Julian Assange leaving?

[Skybird]

Without sources, journalism becomes meaningless and can no longer serve as the claimed pillar of democracy it usually gets described as: overwatching the government. Journalism without sources and whistleblowers - is propaganda. Becasue it is the souces being in knowledge, not he journalists. Journalists just collect, add one and one together, and report it to the public. Without sources, neither journalists nor the poublic cpould know whatt hjeb government is really doing, and when it is doing wrong.

Thats why everywhere in the world govenrments crack down on journalism - and their sources. Villain regimes use brute force for this. Western states run more subtle, but not any less effective means. Career killing, social delegitimisation, character assassination, intimidation, legal threats, isolation, exemplary punishment of sources, personnel networking, smear campaigning, etc etc etc. There are even agencies and companies for this "business".

Solid journalism is a dying art. Its almost dead. What we have up the street and down the street and almost everywhere, is propagandists trying to please their masters for making their careers. As a result the present Western population is the best misinformed and manipulated public in history.


Zum Kotzen. Like in the GDR - but now everywhere.

[Catfish]

You can call Manning and Snowdon traitors alright if you want.
They swore an oath, and they broke it.

You could say the same about people breaking their oath to Hitler and being prosecuted by a justice system that was unjust and ethically wrong.They followed their conscience, and had to suffer the consequences. By allied propaganda they are heroes, today.

I am not sure about Manning, but Snowdon surely followed his conscience. And instead of even discussing what some did in the name of the US government, the herald of the wrongdoings is being prosecuted and convicted.

It is somehow strange to see what the US justice is trying to do with someone who discovered their wrongdoing, in a country that invented the international law and prosecution of wars of aggression in 1945.
I do not want to compare Hitler's 3rd Reich with the US but i wonder why the latter does not handle evident war crimes more openly. There are obviously some corpses in their cellar that they do not want to be found.
Killing the messenger under the worlds's eyes will not make the US believable or trustworthy.

By this law, the killing of german sailors by german officers at may 5th 1945 was alright since Hitler's laws still applied, even if they just wanted to get from Norway to Germany after a war obviously lost. Every one trying to do something against the government was a traitor and acted defeatistly (does this word even exist), but somehow this was seen different by those who fought the Axis.

Whatever, Assange did not swear an oath and he is not even a US citizen, so US law can not apply in his case. So they accuse a foreigner of hacking. Quite a difference to killing civilians in a an unjust war.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Catfish

acted defeatistly (does this word even exist)

It does, but its just "defeatist".

[Platapus]

Catfish,


Because there is a right way and a wrong way to bring suspected misconduct to the attention of the appropriate authorities.



In both the Manning and Snowdon cases, each had many separate approved venues in which they could have brought up their concerns without breaking any laws. They chose not to use them. Instead they went quickly to the illegal path where they could get the most fame.



There are multiple military channels and channels completely isolated from the military, There federal channels, congressional channels, judicial channels, even some state channels all of which are approved ways of reporting suspected misconduct. As a last resort, there are cleared foreign channels that can be used if the information is releasable.



One can adopt a emotional position where everyone is covering up everything. That may make people feel better cynically, but it does not reflect reality.



If you think that you are the only one who is right and everyone else is wrong, chances are you are mistaken.



This is why I have no sympathy for the Mannings and Snowdens. They had approved venues but chose not to use them. They were out for the fame and got infamy. They were going to show everyone that they were better then the rest of the people.



It was not whistle blowing, it was ego assuaging.

[Skybird]

Sorry but I just had to dry a tear or two. I find it so heartmoving and touching if somebody is so blindly trusting in the formal channels and political institutions. It warms the bottom of my soul.

At least Snowden not one moment gave me ever the impression of being an attention-craving wannabe-star. Quite the opposite. He knew the high price he would pay, and still he accepted it, in advance. Obviously he did not share your optimism, Platapus, that the official ways and channels would have helped in what he wanted to make known to the public. They help mainly in one thing: to hide the darker sides of governments, and to protect it from people's awareness.

And political control? We know parliamentary investigation committees in Germany as well, of course. They are battlegrounds for the parties to beat each other in rhetorics, run for years, cost a lot of money, cheer many political egos, and in the end bring only extremely rarely more than just endless tsunamis of bla and bla, and blablabla.

Governments, administrational infrastructure of states, should never be trusted. Especially not if you attack these very structures themselves. They have their own interests, already for the mere reasons of that they exist. Give them your evidence against the,m and they will make sure that it disappeares. And maybe yourself too.

[Catfish]

Thanks Platapus for taking the time to answer.

