Julian Assange surrounded by police.

[HairyCunt]

How is he being ridiculous? Sure, maybe Ecuador is being massively hypocritical, but so what? That doesn't at all detract from anything else he said. And they do have balls for doing this, regardless of their motives.

If you don't think this statement is ridiculous,

"Wikileaks is an eye opener and even if you are American its human to support the truth and not the lie you live in, in expense of other peoples' lives. Patriotism is the security of the rich man. Fuck that. "

I can't explain anymore to you.  It is exactly the kind of paranoid ramblings of someone who thinks the US is behind a global conspiracy and Wikileaks is the light bringer.

[holden caulfield]

It was more of the fact that you directly followed that statement by rambling on about Ecuador. As if Ecuador's own shortcomings were an adequate response to what he said.

[Donkey Lips]

Oh shit - hc and HC are going at it. Place your bets.

[weedpop]

How is he being ridiculous? Sure, maybe Ecuador is being massively hypocritical, but so what? That doesn't at all detract from anything else he said. And they do have balls for doing this, regardless of their motives.

If you don't think this statement is ridiculous,

"Wikileaks is an eye opener and even if you are American its human to support the truth and not the lie you live in, in expense of other peoples' lives. Patriotism is the security of the rich man. Fuck that. "

I can't explain anymore to you.  It is exactly the kind of paranoid ramblings of someone who thinks the US is behind a global conspiracy and Wikileaks is the light bringer.

You know how you know when someone's full of shit? When they insist that they're right about something without actually being willing to explain why. Once again Harry writes an excellent post that has nothing to do with the original topic; another unfortunate symptom of being unable to mentally process information that contradicts your political beliefs.

so you don't believe there is such a thing as classified documents?

Having incredibly strict laws against the release of 'classified' documents means that all information that the government doesn't want public at the time is off-limits, regardless of whether it's actually dangerous or just "dangerous to the administration". As was stated, Assange edited the documents he received in order to not put anyone's life in danger, and the best justification you or harry crews could come up with was "they would totally execute him for this if this were Saudi Arabia/100 years ago". Ya they would do that kind of shit in a barbaric theocracy, but do you want America to be like Saudia Arabia?

I'm sorry, but if you are actually aware of how dishonest and secretive your government is but are still willing to protect their right to secrecy by having someone executed, you are a gigantic pussy and do not deserve to live in a democracy.

[Dontfearthereefer]

Weedpops, i believe it is called cognitive dissonance

[HairyCunt]

How is he being ridiculous? Sure, maybe Ecuador is being massively hypocritical, but so what? That doesn't at all detract from anything else he said. And they do have balls for doing this, regardless of their motives.

If you don't think this statement is ridiculous,

"Wikileaks is an eye opener and even if you are American its human to support the truth and not the lie you live in, in expense of other peoples' lives. Patriotism is the security of the rich man. Fuck that. "

I can't explain anymore to you.  It is exactly the kind of paranoid ramblings of someone who thinks the US is behind a global conspiracy and Wikileaks is the light bringer.

You know how you know when someone's full of shit? When they insist that they're right about something without actually being willing to explain why. Once again Harry writes an excellent post that has nothing to do with the original topic; another unfortunate symptom of being unable to mentally process information that contradicts your political beliefs.

so you don't believe there is such a thing as classified documents?

Having incredibly strict laws against the release of 'classified' documents means that all information that the government doesn't want public at the time is off-limits, regardless of whether it's actually dangerous or just "dangerous to the administration". As was stated, Assange edited the documents he received in order to not put anyone's life in danger, and the best justification you or harry crews could come up with was "they would totally execute him for this if this were Saudi Arabia/100 years ago". Ya they would do that kind of shit in a barbaric theocracy, but do you want America to be like Saudia Arabia?

I'm sorry, but if you are actually aware of how dishonest and secretive your government is but are still willing to protect their right to secrecy by having someone executed, you are a gigantic pussy and do not deserve to live in a democracy.

