(untitled)

U.K. Approves Julian Assange’s Extradition to U.S. https://www.wsj.com/articles/julian-assange-to-be-extradited-from-u-k-to-u-s-11655461361

>>60886 Interesting how the servants of the people are doing favors for each other to make sure that their malicious actions will never be brought to light again...

>>60886 >U.K. Approves Julian Assange’s Extradition to U.S. >Rogue state exports political prisoner to other rogue state. It says more about them than it does Assange. Look on the bright side - they've trained the next generation to never trust authority/government ever again. Also don't forget - the UK leader looked at the best Covid data, and knowing it was safe for him to party with friends - told the people they were not allowed to hold the hand of a dying relative. He broke the law he set, then his government, his party, the cops, and judicial system ALL effectively said "Law makers breaking laws isn't a big deal, get over it". They've trained the next generation that laws are optional with no serious consequences when broken. No matter what propaganda they pump out to kids now, the damage is already done. The seeds of mistrust & scorn are planted deeply and well watered. Pic related is a 92 year old man getting arrested by cops for protesting at Assange bail hearing. + bonus Assange's call to crypto arms

That rape defamation soykaf works, doesn't it?

>>60891 They dont even care about rape. uk just recently got rapists to merely apologize, no jail nothing. Meanwhile a rape victim misgendering the rapist got send to jail. Nuking london would be an improvement and act of mercy at this point.

>>60891 >UK is a serious country UK is a meme. Even more so after this decision on Assange. They have murder raping cops who literally walk about parliament with fully loaded automatic assault weapon bullet sprayers yet unironically arrest people who read words online for wrong think. They unironically tell people to go fight alongside nazis in Ukraine, ship explosive munitions to the nazis, and then prosecute anyone who followed their advice when they return to the UK.

>>60886 to be honest, i don't care. It really isn't a matter of what he did beneficially, he was a scumbag of a human being and frequently made questionable hookups etc. The rest of his team stopped associating with him because he used his status to try to become popular. Doing the right thing once does not mean you should pretend you are an infallible hero of the people. The same goes for that glitterboy snowden. Don't donate to wikileaks, he is probably pocketing the money anyway. IIRC the original sex crime charges came about because he fugged some girl and when she asked for him to get an STD test he said begone floozy, which amounted to failure to get an STD test at the request of a sexual partner (which apparently is a crime in some countries). It's pretty common that countries extradite people to their allies anyway so nothing new there.

>>60890 >Pic related is a 92 year old man getting arrested by cops for protesting at Assange bail hearing. + bonus Assange's call to crypto arms There are at least 5 people recording it, but nobody even bothered to step in or speak up, and people wonder why things like this happen

If only the trial against Assange could get as much mediatic attention as Jhonny Deep trial.

>>60904 Western governments frame child sex abuse victims and they use rape as a weapon. You live in sham. You don't see obvious use of defamation as a weapon. People aren't as fooled in Russia.

>>60904 >IIRC the original sex crime charges You remember wrong, that charge was bullshit from start to finish. Get educated and stop spreading this smear.

>>60984 >People aren't as fooled in Russia. thanks for the bait my guy, in fact IIRC the girl who wanted assange to be arrested to begin with said she would drop the charges if he agreed to get an STD test, which is a really petty thing for him to refuse to do. No sympathy. >>60977 No entertainment value, guy made stupid choices, those stupid choices got him caught, him getting caught means he is going to face bigger charges of large scale espionage, and he is going to go to a not fun place. There is no memeable material here.

Chapter 6: Swedish Judicial Prosecution exposes this fraud in its entirety.

>>60988 The woman also refused to sign her own interview statement as soon as she realized the investigator intended to charge Assange with rape.

>>60988 >she would drop the charges if he agreed to get an STD test >really petty thing for him to refuse to do lmao simping idiot

>>60990 His political actions aside, a lot of rape victims don't want to get the perpetrator in trouble, especially if at some point there was consensual sex involved. I look at him as a man first, then as a hacker. Not to mention, most of his notoriety stems from Manning's leaks anyway.

>>60991 Let me get this straight >Be a guy >Have a sex >Partner consents under certain conditions >You do not agree and proceed anyway >Partner says that they will forget about it if you try to fix your mistake >You tell partner to get fuarrrked >Partner wants to take legal action >You would be a simp if you try to fix your mistake >Would rather be a potential criminal

Doctors will do fraud for cases like Assange. So that would merely be, he's not an idiot.

>>60993 Forgets he doesn't agree with those claims.

>>60891 There's evidence in this thread.

UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer was like this lainon once: he allowed the character assassination of the rape allegations to cloud his objectivity on Assange and simply presumed he was shady character undeserving of sympathy. Then he actually got his ass educated on the case and found it was full of egregious process violations that ensured it would have never held up in court and its main function was to destroy the character of Assange internationally. Thankfully, our poor lainon doesn't have to go through all the painstaking factfinding research on their own, because Melzer wrote a whole book on the subject. Now lainon, too, can relatively easily disabuse themselves of this deception by getting off their lazy ass and reading the relevant chapter in his book. The question is: will they? Or will they simply continue to smear uneducated vitriol on a cyberpunk image board in a desperate attempt to save face?

even if assange is litterally a rapist, even if he was a murderer, the US doesn't want him for that, and the US would forgive him of that in the right circumstances. The US has been desperate for years to capture him under any possible pretense.

>>61000 Assange is NOT a rapist. These were false charges by the Swedish government that were dropped. The women who were "raped" literally came out and said that it was consensual. It's pretty much an open secret at this point that the whole "Assange is a rapist" thing was a fake news charge in order to speed up his extradition.

Why are you using Wallstreet Journal? It's one of Rupert Murdoch's sites and has a paywall. I wonder if anyone will try to intercept Assange getting him chance to escape and if that would worsen things for him or not.

>>60998 Excellent post m8.

>In a January 2020 interview, Melzer said he had never seen a comparable case where a person was subjected to nine years of a preliminary investigation for rape without charges being filed. I have my case in secrecy wherein government in Belgium abused every instance of government to frame me. I'm a "nobody" however. Child sex abuse scandals. Possible use of child sex abuse and all that follows as a weapon against empathy, leftism. Possibly schemes of anti-socialization, for capitalism. I am currently still indefinitely convicted to circumvention of the judicial system in Belgium.

>>61021 >The women who were "raped" literally came out and said that it was consensual. I can't find any source (credible or otherwise) that says that. One of them claims that he intentionally broke a condom, which seems a little far-fetched, and the other says that after having sex with a condom multiple times he did her bareback without consent. There are some other allegations supposedly but I can't find any specific content as to what they are. While those are preeeeettty fuarrrking flimsy allegations of rape, if they are true they would still be sexual assault under most law. If it were actually a trial he would barely get punished for them even if he were guilty, because they have actual rapists to deal with. But regardless of whether he did it, the case was 100% a pretense to get Assange into the hands of the US justice department, that much is obvious to anyone with a brain. They wouldn't allow the case to move forward unless he was in Sweden.

>>61034 Do you consider governments attempt to, and do control the media and content?

>>61034 >If it were actually a trial he would barely get punished for them even if he were guilty, because they have actual rapists to deal with. This is not how legal systems work...

>>61034 >>61042 Nothing at all would have happened had it gone to trial because the investigation was full of inadmissible blunders from the beginning.

>>60904 >he was a scumbag of a human being and frequently made questionable hookups etc. >Doing the right thing once does not mean you should pretend you are an infallible hero of the people. This is a question of lawfulness and the overreach of the US justice system. It's not a trial on whether or not you like him or you think he did something morally questionable albeit legal in the past. He's being prosecuted in the US, despite not being a US citizen, for espionage; a charge that is simply false according the US definition. The reason for doing this is obviously to make an example out of him and intimidate future journalists from disclosing government secrets no matter how unlawful or immoral they are.

>>61040 That doesn't mean you can just make stuff up without proof and call it a fact.

>>61051 It creates the necessity to consider possibilities.

>>61049 >He's being prosecuted in the US, despite not being a US citizen, So being a non citizen means you can break whatever laws you like now? Must be nice to be an illegal immigrant... >for espionage; considerin US law defines that as >(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it... >The reason for doing this is obviously to make an example out of him and intimidate future journalists from disclosing government secrets no matter how unlawful or immoral they are. Its a pretty cut and dry case of do the crime, do the time... Manning was treated a lot worse, even tho he/she did it out if spite, also nobody in any of these situations actually used the legal means of reporting and correcting these issues.

>>61082 >Manning was treated a lot worse although there's direct overlap between manning and assanges cases they're very different and you shouldnt compare them like this. At Crime Time manning was a US soldier, soldiers are held under a different standard even than US citizens. He was arrested fairly quickly after the leak became apparent and wasn't on the run from US authority for years, and of course now has been free'd; we can assume the crime&punishment saga is effectively over for him, on this point. Assange is different, he's not a US citizen which might even free the hands of US authority to mess with him (of course US is perfectly happy to assasinate its own citizens every now and then). His crime is arguably much bigger because it includes basically all of Manning's plus a dozen others. And his punishment included more time in confinement already than Manning got, and that was just Assange's appetizer, as it were. Its very likely it gets worse from here, but its kinda hard to say.

>>61082 >So being a non citizen means you can br It means other countries shouldn't cowardly roll over for the United States any time they are asked to. They should protect their journalists for doing their jobs even if they embarrass the USA every now and then. >Must be nice to be an illegal immigrant... Please argue in good faith. >>(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writin What document exactly is that from? >Its a pretty cut and dry case of do the crime, do the tim It's not. Assange did not hack anything or break into anywhere or crack any safes. He published documents given to him. As a journalist.

I have one question. WHY THEY DO NOT POST LEAKS ABOUT RUSSIA?

