SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Aoami]

Who knows what will happen but it would surely be less than he deserves.

What do you mean by this?

 

[BloodOmen]

View attachment aaaaaa.mp4

 

[Embattle]

US Gov says he's a bad guy because he has secrets on US gov.

Everyone believes them :S

Quite a few think he is innocent because the US government says he is a bad guy.

 

[Scouse]

Quite a few think he is innocent because the US government says he is a bad guy.

I no doubt think that's common. However, even if he is guilty of hacking (lol) or collusion with Russia (?) to obtain this information - he exposed massive criminality.

Exposure of massive criminality should give you a free pass. Genuine whistleblowers need that safety and security to expose wrongdoing. You can't be selective on who you think is a "genuine" whistleblower though - the exposure of criminality is the much bigger goal.

Always remember: If the US wasn't committing atrocities then there would be nothing to leak.

 

[Gwadien]

Quite a few think he is innocent because the US government says he is a bad guy.

I don't think he's innocent at all, I think he's clearly got links with some questionable organisations.

The problem is that the US are clearly shit scared about what he has access to, because if it was nothing but Russian made up shit they'd ignore it and laugh at it.

 

[Gwadien]

As for the actual story, I'm pleased that the UK courts are telling the US 'no'.

It's a nice change from the usual line of being the bitch of the US

 

[Wij]

What do you mean by this?

I'm sure I've been through this a few times but Assange is not into 'transparency' at all. He's never released anything bad about Russia. Only their enemies.

If you read the Senate Intel report, Wikileaks was working hand in hand with the Trump campaign to launder info stolen by Russian intelligence into the election cycle at the time it would benefit Trump most.

Even the stuff his 'good' reputation is based on in 2010 is not all that it seems. Lots was intentionally left out that would contradict the narrative he wanted to project and lots was released that compromised the safety of operatives but that showed no criminality by the US whatsoever.

He's also a raging anti-semite and misogynist. An all-round cunt.

It's all public domain info. Google it.

 

[Wij]

As for the actual story, I'm pleased that the UK courts are telling the US 'no'.

It's a nice change from the usual line of being the bitch of the US

I think you need to read why the judge made that decision.

It was nothing to do with the veracity of the charges in the US. It was because of his mental health and suicide risk.

Which seems like a dangerous precedent to set.

 

[Gwadien]

I think you need to read why the judge made that decision.

It was nothing to do with the veracity of the charges in the US. It was because of his mental health and suicide risk.

Which seems like a dangerous precedent to set.

Oh I know that's the reason why, but it's still nice that our courts aren't bowing to American pressure.

Why is it a dangerous precedent to set? He's basically been in prison for years already, I wouldn't be surprised if he was suicidal.

 

[Aoami]

I'm sure I've been through this a few times but Assange is not into 'transparency' at all. He's never released anything bad about Russia. Only their enemies.

What if Russia has never done anything bad and the Soviet Union was right all along. Rly makes u think.

 

[Scouse]

I'm sure I've been through this a few times but Assange is not into 'transparency' at all. He's never released anything bad about Russia. Only their enemies.

Your (perhaps entirely justified) hatred of Russia leaves you with a massive blind spot @Wij.

The fact that Assange may well be a "bad actor" is immaterial - ultimately this bad actor did a massive, massive good.

Whistleblowers need support. There are many "good actors" that need protection. Attacks on Assange weaken protections for "good actors" and makes it much much harder to hold the criminal activies of our governments to account.

I appreciate you see the danger that Russia poses, but the actions of whistleblowers - and this includes Assange - in exposing criminal activities of our governments don't weaken but strengthen our democracies.

Even if he was helped by Russia, Assange did the United States, and the idea of freedom and democracy, a favour.

 

[Gwadien]

What if Russia has never done anything bad and the Soviet Union was right all along. Rly makes u think.

 

[Wij]

Your (perhaps entirely justified) hatred of Russia leaves you with a massive blind spot @Wij.

The fact that Assange may well be a "bad actor" is immaterial - ultimately this bad actor did a massive, massive good.

Whistleblowers need support. There are many "good actors" that need protection. Attacks on Assange weaken protections for "good actors" and makes it much much harder to hold the criminal activies of our governments to account.

I appreciate you see the danger that Russia poses, but the actions of whistleblowers - and this includes Assange - in exposing criminal activities of our governments don't weaken but strengthen our democracies.

Even if he was helped by Russia, Assange did the United States, and the idea of freedom and democracy, a favour.

Whistleblowing is what Col Vindman did. Not the same thing at all.

 

[Scouse]

Whistleblowing is what Col Vindman did. Not the same thing at all.

Already addressed that in the post @Wij. You can't separate them out - the hunt for Assange has been a disaster for whistleblowers, a disaster for democracy and has made the world more dangerous for all of us.