LOL Do you even know what a secretive, dishonest government is?  Go back and read my point on Ecuador.  

The fact that he hasn't disappeared is a testament to the US. He won't wont be executed he will most likely end up at ADX Florence.


Julian Assange is arrogant enough to think he is qualified above anyone else to decide what is going to be harmful to the public/government, proclaim to be a champion of government transparency and human rights, demands governments to be held accountable for their actions, then take refuge with Ecuador? That is laughable!


You know how else to tell someone is full of shit? They ignore strong arguments and respond with personal attacks. You choose to read what you like, if you go back and read my comments there is enough explanation in there, I'm not going to explain obvious points someone failed to understand the first time.

[weedpop]

Your so-called arguments are some of the most pathetic I've ever seen out of someone as evidently intelligent as you are.

It's characteristically hollow and self-serving of you to accuse people of personal attacks when using ad-hominem insults to paper over logical holes is pretty much your MO. Again, I'm not going to try to convince someone like yourself to change their beliefs are but do wish you would try reactivating the critical thinking portion of your brain occasionally.

[HairyCunt]

Your so-called arguments are some of the most pathetic I've ever seen out of someone as evidently intelligent as you are.

It's characteristically hollow and self-serving of you to accuse people of personal attacks when using ad-hominem insults to paper over logical holes is pretty much your MO. Again, I'm not going to try to convince someone like yourself to change their beliefs are but do wish you would try reactivating the critical thinking portion of your brain occasionally.

Yeah right!
 

[sleepypancakes]

Shut up, Victor.













Close enough.

[RCB3]

I keep coming here expecting a full fledged rant from the Gipper, but am sorely mistaken every time.

[Tufty]

I  think he's lucky to be even getting as much as he is. What do you think the punishment for leaking state secrets in most other countries is? Hello FSB car trunk to bullet in the head. You obviously know nothing about diplomacy, a diplomat needs a level of classification in order to do his/her often delicate job efficiently. This guy knew what he was doing and can't deal with the consequences. Anyone who thinks what he did is "awesome" probably believes there is a NWO government trying to pull the wool over everyones eyes.

Hey genius, Wikileaks is owned by Assange but ran by many people and ON THE INTERNET. So killing him or disappearing him is not a clever move cause that will make wikileaks even stronger. So the best they can do is degrade him to sexual offender or whatever and hurt wikileaks reputation.

 I ve only read wikileaks articles that have to do with US interfering in my country and thats a good thing to know. Its funny how much they fear communists and its frustrating how many journalists, politicians and shit are paid by the US to promote their interests.

Wikileaks is an eye opener and even if you are American its human to support the truth and not the lie you live in, in expense of other peoples' lives. Patriotism is the security of the rich man. Fuck that.  

Ecuador has balls.

You're ridiculous. The government of Ecuador is establishing an authoritarian state, following closely the model of Venezuela. Rafael Correa has won a 40 million judgement in a defamation proceeding against the countries' major newspaper El Universo.  What is occuring there is the most comprehensive dismantling of the free media in the western hemisphere.  Correa has rewritten the constitution to his liking, so he could seat a new Supreme Court. The standing Supreme Court was abolished and through a new, convoluted selection process - controlled by the Executive, Correa got what he wanted - 13 of the new 21 judges are now in his pocket. In Argentina the same thing is happening with their press.

The only reason Ecuador is granting Assange asylum is to appear to fools to be a beacon of transparency.

 First of all you bolded the wrong segment, i think you missed the "Ecuador has balls"

 Secondly I have a very little knowledge of what happens in Ecuador statewise. The only thing i know is that Correa gave the middle finger to IMF and other American capitals  that the corrupted politicians of previous years allowed them to economically take over Ecuador. What you describe is what i would do in a country with a history of corrupted politicians, judges and journalists that favored American capitals to the people of Ecuador. So its not a suprise that i hear the same anti-communist propaganda (MADE IN USA). Argentina too. I know its too bad that Latin America is not anymore fully a colony of the US.