>>61090 PROBABLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANY

>>61092 H O W T H E F U C K I S T H A T P O S S I B L E ?

>>61093 B E C A U S E N O B O D Y S E N D S I T T O T H E M

>>61090 Maybe they don't want to harm the only power in this world that opposes the Great Devil?

>>60892 Only source I could find was babylon bee. Things aren't quite that bad yet.

>>61094 fuarrrk, SO THE WEST MAY APPEAR WORSE BECAUSE RUSSIA IS WORSE??!

>>61096 How publishing Russia related stuff harms China? >>61094 H . O . W . . . D . O . . . Y . O . U . . . K . N . O . W . ?

>>60886 They will kill him They will sentence him to death in a secret court, he will not live The media will forget about it within days. no-one will care. We will continue to fulfill their goals.

>>61090 its run by an aussie, mostly english language folk involved, mostly interested in the US empire, their home. Also they've run stuff from russia. Frankly assange seems like mostly an onery bastard who'd bite any government hand that tried to feed him if the chance arose. Russia could use them without gaining loyalty. Journalists. What can I say.

>>61098 Huh? >>61102 [code] ___ ____ ___ _ _ _ _____ ___ _____ _ ____ _ _ _ ____ _____ |_ _| | _ \ / _ \| \ | ( )_ _| |_ _|_ _( ) ___| | | | | / ___|_ _| | | | | | | | | | \| |/ | | | | | | |/\___ \ _ | | | | \___ \ | | | | | |_| | |_| | |\ | | |_ | | | | ___) | | |_| | |_| |___) || | |___| |____/ \___/|_| \_| |_( ) |___| |_| |____/ \___/ \___/|____/ |_| |/ _ _ _ _____ ____ _ _ ____ _ _____ _____ ____ / \ | \ | | | ____| _ \| | | |/ ___| / \|_ _| ____| _ \ / _ \ | \| | | _| | | | | | | | | / _ \ | | | _| | | | | / ___ \| |\ | | |___| |_| | |_| | |___ / ___ \| | | |___| |_| | /_/ \_\_| \_| |_____|____/ \___/ \____/_/ \_\_| |_____|____/ ____ _ _ _____ ____ ____ / ___| | | | ____/ ___/ ___| | | _| | | | _| \___ \___ \ | |_| | |_| | |___ ___) |__) | \____|\___/|_____|____/____/ [\code] >>61107 is the reason why I think it makes sense most of the leaks are not from Russia. It is also probably that Russian state intelligence is perfectly happy to feed Wikileaks info while CIA etc. are not. It is probable that wikileaks does not know or care where their information comes from, if they don't publish on countries inimical to the US it may only be because the US is behind on the game.

>>61107 >Frankly assange seems like mostly an onery bastard who'd bite any government hand that tried to feed him if the chance arose. Russia could use them without gaining loyalty. Journalists. What can I say. Good. It's what a journalist should do.

I have to say it truly is shocking to encounter a national security state wage slave on a cyberpunk image board, of all places.

>>61087 >What document exactly is that from? This is one of the definitions of the crime of espianage under the US Code of Regulations. Crimes against a country and its people still count, even if the person who commits it is not from there, or physically there. >It's not. Assange did not hack anything or break into anywhere or crack any safes. He published documents given to him. As a journalist. iirc he assisted and encouraged people to provide information to him, he continued to publish information uncensored (instead of redacting actual names where it really meant nothing to the story) which put civilians and military members in harms way, its like saying if the new york times had published the Osama Bin Laden raid were to happen and because of that he was able to escape, it is totally fine because ts just "muh jurnalism." >>61090 A conspiracy theorist would say because he is being paid off or protected... common sense would say he is a human being and decides what he wants to publish as the other lain said "As a journalist." There is also the possibility that Russia would give him some spicy food laced with some kind of face melting neurotoxin or something. >>61115 >Good. It's what a journalist should do. Why should journalists participate in the power plays of nation states? Choosing to selectivly publish is just as bad as publishing propaganda. >>61116 This is just another one of their hangouts lain, they don't have to glow once they go home.

>>61123 >which put civilians and military members in harms way What civilians did he put at risk? The military are already at risk by virtue of being military. The US military routinely disregard collateral damage, ironically we know this because of journalists like Assange. >Why should journalists participate in the power plays of nation states? Journalism is virtually the only way by which government military institutions can be held accountable to the people they should in principle serve. The "power plays" of nation states, in this case, definitely do not reflect the majority will of Americans. What you refer to as the "power plays of nation states" are in fact the "power plays" of political and economic elites.

>>61123 >Choosing to selectivly publish is just as bad as publishing propaganda. you misread him; the suggestion is that Assange is a guy who does not know when to stop. He threatened the equatorians when he was entierly at their mercy. That may well be why he is where he is now, and not still stuck in that one little building in London. Assange has litterally zero state loyalty. He doesn't seem like a guy who could selectively publish to favour one state or another.