I would not go as far and being as radical as Skybird, but there are a lot of sekeletons in the closet the government does not want the american public and the world to see. When it comes to international crime (war crime in this case) and secret services are involved, the regular ways of complaints will isolate you at least, and more probably get you into real trouble including some "harsh treatment" to say at least.

When a president publicly announces without protest that he supports torture as long at is in the interest of America, and killing civilians is acceptable "collateral damage", you may question your belief in this system and have to decide for yourself. And face the consequences of your decision of course.
The US are not Nazi Germany, and the Mossad is not the Gestapo, but the means and methods to reach perceived righteous goals .. thinking of "The little drummer girl" here. Also those civilized nations have their cellars with the white tiles, chains and shackles.

When i think of the people's reactions and juridical repercussions regarding those .. elucidations one might think it probably was not worth it since the public seemed properly disinterested. Still it takes some guts and bravery to do this.
Compare torturers in Abu Ghraib or the helicopter crew playing god, to Snowdon.

[Gerald]

Swedish prosecutor requests Assange's detention over rape allegation.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-w...-idUSKCN1SQ0ID

Julian you are under the ice.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Skybird

As was to be expected: Sweden reopens the case.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48253343

I Assange ever ends up in the US, additional, much more severe charges than those now known all of a sudden will appear like magic firework.

Et voila, what did I point at: the magican pulls 17 new white rabbits out of his top hat.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48391266

What the Swedes do and the Ameicans do, imo borders if not oversteps the thin red line to simply arbitrary justice. I know, its all a coup, and in a coup you do foul stuff, but still... Law enforcement on, law enforcement off, law enforcement on, charges come, charges go, charges appear - just as it pleases you.

What we see is an exmaple getting executed to intimidate every source and journalist in the future. In principle its not different than what in regimes like Turkey or Iran is being done: crackinging down on the media and its aids and assistants.

[Jimbuna]

It would appear he is in deep doody now.

[Catfish]

It is perfectly clear what is happening.

He made governmental crimes public, and they can hardly accuse him of that. How embarrassing.

So they try to destroy him with mud of the lowest calibre, so that everyone will hopefully abandon him. It does not matter whether there is evidence, rumours are enough.

It is like the german exiles in Paris before WW2, calling out Nazi crimes in independent newspapers. They were first dealt with by rumours, and when people got bored they were secretly "removed".

And no one asks questions to the government, about war crime and international law. Where is the conviction of crimes in wars of aggression? What a great democracy we have today.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Skybird

What we see is an exmaple getting executed to intimidate every source and journalist in the future. In principle its not different than what in regimes like Turkey or Iran is being done: crackinging down on the media and its aids and assistants.

Originally Posted by Catfish

It is perfectly clear what is happening.
He made governmental crimes public, and they can hardly accuse him of that. How embarrassing.

Problem is the waters are a little muddy here. Assange and supporters claim that he is a journalist and a whistle blower. Possible true but what he really is without doubt is a political activist. His goals go beyond just journalism and into the political realm. Journalists do not advance conspiracy theories they know are false. Assange did this in the Seth Rich case. It was done to shift blame from Assange to some one else. Robert Mueller's report proved it to be false and that Assange was lying. That is not the way 'journalists' behave.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/muelle...r-for-russians

[Bilge_Rat]

I am no fan of Assange, but charging him with espionage is overreach. By the same token, you could also charge the Ny Times, the Guardian and Spiegel, all of which coordinated with Wikileaks and released the same info in 2010.

Prosecutors are trying to argue Assange is not a "real journalist", but to me it is a slippery slope if the Government gets to choose who are the "real journalists" worthy of protection and who are "political activists" who can be jailed.

How long before all journalists stop reporting the hard news because they are afraid of being prosecuted?

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

I am no fan of Assange, but charging him with espionage is overreach.

That is debatable. What Assange is accused of is helping a source, a discontented GI, Bradley Manning, to break a code to access government computers. Is that what real journalists do? If you were not a journalist and did that what would happen? Since that is against the law would that not get a real journalist fired. Coming into possesion of vast amounts of classified information and publishing many of them in a time of active combat is not something real journalists do all the time. It crosses a line that most real journalists would not and have not crossed. Being a journalist is not an excemption for illegal activity. Assange's greatest legacy may be the damage he has done to the very trade to which he claims to belong.

[STEED]

Julian Assange was too ill to appear at his court hearing in London on Thursday, his lawyer said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48459760

Sounds like Bull to me.

[Jimbuna]

"During the seven weeks in Belmarsh his health has continued to deteriorate and he has dramatically lost weight," the spokesman said.

I'm wondering what the symptoms are and if it is because of his own actions ie: not eating?