeat such now. What fears even proved to be true? The US doesn't kill extremely high profile whistleblowers or leakers or the journalists they work with. That's probably for mostly pragmatic reasons rather than moral reasons, but Assange was literally one of the highest profile people involved in leaking american documents at the time and was so high profile that he was untouchable
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:44
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:What fears even proved to be true? The US doesn't kill extremely high profile whistleblowers or leakers or the journalists they work with. That's probably for mostly pragmatic reasons rather than moral reasons, but Assange was literally one of the highest profile people involved in leaking american documents at the time and was so high profile that he was untouchable The fears that he'd be extradited to the US if he cooperated, which the UK immediately did. I'm not the poster saying "they'd kill him", that was the probated guy. I, and most people, should be opposed to extradition to the US even if the US is not in a position to kill him. CommieGIR posted:Eh, when he sold himself out to the Russians, pretty openly, to help seed his leaks with Russian disinfo docs, he basically sold his soul. Between that and the rape, nobody should be siding with Assange on anything. It was so bad Wikileaks employees were leaving in protest. I'll be completely honest with you, with zero malice intended and all the love in the world: I do not give a single steaming ounce of a poo poo which US-opposed state Assange or Snowden or etc aligns with. None of them would justify prosecuting someone for whistleblowing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:What fears even proved to be true? The US doesn't kill extremely high profile whistleblowers or leakers or the journalists they work with. That's probably for mostly pragmatic reasons rather than moral reasons, but Assange was literally one of the highest profile people involved in leaking american documents at the time and was so high profile that he was untouchable they just torture them until they kill themselves
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:53
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:most assange defenders at the time were definitely saying that the US/CIA/what-have-you manufactured the rape charges. that has, now, largely dissapated but it was very definitely a big thing at the time. ya this is not true
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:53
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I'll be completely honest with you, with zero malice intended and all the love in the world: I do not give a single steaming ounce of a poo poo which US-opposed state Assange or Snowden or etc aligns with. None of them would justify prosecuting someone for whistleblowing. So how do we justify openly spreading disinformation to try to throw an election? There's better whistleblowers to defend, Julian Assange's conspiracy spreading rapist rear end isn't the one you need to rush to defend. People like Reality Winner deserve your defense. Not Assange. And he wasn't fleeing Extradition for whistleblowing, he was doing so because he raped people and wanted to wait out the rape charges. Which, by the way, he was pretty much a lovely person to the Embassy that took him in to the point they kicked him out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:54 |
|
|
I also am skeptical of there being any possibility he would have been killed even if he was extradited. Like when was the last time the US executed anyone for espionage? The Rosenbergs in 1953?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 18:55
|
|