>>61123 >he continued to publish information uncensored (instead of redacting actual names where it really meant nothing to the story) This is simply a baldfaced lie from start to finish. In the real world where facts matter, Assange actually gained a reputation, particularly in regards to the Iraq war logs and the cable leaks where he poured over the leaks for sleepless nights back to back, of being extremely dedicated to curating leaks to protect the innocent.

>>61124 The US military and spook orgs have never established even a single instance of civilians or members of the armed forces harmed as a result of the Iraq war logs. And you know they would point to an example endlessly if they actually had it.

>>61124 >>61131 >Be civilian >Comply with instructions of occupying force of 18 year olds with guns >Occupying force makes a record that you are willing to work with them >The record gets leaked >Your countrymen see you as a traitor >Your life is now in danger

>>61129 And thanks to that curation the glow posters have this neat trick where they open the other side of their mouth and imply malicious editorial intent. Still haven't successfully taught one to roll over unfortunately.

>>61135 That sure is some green text.

>>61135 Funny how the gunship pilots gunning down civilians in the Collateral Murder video never saw a prison cell.

>>61139 still better love story than Russia where killing civilians even intentionally wihout presence of any military target within a range of 100km is a heroic deed.

>>61140 Keep at it spookanon, I'm sure someone will take you seriously eventually!

>>61140 pro tip: just because Russian propagandists engage in whataboutism doesn't mean you have to as well.

>>61139 >Funny how the gunship pilots gunning down civilians in the Collateral Murder video never saw a prison cell. ..with the added irony Assange has served more time with restricted liberty than people who actually murder. >in b4 hurr durr but he murder with information tho' Was this proven during a trial? Oh wait, he's a journalist, jailed for years without being found guilty of anything. When I hear Soviet Western leaders say "democracy" I know they mean "democratic" like Deutsche Demokratische Republik (Former Soviet East Germany). Surveillance state is full on Stasi too.

>>61146 >running away from your problems Had he not hid in an embassy like a bitch, he probably would have already served his time. instead he lived in legal purgatory under his own free will thinking he could escape the consequences of his actions. I'm not arguing that what happened was legal or illegal, but every action has a consequence and he knew good and well what was going to happen, so running just makes him a coward. Jail is also somewhere you get sent by an authority, he ran to the embassy, which means he was hiding.

>>61150 >CIA literally plots to murder you >Why didn't you just do your time like a man bro! You know you're impressing absolutely no one in here with your standard lapdog talking points, right?

Assange did good important work. I hope they don't mental illness him into oblivion. Governments do crazy secret soykaf. The legal work is sham, a presentation. The news is sham, a presentation.

>>61150 Going to an embassy gives the cause moral weight and keeps it in the media. If he wanted to continue to draw attention to what he was doing more than he cared about his own freedom, it was a smart move.

>>61150 >he probably would have already served his time. You mean he would be dead? He's being threatened with life in prison.

>>61169 He would absolutely be lobotomized in a more modern way. That's what psychiatrists are for.

>>61173 >lobotomized in a more modern way shrinks invented "electro therapy" for that, you burn the brain crispy with electricity while leaving no outside marks. At low levels it fries memory only. So you can do whatever you want with your inmate, fry them and throw them out.

>>61176 Uhh.... it doesn't selectively delete certain memories. It doesn't erase most of your memories either. I've met people who have been through this. It's crappy but it's not like the movies you've obviously been watching.

>>61176 >>61183 is correct. A much easier and more reliable way to deal with this problem would be to induce psychosis so nobody takes em seriously.

>>61184 They did (are doing) this to me for the child sex abuse in Belgium. But it's pretty much PTSD and such and they just claim it's psychosis. They can pretty much do it without introducing PTSD and such, since it's still just a fraudulent claim.

>>61191 hey I've seen your posts around here about government pedo sex torture in waffle land. Is there a place I should read about this more ?

>>61191 (me) They used all sorts of weapons on me. Chemical weapons, bioweapons, drugged rape, other organized abuse under drugs, I suspect electromagnetic weapons... My brain isn't the same. I still understand what happened.

>>61192 It's not acknowledged. It's secret stuff. (obviously)

>>61193 (me) I'm also pretty sure their tactics for framing include developing the victim of child sex abuse into pedophiles.

>>61183 wasn't implying selective removal, just fry all memories with this approach. This isnt movie soykaf either but simply comes from medical reports i read in the past. Still carries the problem of uncertainty maybe it worked maybe it didnt of course but its officially confirmed to work same time. Overall reading studies on "medical ethics violations" is better than any fantasy book.

