On 6/3/2019 at 7:22 AM, gk10002000 said:

Assange did it all to himself, so he has nobody but himself to blame.  He could have had a very prosperous career as a businessman, a computer consultant etc.   By all accounts he was very talented.  But he got focused on his own mantra and chose his course of action.  Not even finishing his formal education.  One has to sleep in the bed they make

And that is precisely why he is a 'hero' IMO.

 

Yes, he "could have had a very prosperous career as a businessman, a computer consultant etc.   By all accounts he was very talented" - but instead he was more concerned about exposing the truth.

 

I wish I was as brave and always acted according to my convictions, rather than worrying about how this would affect my income/life ☹️.

Edited June 4, 20197 yr by dick dasterdly

I'm always happy to bring some joy into this world, but am not sure why either Morch or Chomper find my post so funny - whilst not being bothered to post an explanation as to their mirth?

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'm always happy to bring some joy into this world, but am not sure why either Morch or Chomper find my post so funny - whilst not being bothered to post an explanation as to their mirth?

Forgive me, I didn't realise I owed you an explanation for finding mirth in what you wrote. 

 

My view comes from an observation I have made throughout my own life.

 

While some people choose the path they take in life for very logical well considered  reasons, a significant number of others choose their path in life as a result of their own underlying personality and or mental health problems.

 

Broadly speaking and not meant to be a perfect representation of your point of view, you seem to take the view that Assange has chosen a righteous or nobel path.

 

I take a different view.

 

I believe Assange to be a malignant narcissist, and like all narcissist only interested in projecting and protecting his own image. I very much doubt that Assange could have had any kind of business career, unless like Wikileaks, it was all about Assange.

 

I also believe Assange went looking for a fight with the US government for no other reason than because he can't help going looking for a fight. 

 

I firmly believe he willingly became an asset of the Russian intelligence services for the sole reason to advance his own attacks on the US and Clinton in particular. 

 

He's not a journalist, he's a thief who dumps information to attack those his head is telling him he has a problem with. He's  certainly no champion of freedom - as for 'brave' well that is the laughable bit. 

 

A man who wastes seven of the best years of his life in a futile attempt to avoid facing justice for acts he wilfully committed is not brave, far from it. He's a skulking coward.

 

You might conclude from this that I don't particularly like him, please feel welcome to draw that conclusion. 

 

 

Please do not conclude from this that I owe you a detailed explanation for any of the like, laugh, confused or sad clicks I might give any of your future posts. 

 

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'm always happy to bring some joy into this world, but am not sure why either Morch or Chomper find my post so funny - whilst not being bothered to post an explanation as to their mirth?

 

Unlike Chomper, I simply find the naivety displayed amusing. Carry on. Don't ever change.

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Forgive me, I didn't realise I owed you an explanation for finding mirth in what you wrote. 

 

My view comes from an observation I have made throughout my own life.

 

While some people choose the path they take in life for very logical well considered  reasons, a significant number of others choose their path in life as a result of their own underlying personality and or mental health problems.

 

Broadly speaking and not meant to be a perfect representation of your point of view, you seem to take the view that Assange has chosen a righteous or nobel path.

 

I take a different view.

 

I believe Assange to be a malignant narcissist, and like all narcissist only interested in projecting and protecting his own image. I very much doubt that Assange could have had any kind of business career, unless like Wikileaks, it was all about Assange.

 

I also believe Assange went looking for a fight with the US government for no other reason than because he can't help going looking for a fight. 

 

I firmly believe he willingly became an asset of the Russian intelligence services for the sole reason to advance his own attacks on the US and Clinton in particular. 

 

He's not a journalist, he's a thief who dumps information to attack those his head is telling him he has a problem with. He's  certainly no champion of freedom - as for 'brave' well that is the laughable bit. 

 

A man who wastes seven of the best years of his life in a futile attempt to avoid facing justice for acts he wilfully committed is not brave, far from it. He's a skulking coward.

 

You might conclude from this that I don't particularly like him, please feel welcome to draw that conclusion. 

 

 

Please do not conclude from this that I owe you a detailed explanation for any of the like, laugh, confused or sad clicks I might give any of your future posts. 

 

You are making this about a person who you seem to have a problem with. That takes all objectivity out of it. 