 Moreover Ecuador has balls regardless.

 Finally yeah American Western World Democracy. Free as long as your opinions and actions dont hurt our profits else you are fucked.

PS  You are ridiculous USA was once the best in establishing authoritarian governments in Latin America. Now they just corrupt democratic governments.

[David]

  You are ridiculous USA was once the best in establishing authoritarian governments in Latin America. Now they just corrupt democratic governments.

Woah. Keep that under your hat, now, will ya?

Nevermind, I'll keep it under mine.

[sleepypancakes]

I keep coming here expecting a full fledged rant from the Gipper, but am sorely mistaken every time.

School's starting back up, I expect Gip's got some shit to do

[HairyCunt]

I  think he's lucky to be even getting as much as he is. What do you think the punishment for leaking state secrets in most other countries is? Hello FSB car trunk to bullet in the head. You obviously know nothing about diplomacy, a diplomat needs a level of classification in order to do his/her often delicate job efficiently. This guy knew what he was doing and can't deal with the consequences. Anyone who thinks what he did is "awesome" probably believes there is a NWO government trying to pull the wool over everyones eyes.

Hey genius, Wikileaks is owned by Assange but ran by many people and ON THE INTERNET. So killing him or disappearing him is not a clever move cause that will make wikileaks even stronger. So the best they can do is degrade him to sexual offender or whatever and hurt wikileaks reputation.

 I ve only read wikileaks articles that have to do with US interfering in my country and thats a good thing to know. Its funny how much they fear communists and its frustrating how many journalists, politicians and shit are paid by the US to promote their interests.

Wikileaks is an eye opener and even if you are American its human to support the truth and not the lie you live in, in expense of other peoples' lives. Patriotism is the security of the rich man. Fuck that.  

Ecuador has balls.

You're ridiculous. The government of Ecuador is establishing an authoritarian state, following closely the model of Venezuela. Rafael Correa has won a 40 million judgement in a defamation proceeding against the countries' major newspaper El Universo.  What is occuring there is the most comprehensive dismantling of the free media in the western hemisphere.  Correa has rewritten the constitution to his liking, so he could seat a new Supreme Court. The standing Supreme Court was abolished and through a new, convoluted selection process - controlled by the Executive, Correa got what he wanted - 13 of the new 21 judges are now in his pocket. In Argentina the same thing is happening with their press.

The only reason Ecuador is granting Assange asylum is to appear to fools to be a beacon of transparency.

 First of all you bolded the wrong segment, i think you missed the "Ecuador has balls"

 Secondly I have a very little knowledge of what happens in Ecuador statewise. The only thing i know is that Correa gave the middle finger to IMF and other American capitals  that the corrupted politicians of previous years allowed them to economically take over Ecuador. What you describe is what i would do in a country with a history of corrupted politicians, judges and journalists that favored American capitals to the people of Ecuador. So its not a suprise that i hear the same anti-communist propaganda (MADE IN USA). Argentina too. I know its too bad that Latin America is not anymore fully a colony of the US.

 Moreover Ecuador has balls regardless.

 Finally yeah American Western World Democracy. Free as long as your opinions and actions dont hurt our profits else you are fucked.

PS  You are ridiculous USA was once the best in establishing authoritarian governments in Latin America. Now they just corrupt democratic governments.

LOL I can't argue with you on the first, you claim to know nothing about Ecuador statewise, which you prove with your follow-up statements. Let's not continue you're out of you're depth there. It's pointless, you clearly know nothing about the country, and South American politics in general.

As for the second point, the governments in modern Latin America corrupt themselves much better than any previous American intervention. You keep bringing up anti-communist propaganda, I'm not sure where you are going with that. Are you suggesting there is a campaign against Latin American governments because they are too left leaning? Please, it's not the 1950's, in actuality the US is reluctant to get involved these days in Latin America because of past blunders. The fact that you think a country like Venezuela is democratic is a joke, and then you fail to see why companies would not want to invest there. These countries aren't even communist, they're State Capitalist, with populist leaders. Really, they could only hope for Western investment.