>>61193 Clandestine energy weapons research is quite terrifying https://www.latinorebels.com/2015/03/10/king-of-the-towels-the-torture-and-murder-of-pedro-albizu-campos/

>>61205 td:dr >Be a Harvard educated Lawyer and veteran who speaks 6 languages >Well versed in Literature, Chemical engineering, philosophy, and military studies >Decide to run for politics to make his homeland a better place >Gets accused of plotting violent terrorist acts (false flag or wrong blame) >Gets locked up by his (corrupt) political rival >US government subjects him to constant radiation exposure as a test subject >Gets made fun of, called insane, mocked, and literally declared insane on national television >Decades later, US government admits that he wasn't the only one

>>61205 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program This wikipedia page isn't very insightful is it? I think we need wikileaks. I'm pretty sure they can point something at your brain and then it's like you're hallucinating. I'm also pretty sure they can develop your cancer unnoticeably, while you're just living, in your home.

>After examining Assange on 9 May 2019, Nils Melzer, the United Nations special rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, concluded that "in addition to physical ailments, Mr Assange showed all symptoms typical for prolonged exposure to psychological torture, including extreme stress, chronic anxiety and intense psychological trauma. So Assange is a mutilated individual and that could help the US's, UK's presentation.

>guy commits crimes >gets found out, goes on the run >hides out in a little cell for years and years >sustains mental injuries from his years in hiding and self imposed captivity >because of this he merits your sympathy lets stick to saying the things he did shouldnt be considered crimes, rather than making him out to be a faggit who hurt himself while running away from retribution for his dirty deeds.

>>61229 What crimes did he commit?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/julian-assange-extradition-wife-strip-search-b2107553.html >“His own cell was searched. They were looking for things that could be used to take one’s own life. This makes it seem like this is going to be another "suicide". Remember how the Russians were accusing Ukrainians of what Russians were doing? That tactic works.

>>61230 Exposed some truth. There's obviously great overreach with creation of unethical secrecy, and I suspect Assange did absolutely necessary work.

>>61230 He is a known criminal hacker in Australia, crimes to which he has plead guilty. He deliberately evaded arrest in Sweden for alleged sex crimes. He is charged by the US of violating the Espionage act. The first one can be mostly forgotten about. The second one perhaps is a ploy to capture him for the last. As far as I can see there's a very strong argument that he violated the Espionage act, and collaborated with americans to do so. He appears to have solicited leaks of classified information, including from such persons as Bradley Manning, who was himself convicted under the Espionage act. If you support his cause, what arguments can you make ? >he dindu nuffin lol ok he's on record numerous times claiming to have done what he's accused of doing. >he's a sad poor hurt guy who's suffered so much already if I saw a murderer running from the cops get hit by a bus, I'd probably laugh. Assange should have been more careful before getting into this if he wasn't willing to accept getting burned. If you accept the claim he commited crimes, his suffering in confinement in the Embassy is nothing but Justice having a little fun with him. She's getting ready for the next course. >The rape accusation is false and exxagerated, even the swedes acknowledge this well then the swedes should be mighty embarassed then shouldn't they. >Assange isn't a US citizen He conspired with US citizens to commit crimes. He's not an enemy combatant, he's a citizen of an allied country which seems perfectly happy to ship him off to USA. >Muh Journalistic protections Maybe we're getting somewhere now, but if it seems like he actively solicited and caused leaks to happen and did so hoping to interfere with US military operations, its still quite possible he violated the Espionage act. Manning also released stuff in contribution to journalism and got convicted, it seems the courts agree that this was a crime. If Manning is a criminal, Assange is, too. >But the Espionage act is illegal, a clear violation of the First Ammendment, a ridiculous law that never should have been enacted and never should have been upheld. "Congress shall make now law [...] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press [...]." Espionage act, a law made by congress, abridges the freedom of speech and of the press. Not much else to say.