 

What do you think is the right thing to do with for example video footage showing US troops murdering unarmed civilians? Or even more precisely, let's say you did decide it needed to be released, where would you release it?! You could not walk into a govt office with the footage, you can't give it to a news reporter, and this is how the govt wants you yo feel. There is nowhere for you to go with the information. 

 

Feel free to think that is somehow a humanitarian position to take, but you are mistaken. 

 

On 6/2/2019 at 11:10 PM, wayned said:

If he is a hero and not a criminal why should he need asylum?

I dont think he is a hero , my remarks regarding Russia and China were a facetious response to the suggestion that the UK etc do not have a free press.

It is so easy to criticise aspects of European and American democracy yet , in relative terms , many of us dont realise how lucky we are.

1 hour ago, joecoolfrog said:

I dont think he is a hero , my remarks regarding Russia and China were a facetious response to the suggestion that the UK etc do not have a free press.

It is so easy to criticise aspects of European and American democracy yet , in relative terms , many of us dont realise how lucky we are.

 

 That's absolutely true.  But how much longer will we be that lucky?  The erosion of our rights and the economic prosperity of 99% of us are on a pretty precipitous slope, and have been for decades.

 

And how much better would the world be if evil acts had a higher probability of seeing the light of day?

 

36 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

 That's absolutely true.  But how much longer will we be that lucky?  The erosion of our rights and the economic prosperity of 99% of us are on a pretty precipitous slope, and have been for decades.

 

And how much better would the world be if evil acts had a higher probability of seeing the light of day?

 

 

The sky is falling. Again.

 

Not sure how our rights and economic prosperity can be both "eroding", and on a "precipitous slope" with all this going on for "decades". But then again, learned not to expect much coherence on these topics. The 99% is another mystery - what "us" are referenced? Westerners? People in general? If the former some would argue that your comments are counterfactual, for the latter, they simply are. Paint it this way or that, we're living at times where hiding stuff is very difficult. Surely compared to past decades. More stuff sees the "light of day" than ever before.

 

One could argue that both China and Russia (never mind numerous other countries) represent a large share of the World's "evil acts". Some would say, a greater share than the West's. Assange doesn't seem too bothered by either. Somehow going after the parts of the World who are somewhat (by no means perfect) okish, gets higher priority.

 

Edited June 4, 20197 yr by Morch

He sort of dug his own grave (but then he knew this).

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

The sky is falling. Again.

 

Not sure how our rights and economic prosperity can be both "eroding", and on a "precipitous slope" with all this going on for "decades". But then again, learned not to expect much coherence on these topics. The 99% is another mystery - what "us" are referenced? Westerners? People in general? If the former some would argue that your comments are counterfactual, for the latter, they simply are. Paint it this way or that, we're living at times where hiding stuff is very difficult. Surely compared to past decades. More stuff sees the "light of day" than ever before.

 

One could argue that both China and Russia (never mind numerous other countries) represent a large share of the World's "evil acts". Some would say, a greater share than the West's. Assange doesn't seem too bothered by either. Somehow going after the parts of the World who are somewhat (by no means perfect) okish, gets higher priority.

 

I think you are confused, as usual. 

 

Wikileakes is not considered as a whistleblower per se. it is an outlet for whistleblowers. 

 

You cannot talk about why wikileaks doesnt discuss china or russia without understanding its role. It is purely an outlet. If china or russia whistleblowers submit material to it then they can publish it. If nothing comes from there then there is nothing to publish.

 

just because most comes from US may mean more people in the US are willing to question their own govt at their own risk.

 

whether Assange is bothered by other countries does not diminish what the US has done. 

 

You are using the ‘but hillary’ response.

 

 

Edited June 4, 20197 yr by Sujo

On 6/1/2019 at 5:30 PM, Pilotman said:

It gets better and better, No sympathy for this man at all. His actions have probably resulted in any number of deaths of those who serve to protect. The best bit is yet to come,  when he gets jailed for 25 years. 

 

What number of deaths are you referring to? The number of deaths the US govt said never happened?

13 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

And that is precisely why he is a 'hero' IMO.

 

Yes, he "could have had a very prosperous career as a businessman, a computer consultant etc.   By all accounts he was very talented" - but instead he was more concerned about exposing the truth.

 

I wish I was as brave and always acted according to my convictions, rather than worrying about how this would affect my income/life ☹️.