[chockfullofthat]

I think Gip had a heart attack mid post and died.  HairyCunt killed Gip.

[brycickle]

Either that, or he stroked out when he saw that not only did Sleazy vote for Obama, but plans to vote for him again. His entire perception of reality, and people being able to hold two seemingly conflicting view points at the same time didn't mesh and made his brain explode.

[Tufty]

LOL I can't argue with you on the first, you claim to know nothing about Ecuador statewise, which you prove with your follow-up statements. Let's not continue you're out of you're depth there. It's pointless, you clearly know nothing about the country, and South American politics in general.

As for the second point, the governments in modern Latin America corrupt themselves much better than any previous American intervention. You keep bringing up anti-communist propaganda, I'm not sure where you are going with that.  Are you suggesting there is a campaign against Latin American governments because they are too left leaning? Please, it's not the 1950's, in actuality the US is reluctant to get involved these days in Latin America because of past blunders. The fact that you think a country like Venezuela is democratic is a joke, and then you fail to see why companies would not want to invest there. These countries aren't even communist, they're State Capitalist, with populist leaders. Really, they could only hope for Western investment.

 I bet that you dont know shit about Ecuador. On the contrary i told you i know very little.

I didnt mention shit about Venezuela but i am pretty sure that there is no authoritarian government in Ecuador and Argentina. Ecuador and argentina have social-democratic governments.
 

Are you suggesting there is a campaign against Latin American governments because they are too left leaning? Please, it's not the 1950's, in actuality the US is reluctant to get involved these days in Latin America because of past blunders.

AHHAOAHOAOHAOAHOAHOAHOAOHAOAHOAHOA. The republicans called OBAMA communist and spew their propagnada during the previous elections you are telling me that their Media are not gonna throw the communistic propaganda to "left wingers" in Latin America who are not behaving as they wish ??

 

[HairyCunt]

LOL I can't argue with you on the first, you claim to know nothing about Ecuador statewise, which you prove with your follow-up statements. Let's not continue you're out of you're depth there. It's pointless, you clearly know nothing about the country, and South American politics in general.

As for the second point, the governments in modern Latin America corrupt themselves much better than any previous American intervention. You keep bringing up anti-communist propaganda, I'm not sure where you are going with that.  Are you suggesting there is a campaign against Latin American governments because they are too left leaning? Please, it's not the 1950's, in actuality the US is reluctant to get involved these days in Latin America because of past blunders. The fact that you think a country like Venezuela is democratic is a joke, and then you fail to see why companies would not want to invest there. These countries aren't even communist, they're State Capitalist, with populist leaders. Really, they could only hope for Western investment.

 I bet that you dont know shit about Ecuador. On the contrary i told you i know very little.

I didnt mention shit about Venezuela but i am pretty sure that there is no authoritarian government in Ecuador and Argentina. Ecuador and argentina have social-democratic governments.
 

Are you suggesting there is a campaign against Latin American governments because they are too left leaning? Please, it's not the 1950's, in actuality the US is reluctant to get involved these days in Latin America because of past blunders.

AHHAOAHOAOHAOAHOAHOAHOAOHAOAHOAHOA. The republicans called OBAMA communist and spew their propagnada during the previous elections you are telling me that their Media are not gonna throw the communistic propaganda to "left wingers" in Latin America who are not behaving as they wish ??

 

You didn't mention Venezuela specifically, but did mention Latin America in general, when you said the US just corrupts modern democracies instead of installing regimes. Also, Ecuador and Argentina have Authoritarian governments that operate under the guise of Social Democracies with populist leaders, as these thing always do.  How far do you want to get into it?