Let me drop some wisdom here for my young friends to benefit from. Hear my words. I've been reading your board, and it seems like there's some good people here. Lots of tech knowledge being shared and intelligent thoughts being expressed. Unfortunately this topic of Assange has you divided and arguing amongst each other. Which is exactly what was intended to happen, by the Script Writers who planned all this. Are you wise enough to recognize and accept the truth when it is finally presented to you, plain and simple? Or will it appear too foreign and mysterious to your media-steeped eyes, and will your brainwashing prove too powerful to be overcome? That is the true meaning of the "inform" vs "blue pill" metaphor, which we are about to explore in reality, right here in this post, here in this moment. Speaking of The Matrix...do you really believe that "The Wachowski Brothers", two mysterious "brothers" who came out of nowhere to bring us the "The Matrix" and have otherwise been living in complete obscurity, really did get a sex change operation, became "The Wachowski Sisters" (lol), and that the Matrix was actually about transgenderism all along, as they are now saying? At what point do you step back from all of this and realize you're being played? You think this argument you are having right now, with two sides pitted against each other, just happened by accident? That is was just an organic, natural evolution of the basically completely random news flow? No. That's what They want you to think, but reality doesn't work like that. None of this is random, or coincidence. Everything was planned to happen this way, and is continuing to happen according to a plan. All of the people involved--the news anchors, the officials, and yes, even Julian Assange himself--are actors, reading from a script written by a central committee. It's all fake. None of it is real. In 2012, the "Smith-Mundt Modernization Act" was passed in the U.S. Congress which made it completely legal, for the first time, to broadcast propaganda to U.S. citizens. Of course, the Three Letter types had already been doing that all along, since long before they took control over the U.S. government after WW2. But now since 2012 it's *completely legal* for them to completely make up fake stories based on nothing at all, or to twist and distort the "facts" in any self-serving way they please, and broadcast it on the daily news and pretend like they're telling the truth. Happens every day, all day, on every "news" network. "Fake news" is redundant; almost ALL news is fake. Whatever or whoever Assange may have been in the beginning, it's clear he is now under U.S. control and has been for a long time. All of this "on the run from the law" business is just theater. It's drama, to keep the masses stirred up and arguing with each other. For all we know, Assange could have died in 2014 when he was poisoned by a hit squad or something, and all of the "news" about him since has been totally fake, only meant to toy with people's minds. Or maybe he was working for the Three Letter Folks since the beginning and all of this has been just an act. The rabbit hole goes deep. Snowden works for the same people too, FYI. By the way, the "rabbit hole" expression comes from Alice in Wonderland. The white rabbit tattoo in the Matrix is also an obvious Alice in Wonderland reference. What we are talking about here is exactly the sort of thing the story Alice in Wonderland is talking about. The author was an Insider, revealing deep truths about our present reality, just as the Matrix authors were. Reality is NOT as it appears on the surface. Each of you reads articles on your favorite propaganda site or Youtube channel, fitting it into your current "knowledge", which is itself derived from a lifetime of media indoctrination. Every one of these thousands of "independent" "news" organizations--all owned by the same five major media megaconglomerates--presents a biased viewpoint subtly tailored to their specific audience, and each of you finds your way to an outlet that fits with your specific biases and life experience. And if you think you're the exception to that rule, that you're the exception who's found some kind of outlet that is telling the *real* truth and not the mainstream lies, you are among one of the most dangerously ignorant. Everyone in this game now is owned by the Same People. So having absorbed all of these lies from your favorite liar and thinking you know what's up, you get on forums like this to argue amongst yourselves, as if you are each teaching the other idiot something, when in fact you are all equally brainwashed and deceived. Your time and energy is wasted in these neverending arguments which were specifically *designed* to keep people at each other's throats. Meanwhile the puppetmasters behind the scenes laugh, and grow in riches and power with every year.

>>61233 I hate to break it to you, anon, but the Espionage Act is a law directed at US citizens. Not only did Assange do what numerous US journalists have already done without seeing a day in prison, but he's also not a US citizen. Curious how you think this law has any jurisdiction on the rest of the planet.

>>61233 Various reasons for why each of those points is not considered valid have already been given throughout the thread by different posters. I encourage you to read it. I suspect you are deliberately strawmanning just to bait. In case you are genuine, I would like to add to what you might learn reading the thread that you seem to hold USA law as inherently moral and therefore it is the obligation of every moral person to follow it uncritically in every circumstance. The writers of USA law are human. They have selfish interests and moral failings that can of course result in immoral laws.

>>61237 pretty much this, you can't lift up a rock without finding someone posted this soykaf propaganda on any platform, and i'm not even from the US. just stf.u for once and think before throwing more fuel into yet another machine of nonsense, like ants on an antmill

>>61233 >He deliberately evaded arrest in Sweden for alleged sex crimes. He was never charged with a crime. The Swedish authorities deliberately didn't allow the case to move forward-- he absolutely *could* have been convicted while he was in that embassy, and his lawyers tried several times to make that possible. The thing is that the case was far too flimsy to stick, neither of the people whom he supposedly assaulted actually accused him of it. >If you support his cause, what arguments can you make ? I believe that he has not actually done anything wrong. I don't care if he violated US law; I believe that if the law forbids you from acting ethically (such as unveiling war crimes) , it is ethically right to break the law. Therefore whether he is guilty of something or other under the espionage act is completely irrelevant. >if I saw a murderer running from the cops get hit by a bus, I'd probably laugh Would you do the same if you saw a man running out of a building saying "there are murderers in there!"?

>>61233 sham >>61237 sham

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Threat_Research_Intelligence_Group this is sort of meta about this place, I guess