 But if those convictions are fundamentally flawed, well so be it.  As for exposing "the truth" as you say, well, many truths are governed by state and country laws that were duly instituted.  If one violates those laws, one is liable for prosecution. 

4 minutes ago, gk10002000 said:

 But if those convictions are fundamentally flawed, well so be it.  As for exposing "the truth" as you say, well, many truths are governed by state and country laws that were duly instituted.  If one violates those laws, one is liable for prosecution. 

 

Unless, of course, you're a US helicopter crew gleefully killing a bunch of innocent journalists who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Then you get a pass, and those obstructing any meaningful investigation also get away with it...

 

I don't understand anyone who has watched that video, listened to the banter and not concluded that it was a despicable act-  done in our name and on our $$$ no less.  Then it was covered up.  Until some whistleblowers put it out into the public domain.

 

1 minute ago, impulse said:

 

Unless, of course, you're a US helicopter crew gleefully killing a bunch of innocent journalists who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Then you get a pass, and those obstructing any meaningful investigation also get away with it...

 

I don't understand anyone who has watched that video, listened to the banter and not concluded that it was a despicable act-  done in our name and on our $$$ no less.  Then it was covered up.  Until some whistleblowers put it out into the public domain.

 

 

On the other hand, it's not too hard to understand why you're trying to paint things this way - as if anyone who's not an Assange fan automatically sees nothing wrong with actions as cited. Anything goes as long as an imaginary point is  scored. Despicable. Indeed.

23 minutes ago, Morch said:

On the other hand, it's not too hard to understand why you're trying to paint things this way - as if anyone who's not an Assange fan automatically sees nothing wrong with actions as cited. Anything goes as long as an imaginary point is  scored. Despicable. Indeed.

 

I am neither a fan, not a detractor of Assange.  In fact, it would be nice and clean if the guy was a little less slimy on a personal level.  But that's the way it is sometimes.  Dodgy people that I wouldn't freely associate with, but doing good things.

 

I am a fan of transparency and so called leaders and our military being held accountable for their actions and their cover ups- especially when they do it under color of the authority we have granted them. 

 

Without information, democracy is futile.

 

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

I am neither a fan, not a detractor of Assange.  In fact, it would be nice and clean if the guy was a little less slimy on a personal level.  But that's the way it is sometimes.  Dodgy people that I wouldn't freely associate with, but doing good things.

 

I am a fan of transparency and so called leaders and our military being held accountable for their actions and their cover ups- especially when they do it under color of the authority we have granted them. 

 

Without information, democracy is futile.

 

 

Still doesn't make crude wide brush tatting bit necessary, and still, you went for it. I think this discussion, as many past ones highlight that not everyone sees all Assange did and does as "good things". But making such distinctions isn't of much use if one's more invested in bashing the "West". Guess it goes hand in hand with the often prescribed self flagellation guilt trip.

 

Western democracies aren't perfect, and yet, they are light years ahead of countries like China and Russia. For some reason, you (and for that matter, Assange) seem much more focused on the latter. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

As for the expected slogan closing line - it's not that there's no information. We live in an age where there is more information available than people can process. We're also living in an age, where despite nonsense claims, the level of freedom on offer (at least in the West) is unprecedented.

3 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Unless, of course, you're a US helicopter crew gleefully killing a bunch of innocent journalists who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Then you get a pass, and those obstructing any meaningful investigation also get away with it...

 

I don't understand anyone who has watched that video, listened to the banter and not concluded that it was a despicable act-  done in our name and on our $$$ no less.  Then it was covered up.  Until some whistleblowers put it out into the public domain.

 

Yeah, maybe should have been ex wives divorce lawyers instead of journalists

Off topic posts and replies have been removed. 

On 6/4/2019 at 10:07 AM, dick dasterdly said:

And that is precisely why he is a 'hero' IMO.

 

Yes, he "could have had a very prosperous career as a businessman, a computer consultant etc.   By all accounts he was very talented" - but instead he was more concerned about exposing the truth.

 

I wish I was as brave and always acted according to my convictions, rather than worrying about how this would affect my income/life ☹️.

 

20 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Unlike Chomper, I simply find the naivety displayed amusing. Carry on. Don't ever change.

 

You misunderstand.

 

I'm a cynic, and consequently rarely naive when it comes to politics.....

Edited June 5, 20197 yr by dick dasterdly