Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Gio]

Samc wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 15:16

Paul Cavins wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 01:57 "Gaming the system"--In saying that I mean breaking the "rules", or using all means necessary. He facilitated in violating the "privacy" of the State Department of the USA, among other entities. (Thanks to Mr. Manning). "Rigging the system" is the game that Assange is all about. That's why I laugh at him for lamenting those tactics being used against him. Do you get it? He is acting outside of the rules, so then those who act against him also act outside the rules. I know you sympathize with his aims. Can you suspend your feelings about him to get the concept? He has no expectation of fair play from his adversaries, as he does not believe in fair play. GET IT? The one thing I get is that the US and several other governments (with all the resources available to them) have not been able to even charge this man with a single crime or infraction!  Any vaguely intelligent and rational person would come to the reasonable and logical conclusion that this is so because he has not committed a crime or infraction, and yet, here you are declaring him guilty of committing several crimes and breaking all kinds of rules...."He facilitated in violating the "privacy" of the State Department of the USA, among other entities"...This is incredible!!! Declaring that anyone should not expect fair play from the governments of progressive, democratic countries is ridiculous, the law and constitution of every progressive country that I know, specifically forbid the government from acting outside the law... I am really amazed that someone would not immediately see the danger in allowing the government to behave in this manner.

Now hold on there..... Did he or did he not obtain private communications between government personnel and distribute them worldwide? Can I hack your email, or read my wife's diary then?
People scream for privacy yet want an all access pass too.

Which is it?

[bblackwood]

Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 19:29

Now hold on there..... Did he or did he not obtain private communications between government personnel and distribute them worldwide? Can I hack your email, or read my wife's diary then? People scream for privacy yet want an all access pass too. Which is it?

Specifically, what laws did Assange break? Did he hack the data or simply post it?

Big difference, according to the SCOTUS...

[Gio]

How did he get it?

If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it?

[Samc]

Gio wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 01:40

How did he get it? If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it?

Apples and oranges man, I'm sure the state department used a lot of resources to go over this with a fine tooth comb and have yet to charge him with a crime.

I will ask the question again; What crime did he commit?  You have to answer this question first before you lock him up and throw away the key.

Why in the world are you not pissed about the less than stellar behavior of the government, I personally find that to be very dangerous.

[Tidewater]

He didn't have to actually break a law for me to want his ass kicked, did he?

I am a hater. So be it.

He isn't the only thing that deserves a beating. He's a punk though!

[Samc]

Gio wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 01:29

People scream for privacy yet want an all access pass too. Which is it?

Do you seriously not understand the difference between the personal privacy of a private citizen and what's happening here?

The propaganda machine must really be working...

[bblackwood]

Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 19:40

How did he get it? If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it?

What if you give me a picture of the car you stole? What am I guilty of then?

C'mon, man up - what law has Assange broken?

Personally, I think he's a douche, but that's not illegal in and of itself where I'm from...

[Gio]

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:43

Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 19:40 How did he get it? If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it? What if you give me a picture of the car you stole? What am I guilty of then?

Now we're treading the same waters piracy advocates swim in.

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:43

C'mon, man up - what law has Assange broken? Personally, I think he's a douche, but that's not illegal in and of itself where I'm from...

Well, if he was a US citizen, treason comes to mind, but I guess because he's an international "journalist" it's OK.

If we're going to "out" people, then do it across the board, private citizens included. The possible interpretation of this is where I see danger.

Maybe I'm a douche too....

[bblackwood]

Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:03

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:43 Gio wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 19:40 How did he get it? If I give you a car that I stole, do you have the right to drive it? What if you give me a picture of the car you stole? What am I guilty of then? Now we're treading the same waters piracy advocates swim in. bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 22:43  C'mon, man up - what law has Assange broken? Personally, I think he's a douche, but that's not illegal in and of itself where I'm from... Well, if he was a US citizen, treason comes to mind, but I guess because he's an international "journalist" it's OK. If we're going to "out" people, then do it across the board, private citizens included. The possible interpretation of this is where I see danger. Maybe I'm a douche too....

Look, it's simple - if he's guilty of a crime, tell me what it is. Equating his actions with piracy is a stretch at best, so tell me, specifically, what he did that broke the law.

Keep in mind the SCOTUS rulings regarding this exact sort of thing...

[Samc]

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 04:40

Look, it's simple - if he's guilty of a crime, tell me what it is. Equating his actions with piracy is a stretch at best, so tell me, specifically, what he did that broke the law. Keep in mind the SCOTUS rulings regarding this exact sort of thing...

It's very simple for me, had he broken the law he would have been charged a long time ago, I have no doubt that several lawyers went over this with a fine tooth comb...

[jonathan jetter]

i agree with Sam and Brad.  Mr.  Assange has been on everyone's radar for quite some time now.  if there was an easy way to lock him up, i'm sure the DOJ would have taken action by now.

it may not be the type of journalism that you're used to, but it is journalism.  it is the release of information to the public, and honestly with far less opinionated bias than most other media sources.  

also....to echo what Sam said.  we absolutely have the right, and the duty, to insist that nations obey their own laws.  we have just been force-fed so much propaganda for so long that it no longer angers the common person when the politicians or the super-wealthy elite reinvent laws to suit their own whims.

last but not least...i want to reiterate that, even if the Espionage Act was applicable (i don't think it is, but i'm not a lawyer), the overwhelming majority of paragraphs in its text specifically state that it is only operative in times of war.  and the politicians have for many decades now been reaping the benefits of never making formal declarations of war.

[bblackwood]

Worth reading for those not familiar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_St ates

[Hallams]

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 23 December 2010 23:33

Worth reading for those not familiar:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_St ates

Just thought i would Post this from the above link:

New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court per curiam decision. The ruling made it possible for the New York Times and Washington Post newspapers to publish the then-classified Pentagon Papers without risk of government censure.

President Richard Nixon had claimed executive authority to force the Times to suspend publication of classified information in its possession. The question before the court was whether the constitutional freedom of the press, guaranteed by the First Amendment, was subordinate to a claimed need of the executive branch of government to maintain the secrecy of information. The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did protect the right of the New York Times' to print the materials.

[Bill_Urick]

WTF?

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2374683,00.asp

[MDM,]

The government has a right to restrict 'sharing' of information if it causes a danger to the state's population or army, primarily during a War.

this is why we are living in a constant pseudo-war with terrorist 'threats' looming around the corner.

take the war away and you can report on almost any government activity..

now, if you have substantially large and corrupt entities within the government, who are committing all sorts of acts of treason, fraud etc. then it's logical that a huge amount of resources will be spent on keeping the war alive and kicking... and restricting free press.