>>61237 Nice pasta glitterboy, bet you like to hear your own voice, tell me about how assange is collaborating with the tranny lizardmen some more plz >>61242 IIRC he and manning collaborated to conduct the largest leak in US history. US Citizen or not, he is still in violation of laws, and if he ever steps foot on US soil, he's bound for a good time in prison. Extradition is a curious subject more fitting of an international studies angle. I would look at it from that stand point, because it is clear that what he did is clearly illegal in the united states as whistleblowing =/= leaking even though many people get the two confused. Manning was a whistleblower, and genuinely cared. Assange got ahold of mannings info and got it out to the world. There were systems in place that manning could have used, but he went to assange (a crime). Intelligence whistleblowing is handled differently than normal public whistleblowing. Also legally, being in an intelligence field you cannot disclose what you know, unless you are using internal regulatory systems to report unethical systems or abuse (to keep the public from knowing). As much as most people want information to be free, secrecy is what keeps a lot of things running smoothly. >Whistleblower protection laws and regulations guarantee freedom of speech for workers and contractors in certain situations. Whistleblowers are protected from retaliation for disclosing information that the employee or applicant reasonably believes provides evidence of a violation of any law, rule, regulation, gross mismanagement, gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety >>61243 > to hold USA law as inherently moral and therefore it is the obligation of every moral person US law is not what is being debated here, what is being debated is the US aquisition of someone who broke it's rules. The law may not be moral by your particular standards, but to most Americans, the law seems applicable to this case, hence Assange being prosecuted under US law is appropriate. He did, after all, violate US Laws by illegally getting his hands on US intelligence data, and then dumped it onto an easily accessible website for the whole world to see.

>>61282 >The law may not be moral by your particular standards Yes. The law is not moral by my particular standards. >but to most Americans, the law seems applicable to this case Highly debatable. I would need the citation of a credible source on that. In any case, we're just going in circles at this point. I reject any defense of what is being done to Assange that defers to the authority of US, or any other, law. >He did, after all, violate US Laws by illegally getting his hands on US intelligence data Debatable. Read the thread. > dumped it onto an easily accessible website for the whole world to see Published it. Yes. As is his obligation as a journalist. You are taking points that have already been refuted in the thread, not addressing them and re-stating the points that were being refuted.

>>61282 >US law is not what is being debated here, what is being debated is the US aquisition of someone who broke it's rules. The law may not be moral by your particular standards, but to most Americans, the law seems applicable to this case, hence Assange being prosecuted under US law is appropriate. He did, after all, violate US Laws by illegally getting his hands on US intelligence data, and then dumped it onto an easily accessible website for the whole world to see. If someone dumped a load of russian documents showing russian war crimes in ukraine would you insist that this person is given back to russia to spend the rest of their lives in jail because they broke a russian law?

>>61090 very good question also, other question: why did they attack the panama papers leaks? why did they withdraw the emals from the republican party leak in 2016 election? they got them togheter with hillary's emails. why did wikileaks on twitter supported the conspiracy theory that seth rich leaked those emails, which is factually false? The more time passes, the more assange seems not to be the freedom loving hacker he claims to be. Him and wikileaks at a poit must have been coopetd by russia, if not at the very beginning. He did good things at the beginning, tho.

>>61295 This whole post has [citation needed] slathered all over it. Especially the part about Republican emails.

>>61296 >This whole post has [citation needed] slathered all over it. I don't know what he's talking about either. He turned an abstract moral question into a "russia bad" NPC post just because russia was used as an example.

>>61295 >why did they attack the panama papers leaks? I don't know who "they" is supposed to be. Everyone attacked the panama papers. From western leaders to Putin and Zelensky, they are all included in the dump so of course they are all going to attack it together. >why did they withdraw the emals from the republican party leak in 2016 election? they got them togheter with hillary's emails. Why would they be "together"? From what I can tell some sources say they hacked both the DNC and RNC (which are separate organizations obviously) and then withheld the RNC data. Other sources say they tried but failed to get into the RNC servers. Either way, applying some light critical thinking to the situation, Trump was not a career politician he was a complete outsider so what relevant data existed to be leaked anyway? >why did wikileaks on twitter supported the conspiracy theory that seth rich leaked those emails, which is factually false? What is the evidence for saying it factually false? (Apart from everyone with a vested interest denying it.)

>>60891 that rape thing came from sweden and was discredited a long time ago, afaik they dropped it a while ago, probably just to smooth the path for julian to be delivered to the united states.

>>61295 >why did wikileaks on twitter supported the conspiracy theory that seth rich leaked those emails, which is factually false? Tell me you know nothing about the subject, without saying you know nothing about it. >conspiracy theory >which is factually false You're either ignorant of the subject to a stunning Dunning-Kruger level, or you are knowingly lying. Why do you presume to know more than those involved? Why do you presume to know more than top level intelligence officers? The data was leaked TWICE. First by DNC insider Seth "Bernie-Sanders-was-robbed-of-the-Democrat-nominattion-by-Hillary" Rich to Wikileaks. SECOND was a false flag leak to make it look like DNC was hacked. The idea was damage control of Seth's leak and if "under criminal investigation" nothing about it could be discussed, but Trump and the Russians could be smeared. Ironically, it was done by that Russian CEO of Crowdstrike (the company doing DNC infrastructure security). If you bothered to check the metadata on EITHER leak you'd know it was an inside job. Why are you too ignorant to you answer your own questions? Why didn't you follow the happenings as they happened? Why don't you go and do what you should have done at the time to find out what happened instead of asking here? > wikileaks at a poit must have been coopetd by russia, >must have Oh, that explains your post. You should have said you're into creative fantasy writing.

>>61242 this is false. Assange won't be the first non american tried under the espionage act, and if he's convicted he won't be the first convicted. See Alfred Zehe.