As for Correa "giving the finger" to the IMF, as an example of his steadfast socialist ideology, one just has to look at who he is aligning himself with, it's not Sweden, Norway, or even Canada, instead he is cozying up to Hugo Chavez, Dimitry Medvedev, Hu Jintao etc. I think that says enough about his ambitions. Maybe you think it is just western media that makes those guys look bad, I don't know.

Sorry, I can't make sense of your second point.

[Sleazy]

How is he being ridiculous? Sure, maybe Ecuador is being massively hypocritical, but so what? That doesn't at all detract from anything else he said. And they do have balls for doing this, regardless of their motives.

If you don't think this statement is ridiculous,

"Wikileaks is an eye opener and even if you are American its human to support the truth and not the lie you live in, in expense of other peoples' lives. Patriotism is the security of the rich man. Fuck that. "

I can't explain anymore to you.  It is exactly the kind of paranoid ramblings of someone who thinks the US is behind a global conspiracy and Wikileaks is the light bringer.

You know how you know when someone's full of shit? When they insist that they're right about something without actually being willing to explain why. Once again Harry writes an excellent post that has nothing to do with the original topic; another unfortunate symptom of being unable to mentally process information that contradicts your political beliefs.

so you don't believe there is such a thing as classified documents?

Having incredibly strict laws against the release of 'classified' documents means that all information that the government doesn't want public at the time is off-limits, regardless of whether it's actually dangerous or just "dangerous to the administration". As was stated, Assange edited the documents he received in order to not put anyone's life in danger, and the best justification you or harry crews could come up with was "they would totally execute him for this if this were Saudi Arabia/100 years ago". Ya they would do that kind of shit in a barbaric theocracy, but do you want America to be like Saudia Arabia?

I'm sorry, but if you are actually aware of how dishonest and secretive your government is but are still willing to protect their right to secrecy by having someone executed, you are a gigantic pussy and do not deserve to live in a democracy.

i didn't say that he should be executed, i mentioned that "haven't people been executed" as a way of qualifying the level of crime that he was commiting under US law as a away of pointing out that he should have known better and now that the wrath is coming for him he should man up and stop being a pussy.

and fair enough. you don't feel governments have a right to classify information, i think it's not only a reasonable right but that it's one that every single government that's ever existed takes advantage of.

and we definitely widely differ in the notion that some creepy euro techno guy knows best what information is important to our national security

[Tufty]

 Well i dont want to get into these further cause you are clearly an avid right-winger and  right wingers have their own spectrum of reality that comes from right-wing sources. I like debating but I think there is no point in that with people like you. However i will make one last statement.

 I insist on Ecuador and Argentina having social democratic governments that i dont like either but for a different reason. Social democracies idelogically have one goal, to turn capitalism-democracy into socialism-democracy slowly. I believe that in that slow progress socialists get corrupted by capitals to abandon their goal so i am not confident about their future. However they are more democratic than the US thats 100% right.

 As for Correa's allies... First of all in the modern world you cant be alone cause its difficult to be self-sufficient. When u give the middle finger to IMF and US and EU capitals u cant be allied with the countries u mentioned because the EU and the US WONT LET YOU. I am sure many countries that are in the alliance of EU and US like more Correa than Germany and the US but they dont have the balls to criticize them or threaten them that will change team. I dont think Correa aggrees 100% with the bad people u mentioned but he has to be allied with someone so he goes with the other middle fingers givers. Most countries that are in the EU and US alliance dont like what the US or the EU is doin but they got to have allies......

 Well my point is as the crisis in the EU rises the communist approach gets more followers and anti-communism starts to be as relevant as it was in the 50s. Authoritorian state communism like the USSR is bad but its still better than the neo-liberal path we are getting into...  

 PS i am an anarchist and i dont like state organisation or the illusion of democracy we have for 100000000000 reasons. So get that in your head before you start saying i support authoritarian governments like Venezuela, Russia etc. or past communist regimes like the USSR. Although i support the communistic economic theory i dont like the idea of the state as it is known in all these years but thats a looooooooooooooooooooooong conversations and forbidden for closed minded right-wingers.

