Trump Clears Way For Julian Assange Pardon

You're jealous of his youthful good looks and lots of blond hair aincha?

 

Don't know too much about this dude except that he's a whistleblower and entities like the CIA hate whistleblowers. Saw a documentary the other day in which he helped Snowden escape his pursuers. Seems like a "stand-up" guy to me, and am glad The Donald is considering pardoning him. He deserves pardoning more (IMO) than the likes of arc-criminal Marc Rich.

 

If you knew anything about him you would know that Trump can't pardon him because he hasn't been convicted of anything in an American court. He is a very long way from a 'stand up guy'.

 

I speak plainly. As do you. And yet you seem to have a problem with that.

I think it is clear that he intensely disliked Hilary. It's not the same thing as being a Trump supporter. (but evidence your claim if you wish to pursue this?) I also intensely disliked Hilary and her war party and yet have zero time for Trump.

I actually agree that redaction should've been done and I suspect Assange learned from that - his outfit is not the NYT's and is largely volunteer, so mistakes in judgement are inevitable. I doubt it'll happen again. And as Cerberus said earlier there was no harm done

As for your "one you clearly support", clearly I don't. Perhaps you'll make sure of your facts next time before jumping in foot-in-mouth.

[/quote]Wikileaks long ago strayed from its core mission to become the vanity project of one man. Sadly there are far too many people who are happy to excuse his every action and stroke his bloated ego. I'm content not to be one of them.[/QUOTE]

This is a personal opinion, which of course, you're welcome to express, but it has no reality. The Vault 7 release was approx 9 months ago. Hilary's emails release was March 2016, less than two year's ago. There has been no "long ago" straying from its core mission to become vanity project.

 

Yeah, I said I didn't know too much about the guy. The title of the thread implies a pardon is forthcoming. Gotta disagree with your assessment of the guy though, bigfella. He, and other whistle blowers put their lives on the line to expose the truth. Very often exposing sinister and diabolical truths at that. I put Harry Markapolis in this category. He tried to expose Bernie Madoff but no one would listen.

 

"A Trump always pays his (political) debts"

 

Ot seems, from an Aussie perspective, that the movie "carch me if you can" starring Leonardo Dicaprio was based on a true story. If that was a precedence then my gellow aussie should get a pardon PLUS a job at the pentagon. Job done.
Oh, but he should remain an aussie. He's rebellious.

 

What was learned from Ellsberg, Manning, Snowden, Binney and quite a few others rather greatly offsets your claim. The military has a long record of deception.

As General Butler said in the last century, war is a racket. The military and the government in general deceives on a regular basis. Rationalize it anyway you wish, but we civilians are treated like mushrooms, if you know what I mean.

 

Do you think the public should be shown all of the gruesome stuff that happens on the battlefield, or just the mistakes that make their military look bad?

 

In war, control of information is crucial. I think this is part of the reason the US hasn't won a war since WWII - except for Iraq, a victory Obama threw away.

 

That's nothing. The US has not even declared war in accordance with constitutional provisions since WWII. What's your point?

 

My point was/is: In war, control of information is crucial.

 

The US were there supposedly to free the Iraqi population from Saddam, not murder them as dead and injured civilians are attempted to be rescued by other civilians. BTW the Iraqi population already knew years before the wiki leaks released the videos what your military were doing - it is the US population that were kept in the dark. ROE were rarely followed during all your wars

 

That was supposed to be an answer to my question??

 

I know people who knew him personally when he was living in Australia. Some of them are strong supporters of his actions. Not one of them would describe him as a 'stand up guy'. I'll take their assessment & the assessment of others who have had dealing with him.

 

You can argue that as a tactical necessity in a time of war. It's a far more problematical to hide controversial and/or illegal decisions/actions years later. But as we know from many different cases over the decades nations regularly use the classification system to conceal embarrassment and wrongdoing.

 

I think those things that are clearly illegal should be made public and applaud Assange and Wikileaks for doing that. In the case of the gunship killingss, those responsible should, in my view, have been sent for court martial.

Apart from this the vast bulk of what Assange has published to date is not about battlefield actions, but other criminal activities or actions that they public should have a right to know, as it's mostly being done in their name.

 

Why would he want to give evidence that his source was not Russia? He's already said too much.

If your spying abilities were so good that you knew the source had to be one of 5 different possibilities, why would a man sworn to protect his sources want to narrow it down to 4? Whatever source it might be has nothing to do with his credibility or any sort of "crime". It's purely a matter for American, political idiocy. What good did it do when Obama produced his birth certificate? None.

 

He didn't help anyone. All he did was discredit someone.

 

Neither is the core of the subject. You vote and support, right? How you vote and who you support depends upon what it is you think you know. Your taxes are spent accordingly. Correct? I was a Vietnam Veteran Against the War. But the American population booed us, slandered us, and even threw rocks at us. We were run roughshod by the police as well. Still today there are many who slander us. Why is that? Do you know? Is it because of political propaganda? The more we know the better equipped we are to make sensible decisions. But censorship and propaganda are working against us. Hasn't that has ALWAYS been true?

 

His source was not Russia. The record has already been established about this. It was a "leak" not a "hack" from inside the DNC. And the leaker handed his data stick to former UK Ambassador Craig Murray who passed it on to Assange. Murray went on the record to publicly confirm this last Summer.

The whole Russia sourced Wikileaks fad is a deflection.

 

My reply is to One Mind who apparently doesn't know any of that. In any case, it isn't really at all important if Russia did or didn't and Assange ought not to have responded to the question. In doing so he took a step outside of his pledge to total secrecy.

 

I don't know but if a Kabuki dancer leaker can get pardoned, Assange ought to get pardoned.

 

It's all a balls up. He didn't rape anyone in Sweden. The women in question say so. It's the Swedish courts that are henching for the US and the UK who are henching for Sweden. So Sweden has dropped the the whole thing but because the UK wanted him for questioning they are prepared to charge him for resisting. So whether or not he did the crime in Sweden he is still technically guilty of not turning himself in to the coppers in the UK. The thing is, no one can be trusted. The UK might turn him over to Sweden as protocol requires and from there ..... it's off to a life sentence in Guantanamo. I don't know if anyone here on the forum realizes it but Sweden has yet to refuse extradition by clandestine CIA planes. No matter Sweden's former reputation, our government cannot be trusted to follow even our own laws.