Opinion Should WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange Be Jailed?

?


  • Total voters
    99
I would prefer the information be released without it impacting innocent bystanders.

Bradley Manning was rightfully court marshaled as he was an active duty service member when he provided classified information to a non-state actor.
*martialed
 
Maybe I misread you.
Are you contending there are no secrets the government can legally keep from the American public?
The analogy is directly apt in the sense of limitations.

It's the lying i'm talking about. Sure the people don't need a copy of the schematics of the new nuclear warheads (that would be fire in the theatre) or need to know the rules of engagement for covert operations. However saying one thing then doing another it's perfectly reasonable to want to know your representatives actual thoughts and actions.
 
It's the lying i'm talking about. Sure the people don't need a copy of the schematics of the new nuclear warheads (that would be fire in the theatre) or need to know the rules of engagement for covert operations. However saying one thing then doing another it's perfectly reasonable to want to know your representatives actual thoughts and actions.
Sure, and I agree.
But I also accept that any government has to actively keep knowledge from its citizens.
I think the government would have kept the knowledge of the extent of the sweep to a minimum if they could have.

Thinking through history, I can come up with just a LOT of things I'm glad the public never knew about. Manhattan Project being one, and all it would have taken to fuck the whole thing up was a good journalist who insisted "the public has a right to know!"

Situationally, I disagree.
 
Sure, and I agree.
But I also accept that any government has to actively keep knowledge from its citizens.
I think the government would have kept the knowledge of the extent of the sweep to a minimum if they could have.

Thinking through history, I can come up with just a LOT of things I'm glad the public never knew about. Manhattan Project being one, and all it would have taken to fuck the whole thing up was a good journalist who insisted "the public has a right to know!"

Situationally, I disagree.

Richard Feynman used to drive the Russian spy tasked with collecting information on the project into the base. If you read his book he talks about the secrecy being a bane on the project (Surely you are kidding Mr Feynman is the name of the book), it was his pushing for less secrecy that got the job done better and more efficiently. As the engineers were told nothing as it was so secret. Once they knew what they were doing it all progressed better.

Also the censorship was voluntary not imposed. Big difference.Plus we were in the middle of a world war. Not quite equivalent to what's happening now.

What do you think would have happened if it became public knowledge?

Finally a quick google search shows it had loads of leaks the manhattan project someone has compiled a list of them

http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2013/09/20/worst-manhattan-project-leaks/
 
If Hillary deserves to be jailed for merely having classified emails on her private server, Assange deserves to be jailed for longer for the amount of classified and stolen material he actually published.

I would prefer the information be released without it impacting innocent bystanders.

Bradley Manning was rightfully court marshaled as he was an active duty service member when he provided classified information to a non-state actor.

Assange is not a US citizen. Meanwhile Bradley Manning was a US soldier releasing classified info.

Why are you comparing the two?

Assange is under no obligation to the US to not release stories that are embarrassing to the administration.

Secondly, the alleged "sexual assault" charges against him are trumped up and not actually sexual assault. If anybody bothered to look into it, it is obvious the charges are BS.

It's not even sexual assault, but rather "sex by surprise." Based on some archaic law from the 18th Century. For not using a condom during CONSENSUAL sex.

He had CONSENSUAL sex with a woman in Sweden and later on that night, he banged her again without a condom. The Swedish government was PRESSURED by the US to charge Assange only for QUESTIONING.

Sweden initially didn't think anything was there. And the woman involved in the case also didn't want to press any charges.

It's just the US politically pressuring Sweden to extradite him on this BS charge, so they can snatch him during transit. That's why he's still hiding in the embassy.
 
Assange is not a US citizen. Meanwhile Bradley Manning was a US soldier releasing classified info.

Why are you comparing the two?

Assange is under no obligation to the US to not release stories that are embarrassing to the administration.

Secondly, the alleged "sexual assault" charges against him are trumped up and not actually sexual assault. If anybody bothered to look into it, it is obvious the charges are BS.

It's not even sexual assault, but rather "sex by surprise." Based on some archaic law from the 18th Century. For not using a condom during CONSENSUAL sex.