[svilleantigo]

"Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

[HairyCunt]

Well i dont want to get into these further cause you are clearly an avid right-winger and  right wingers have their own spectrum of reality that comes from right-wing sources. I like debating but I think there is no point in that with people like you. However i will make one last statement.

 I insist on Ecuador and Argentina having social democratic governments that i dont like either but for a different reason. Social democracies idelogically have one goal, to turn capitalism-democracy into socialism-democracy slowly. I believe that in that slow progress socialists get corrupted by capitals to abandon their goal so i am not confident about their future. However they are more democratic than the US thats 100% right.


As for Correa's allies... First of all in the modern world you cant be alone cause its difficult to be self-sufficient. When u give the middle finger to IMF and US and EU capitals u cant be allied with the countries u mentioned because the EU and the US WONT LET YOU. I am sure many countries that are in the alliance of EU and US like more Correa than Germany and the US but they dont have the balls to criticize them or threaten them that will change team. I dont think Correa aggrees 100% with the bad people u mentioned but he has to be allied with someone so he goes with the other middle fingers givers. Most countries that are in the EU and US alliance dont like what the US or the EU is doin but they got to have allies......

 Well my point is as the crisis in the EU rises the communist approach gets more followers and anti-communism starts to be as relevant as it was in the 50s. Authoritorian state communism like the USSR is bad but its still better than the neo-liberal path we are getting into...  

PS i am an anarchist and i dont like state organisation or the illusion of democracy we have for 100000000000 reasons. So get that in your head before you start saying i support authoritarian governments like Venezuela, Russia etc. or past communist regimes like the USSR. Although i support the communistic economic theory i dont like the idea of the state as it is known in all these years but thats a looooooooooooooooooooooong conversations and forbidden for closed minded right-wingers.

   BTW, Is English your second language? What grade are you in?

[Fairy Boy]

and we definitely widely differ in the notion that some creepy euro techno guy knows best what information is important to our national security

Sleazy, would you feel better about the role of Wikileaks if it was not him alone making decisions on what to release, but he instead worked with legitimate news agencies to determine what material needs to be redacted or omitted entirely?

I think everyone here understands that these types of leaks can be very damaging to national security, but if done carefully, what are your (also looking at you, HarryCrews) objections to properly-handled whistleblowing? From the arguments thus far, I'm having a hard time telling if the anti-Wikileaks guys are entirely against whistleblowing, or think it is being mishandled.

My opinion is that whistleblowing of this nature helps provide a sorely-needed balance to our increasingly large governments. Julian is doing the non-elites of the world a favor by exposing corruption. It may be true that someone else could do a better job, but I think we are better off for what he has done, and I hope there continues to be people like him willing to expose the shadier workings of our governments. Lord knows my balls aren't large enough.

[weedpop]

and we definitely widely differ in the notion that some creepy euro techno guy knows best what information is important to our national security

Sleazy, would you feel better about the role of Wikileaks if it was not him alone making decisions on what to release, but he instead worked with legitimate news agencies to determine what material needs to be redacted or omitted entirely?

It's not even about that for them. No matter how much care was taken in not releasing sensitive information, it's about breaking this covenant with the state. It's not all that hard to determine what kind of details might put people's lives in danger: places, dates, names relating to sensitive operations in warzones etc. can all be identified and removed by people who know a bit about the circumstances. Out of curiosity, can anyone actually name an example of a death or endangerment resulting from the wikileaks info. being released?

Again, there's no attempt at a moral justification, just a bunch of status quo based reasoning "It's always been like that" "he knew what he was getting into". I just think the punishment should be proportionate to the actual harm caused by the crime itself, rather than having a broad mandate for the authorities to execute anyone who reveals information that they don't wish to to be revealed.