 

[Wij]

Already addressed that in the post @Wij. You can't separate them out - the hunt for Assange has been a disaster for whistleblowers, a disaster for democracy and has made the world more dangerous for all of us.

Vindman having to leave the army when he whistleblowed through the proper channels rather than via Russian Intelligence made the world more dangerous.

 

[MYstIC G]

 

[Wij]

For instance:

United States Corrupt Twattery

No they didn’t. Again a misrepresentation. Unchallenged bullshit keeps coming back. Sanders likes it to come back. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/11/04/no-the-dnc-didnt-rig-the-democratic-primary-for-hillary-clinton/ Has Bernie promised...

forums.freddyshouse.com

 

[Scouse]

whistleblowed through the proper channels

ROFL.

In fact, I take back that laugh. It's too damn serious. It doesn't matter where or who criminality is exposed to. If Russia can make something of the criminal actions of the United States then the fix is to ensure the US never commits atrocities. Never takes criminal actions - so Russia can't use their criminal actions as a weapon against them.

The priority definitely isn't the fucking-over of those that expose criminal actions. Even if we don't like them, and no matter how they do it.

Your base priorities are incorrect @Wij. Stopping crimes enacted by the state is the priority. That's how we make our democracies stronger, our people safer.

You're turning a blind eye to the crimes of the state to pursue those who've exposed them. You should be turning a blind eye to crimes committed by exposers - in order to pursue the state.

 

[Scouse]

For instance:

United States Corrupt Twattery

No they didn’t. Again a misrepresentation. Unchallenged bullshit keeps coming back. Sanders likes it to come back. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/11/04/no-the-dnc-didnt-rig-the-democratic-primary-for-hillary-clinton/ Has Bernie promised...

forums.freddyshouse.com

Who gives a fuck?

Did the United States commit crimes, or did it not?


Everything else is secondary.

 

[Wij]

So your argument is that the end justifies the means and that it also justifies anything else that individual did for all time?

Otherwise, accept he's a dickbag.

 

[MYstIC G]

 

[Moriath]

I no doubt think that's common. However, even if he is guilty of hacking (lol) or collusion with Russia (?) to obtain this information - he exposed massive criminality.

Exposure of massive criminality should give you a free pass. Genuine whistleblowers need that safety and security to expose wrongdoing. You can't be selective on who you think is a "genuine" whistleblower though - the exposure of criminality is the much bigger goal.

Always remember: If the US wasn't committing atrocities then there would be nothing to leak.

Two wrongs dont make a right

 

[Lamp]

Mouthpiece toothbrushes efficacy questioned:

Mouthpiece toothbrushes: think twice before you buy - Electric Teeth

What is a mouthpiece toothbrush? How do you use one, and are they better than a normal electric toothbrush? We explain all you need to know in this article.

www.electricteeth.com

 

[Raven]

 

[Moriath]

Mouthpiece toothbrushes efficacy questioned:

Mouthpiece toothbrushes: think twice before you buy - Electric Teeth

What is a mouthpiece toothbrush? How do you use one, and are they better than a normal electric toothbrush? We explain all you need to know in this article.

www.electricteeth.com

Nothing wrong with the good old manual brush tbh. Things like this are a waste of resources.

 

[Scouse]

Two wrongs dont make a right

No they don't.

However sometimes you're presented with a choice between two evils and you chose the lesser.

One being the protection of democracy and our way of life by exposing criminality by state actors - and protecting the future exposure of that criminality.

The other is pursuing a guy we don't like because he might have got his evidence from Russia.


Pick one. There's a reason that immunity from prosecution is a thing - we choose the lesser of two evils to put the much badder guy behind bars. This is clearly and obviously such a case.

 

[Embattle]

I reckon you are attributing reasons for him doing it that he just didn't have at the time.

 

[Scouse]

I reckon you are attributing reasons for him doing it that he just didn't have at the time.

Are you talking about me or @Wij?

I don't give any fucks about Assange. Reasons he did it are completely irrelevant. He needed immunity from prosecution in the same way you give a (suspected) murderous henchman immunity from prosecution in order to nail their mob bosses.

Assange has never been remotely suspected of anything so horrible as murder - he's up for "hacking" - but his postings to wikileaks exposed widespread criminal action - including murder - by the United States.


THAT's the crime.

 

[Embattle]

Are you talking about me or @Wij?

I don't give any fucks about Assange. Reasons he did it are completely irrelevant. He needed immunity from prosecution in the same way you give a (suspected) murderous henchman immunity from prosecution in order to nail their mob bosses.

Assange has never been remotely suspected of anything so horrible as murder - he's up for "hacking" - but his postings to wikileaks exposed widespread criminal action - including murder - by the United States.


THAT's the crime.

So is Assange's, in reality proven again today.

 

[Scouse]

So is Assange's, in reality proven again today.

This sentence doesn't make any sense.