He had CONSENSUAL sex with a woman in Sweden and later on that night, he banged her again without a condom. The Swedish government was PRESSURED by the US to charge Assange only for QUESTIONING.

Sweden initially didn't think anything was there. And the woman involved in the case also didn't want to press any charges.

It's just the US politically pressuring Sweden to extradite him on this BS charge, so they can snatch him during transit. That's why he's still hiding in the embassy.

Releasing materials belonging to the US government immediately puts Assange under the jurisdiction of the US government even if he is not a US citizen. The information was stolen through multiple methods of clandestine attacks.

You're basically saying it's ok for non-citizens to commit crimes against the US and there should be no repercussion.
 
Can you then point to one specific instance of corruption exposed by Wikileaks that was worth endangering the lives of innocent US personnel?

Can you then point to one specific instance life endangerment by a Wikileaks story?
 
Releasing materials belonging to the US government immediately puts Assange under the jurisdiction of the US government even if he is not a US citizen. The information was stolen through multiple methods of clandestine attacks.

You're basically saying it's ok for non-citizens to commit crimes against the US and there should be no repercussion.

The NY Times also released the same exact materials as Assange. Why aren't they being prosecuted?

Secondly, the US has no legal ground to stand on to charge Assange. Otherwise, why haven't they done it? That's why they are seeking extradition based on some trumped up sex charge.
 
Can you then point to one specific instance life endangerment by a Wikileaks story?

Just one of the leaks;

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/10/22/wikileaks.iraq/index.html

The U.S. military is notifying Iraqis named in the documents, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell told CNN.

"There are 300 names of Iraqis in here that we think would be particularly endangered by their exposure," he said. "We have passed that information on to U.S. Forces Iraq. They are in the process right now of contacting those Iraqis to try to safeguard them."
 
The NY Times also released the same exact materials as Assange. Why aren't they being prosecuted?

Secondly, the US has no legal ground to stand on to charge Assange. Otherwise, why haven't they done it? That's why they are seeking extradition based on some trumped up sex charge.

They were seeking a way to extradite Assange because he was hiding out in an embassy that we did not have an extradition treaty with so they COULD charge him formally.

I would assume they would pursue him under the Espionage Act like they did to Manning once in custody except he won't get his sentence shortened.
 
I was disappointed Assange didn't face up to the rape charges, but I don't think he should be imprisoned by the US Government for anything he's said or released.
 
If Hillary deserves to be jailed for merely having classified emails on her private server, Assange deserves to be jailed for longer for the amount of classified and stolen material he actually published.
Excuse my interjection, but it is clear to me that you think Assange deserves to be jailed, but it is unclear to me whether you think Hillary Clinton deserves to be jailed.

Does Hillary Clinton deserve to be jailed?
 
Excuse my interjection, but it is clear to me that you think Assange deserves to be jailed, but it is unclear to me whether you think Hillary Clinton deserves to be jailed.

Does Hillary Clinton deserve to be jailed?

I'd say merely having classified information without disseminating it is an exponentially far less severe crime especially if it was not intentional and I accept the FBI's judgement on the matter.
 
Let's see the charges. My guess is yes, it's very likely that he'll be rightfully put away.
 
I'd say merely having classified information without disseminating it is an exponentially far less severe crime especially if it was not intentional and I accept the FBI's judgement on the matter.
Did Kristian Saucier deserve to be jailed?
 
Did Kristian Saucier deserve to be jailed?

Another completely different and exponentially worse crime than what Hillary did.

Nuclear submarines are vital national security interests and he should have known better.

Taking the photos was dumb to begin with then he lost it for someone else to find.

"At sentencing, Saucier unsuccessfully argued for probation rather than imprisonment on the basis that Hillary Clinton was not indicted for her email controversy. Saucier's lawyers acknowledged that the two cases were different: Saucier admitted knowing that what he was doing was illegal."
 
Another completely different and exponentially worse crime than what Hillary did.

Nuclear submarines are vital national security interests and he should have known better.

Taking the photos was dumb to begin with then he lost it for someone else to find.
Where any vital national security interests in Hillary's emails that were lost for someone else to find?
 
Back
Top