>>61116 Where were you expecting to find them? Twitter? Lol.

>>61285 >He did, after all, violate US Laws by illegally getting his hands on US intelligence data >Debatable. Read the thread. This is not debatable at all, he was not part of the intelligence field with a clearance or explicit permission to obtain or share those records.by every definition what he did was against the law. >>61294 My opinion is that you should know the risks of any action you take. it would be different if he was in belarus and russia wanted him and not in canada. He was in a country allied with the US and the US wants him. Its funny how nobody talks about snowden who last I recall literally got help from the russians from getting arrested in the US.

>>61355 the basic premise of law is it only applies if you operate in said country. Weed being illegal in germany doesn't criminalize you in us. In fact germans even jump over the border to netherlands to smoke and go back without getting vanned. So its not about legality. What it really is is eu countries being basically once again provinces of the new roman empire USA. You can see this in what happens when US mil breaks patents of eu countries - nothing happens.

>>61360 this is an absurd claim that few governments seriously believe. It so happens that they do not particularly care about many things they'd consider crimes at home when done abroad, but particularly in cases of serious crimes there's not much determination to have them prosecuted where they occured. The chinese in particular preffer to prosecute their own citizens, and chinks who've commited murders abroad, or murderers of chinks, have been prosecuted in Chinkistan with cooperation of their respective governments. The US explicitly declares its intent to prosecute Americans who travel overseas and commit some types of crime, such as having sex with minors, even if they're legal where the crime occured. What you say generally works out to be true, but there are exceptional cases. I see no reason why Assange's case shouldn't be one of them.

>>61364 Sure if there was no interest it wouldn't happen, that is universally true but the crux is still its only possible because us > eu. Laws only matter in so far as you can enforce them and we see them broken one sided which reinforces that its literally a matter of power dynamic and not whatever laws someone has. Kim dotcom comes here also to mind as another example. Not an american but they still got to raid and abduct him for trial in their own court.

>>61365 >Sure if there was no interest it wouldn't happen, that is universally true but the crux is still its only possible because us > eu. >Laws only matter in so far as you can enforce them yes this is always and obviously true. and we see them broken one sided which reinforces that its >literally a matter of power dynamic and not whatever laws someone has. >the crux is its only possible because us > eu I don't think its inconcievable that if there were an, lets say Australian equivalent of Assange; a US citizen who's exposed Aussie secrets in violation of written Aussie laws, the US might happily extradite him, if not it would probably prosecute him at home. US, British Empire, and EU are allies, they have treaties and obligations to eachother and regard eachother as holders of common interests. Its not simply a case of the US being stronger. Lets also remember that for years and years Assange lived in a particular known building, which he never left, in a city controlled by the BE. The Brits could have broken him out. The Americans could have killed him even without British authorization. But they let the thin walls of the Embassy of a minor South American country stop them. There's some element of civilizational restraint going on; its not just strongarming. Of course then the Equatorians sold him out for more than 10 billion dollars. >Kim dotcom comes here also to mind as another example. Not an american but they still got to raid and abduct him for trial in their own court. sure, and what about so many wars, the US (if we beleive the official stories) invaded Afganistan to execute a non US citizen who cooperated with others to commit crimes in the US while he himself was not in the country. In some respects its a very similar situation to with assange. Or when the Brits invaded France and Germany for crimes commited in continental Europe. A great number of wars can be interpreted as enforcement of laws abroad, and diplomacy, which won Assange from the Equatorians, is war by other means.

>>61360 I'm pretty sure that in any NATO country it is illegal to be an enemy of the state of any other NATO country. I may be wrong though. Certainly in the 50s, Assange would have just been assassinated and that would be that.

I pirated documentary ithaka, about Assange. Seems interesting so far.

I endured similar tactics used by state in Belgium for child sex abuse scandals. Such as defamed spotlight on me, before I could expose anything. After elaborate torture, which is psychological mutilation. People didn't appear to consider the mutilated individual appears strange because of mutilation. I keep getting misdiagnosed with "psychosis", it's PTSD, i'm a terribly mutilated individual, from childhood. Organization of "psychosis" is part of the mutilations inflicted on me. The presentation about the Chinese treatment of Uyghurs for example is unfortunately hypocritical, I was forced to accept faith, I was forced to renounce reality. We lack this presentation about inland. I suspect child sex abuse was intentional use of weapons against "leftism" in my case.

>>61456 how big is your ego lain. You're injecting your story into every thread where you can possibly shoehorn it. Say something interesting about assange would you ? Rather than repeat the same shpeel about your own self. Its like you need your own containment board. You're worse than a trpfg.

>>61457 I'm fighting for my life. My life has been assaulted. I have few options. It's like they know what they do works, and you confirmed it.

>>61457 Me again. People are insanely mutilated for presentation of scandals in the west and you don't give a soykaf? There's nothing I can do, judicial system is sham. I'm not generating media for you to consume, I'm fighting for my life.