[HairyCunt]

and we definitely widely differ in the notion that some creepy euro techno guy knows best what information is important to our national security

Sleazy, would you feel better about the role of Wikileaks if it was not him alone making decisions on what to release, but he instead worked with legitimate news agencies to determine what material needs to be redacted or omitted entirely?

I think everyone here understands that these types of leaks can be very damaging to national security, but if done carefully, what are your (also looking at you, HarryCrews) objections to properly-handled whistleblowing? From the arguments thus far, I'm having a hard time telling if the anti-Wikileaks guys are entirely against whistleblowing, or think it is being mishandled.

My opinion is that whistleblowing of this nature helps provide a sorely-needed balance to our increasingly large governments. Julian is doing the non-elites of the world a favor by exposing corruption. It may be true that someone else could do a better job, but I think we are better off for what he has done, and I hope there continues to be people like him willing to expose the shadier workings of our governments. Lord knows my balls aren't large enough.

I'm not against whistle-blowing. A situation like  Abu Ghraib by all means should be brought forth.  Like Weedpop says though it's not about that for Wikileaks. Their mandate is that there should be no secrets.  Assange is not a whistleblower, he is a megalomaniac middleman that resents the society that nurtured him, his only agenda is to sabotage US foreign policy.

Even if they removed names, places etc putting people in danger is only one point. Wikileaks often has no context for the cables they are viewing, and could easily interfere with ongoing diplomatic negotiations between nations. Say a deal between Israel and Iran, both have to appear strong to their people and need to work in secret to accomplish anything. Things that appears shady now, often turn out not to be.  Wikileaks is just not qualified to determine such things.

and we definitely widely differ in the notion that some creepy euro techno guy knows best what information is important to our national security

Sleazy, would you feel better about the role of Wikileaks if it was not him alone making decisions on what to release, but he instead worked with legitimate news agencies to determine what material needs to be redacted or omitted entirely?

It's not even about that for them. No matter how much care was taken in not releasing sensitive information, it's about breaking this covenant with the state. It's not all that hard to determine what kind of details might put people's lives in danger: places, dates, names relating to sensitive operations in warzones etc. can all be identified and removed by people who know a bit about the circumstances. Out of curiosity, can anyone actually name an example of a death or endangerment resulting from the wikileaks info. being released?

Again, there's no attempt at a moral justification, just a bunch of status quo based reasoning "It's always been like that" "he knew what he was getting into". I just think the punishment should be proportionate to the actual harm caused by the crime itself, rather than having a broad mandate for the authorities to execute anyone who reveals information that they don't wish to to be revealed.

No one is suggesting he be executed, but solitary confinement in a Supermax prison for life would do nicely. Robert Hannsen, Harold Nicholson are serving similar sentences for passing classified information to Russia. Noshir Gowadia sold classified aircraft information to China.  Like them Assange did know what he was getting into and should be a man about it and face the law.

[brycickle]

The difference is that Assange never had immediate access to any of that information. Someone had to give him those files before he could publish them. Those other three that you mention are blatantly guilty of espionage and treason. Those fuckers did what they did directly for profit too.

[pugmaster]

Great flick

[Tufty]

   BTW, Is English your second language? What grade are you in?

Yeap. I am Greek,  24 years old and i am finishing electrical engineering this year (its 5 years studies here). Why asking?

[HairyCunt]

  BTW, Is English your second language? What grade are you in?

Yeap. I am Greek,  24 years old and i am finishing electrical engineering this year (its 5 years studies here). Why asking?

I just thought it might be.  It's good.

It's ironic that you are so pro-socialism and from Greece. How's that working for you over there?
Looking for another German hand out?

[HairyCunt]

The difference is that Assange never had immediate access to any of that information. Someone had to give him those files before he could publish them. Those other three that you mention are blatantly guilty of espionage and treason. Those fuckers did what they did directly for profit too.

I don't see a difference between doing something for profit and doing something to stroke one's ego, it's apples and oranges.  You're right, Assange didn't have direct access to information, but he won't stand up to the allegations and defend himself.