Julian Assange arrested at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

a reply to: Jay-morris

You don't understand. He should not have been in the UK as it say in the first line of my post. He should have set up his operation in such a country when wikileaks started. And he could have avoided all this trouble, that's what I think anyway. Purely academic at this point and he's now in a terrible mess.

originally posted by: surfer_soul

Different people have different ideas of what rape is, but the law is the law. Have a chat to a woman, if you know one, about rape tolerances, unprotected sex, STD and consent.

I read the police report and it’s clear from that they don’t have a case.

Why should I have to have a chat to a woman, are they an authority on the matter? It’s not just women who get raped you realise don’t you? STDs have nothing to do with it either moron. They both consented and that is that.

You clearly have read nothing about the case, where do you get the facts from? One of the women in question consented only if he wore a condom, the allegation is that he didn't want to and pushed her to have sex. It's called sexual assault in Sweden, maybe where you are from it's called being fussy.

Before you call anyone a moron, get your facts straight or that's what you'll look like.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: JBurns
Snowden, Assange, Binney, Manning, all are patriots in my book.

Yeah, well, Manning, not so much...

so much idiocy. To be a 'patriot'? Why are you Americans calling Assange (Australian) a 'patriot'? Do you even have a clue what the word is defined as?

If he was a 'patriot' he would be stealing sensitive information about the political side of Australian politics he doesn't like and publishing that, but he didn't.

Level of intelligence on here is sinking through the floor sometimes.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I could write a book about all the tie-ins going on right now. I don't have that much room (or time to be honest).

William Barr is weeding through the FISA situation. That will lead him into FBI corruption and hatred for Trump among the leaders. That, in turn, will open up the Obama administration and the Clintons. The house of cards is shaking.

This arrest is another move toward that end... Assange is not just a witness, but he has information that will blow the lid off all the shenanigans that went on under Obama. Trump supporters dealt with over two years of investigations into our choice for President; now it's our turn to investigate Obama and Clinton. Time about is fair play.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: roadgravel

... and how would Assange have known how to crack a password on a US military computer system?

A person just has to type in the right one.

It is not that easy as some ordinary folk guessing a password.
You knew that I hope

I have noticed that most people here don't know much about computing. Any facts about biometrics or such used by him to to access a military network.

originally posted by: uncommitted
so much idiocy. To be a 'patriot'? Why are you Americans calling Assange (Australian) a 'patriot'? Do you even have a clue what the word is defined as?

Your point is well taken, the manner in which it was given, not so much.

No need to be a total ass about it.

I'm on the fence over him. There is a good amount of files he should not have released, and in doing so it was basically just an anarchist move and not a calculated one to show bad actors where they may be. Because of this he most likely should get jail time.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: uncommitted
so much idiocy. To be a 'patriot'? Why are you Americans calling Assange (Australian) a 'patriot'? Do you even have a clue what the word is defined as?

Your point is well taken, the manner in which it was given, not so much.

No need to be a total ass about it.

Why do you think I was being a total ass? The word 'patriot' gets bandied about on this site by many people so much without them stopping to think about what it means. If you are offended, I apologise. If you don't think it's idiocy for people not to think before they write, then I can only say I stand by what I said.

a reply to: gortex

They will try to convince him now that 2+2=5.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I could write a book about all the tie-ins going on right now. I don't have that much room (or time to be honest).

William Barr is weeding through the FISA situation. That will lead him into FBI corruption and hatred for Trump among the leaders. That, in turn, will open up the Obama administration and the Clintons. The house of cards is shaking.

This arrest is another move toward that end... Assange is not just a witness, but he has information that will blow the lid off all the shenanigans that went on under Obama. Trump supporters dealt with over two years of investigations into our choice for President; now it's our turn to investigate Obama and Clinton. Time about is fair play.

TheRedneck

Trump loved wikileaks during the election, now somehow he doesn't seem to know much about it.... wonder why he is suddenly keeping so quiet? I wonder what wikileaks may have been able to find on your current administration if they cared to look now.

Face it, if they had much more on Obama and Clinton it would have been released at the time Trump made another promise that he couldn't keep - that he would see Clinton in jail. All he could do most of the time is repeat stuff he (or a henchman) found on a conspiracy site.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Sweden's director of public prosecutions Marianne Ny decided in May 2017 to shut a preliminary investigation into the rape allegations. She argued that since Assange could not be reached after taking up residence in the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2012, it was not possible to proceed with the probe

originally posted by: JimTSpock
If Assange was smart he would have set up in a country with no US extradition. And no extradition to countries where wikileaks may be breaking the law. He's not smart he's dumb. And that's why he was hiding in the silly embassy for years and appears to have no plan or clue what he's doing that's my 2c.

Julian Assange is many things, but dumb is not one of them.

a reply to: uncommitted

Trump had to bide his time until the Mueller investigation was completed.

He still needs to be careful, or people will accuse him of colluding with WL. But - if Assange makes some kind of a deal with prosecutors to exchange information for a lighter sentence, and Trump stays out of it, then all is good.

a reply to: uncommitted

Trump loved wikileaks during the election, now somehow he doesn't seem to know much about it.... wonder why he is suddenly keeping so quiet?

Really? You can't see what that means?

Think back to another issue... remember when Kim Jong Un was shooting off missiles and making threats? What was Trump's attitude? "Little Rocket Man." "My button is bigger than your button, and mine works." When the first summit was announced and it looked like Kim was going to negotiate, do you remember the narrative change? All of a sudden Trump and Kim were best buddies!

That's a negotiation tactic. Words cost nothing and they're powerful, so use the words that accomplish the goal. Trump does this very well, which is one of his strong suits.

During the election, when Trump was preaching "drain the swamp," of course he loved Wikileaks! It was an ally! Today, with the actual draining getting close and swamp critters trying everything to attack him and anyone associated with him, of course he doesn't want to say he loves Wikileaks... that would make them and Assange a target for the swamp, during the one time when Assange is most vulnerable.

Here's a tough life lesson, but one you really need to comprehend: people who are successful do not go around telling everything they are thinking. That's what makes them successful. Look beyond the words... what are the words designed to do? In this case, they are designed to keep the swamp from becoming scared and making a move on Assange.

TheRedneck

a reply to: uncommitted

Wikileaks doesnt look for anything on anybody as far as I know. They take submissions from whistleblowers all over the world. Thats why I struggle with Julian Assange being called a journalist. Publisher? Sure. But IMO, he hasnt really actually created any content, only published what others have given him.

As far as Trump "loving" Wikileaks during the election - I'm assuming he was talking about the information that was coming out of Wikileaks at that time, i.e. The Clinton Emails. It can still be true today that he has not been involved in the situation happening right now with Assange. Perhaps he is telling the truth, and this has been a William Barr operation from the get-go?

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: surfer_soul

Different people have different ideas of what rape is, but the law is the law. Have a chat to a woman, if you know one, about rape tolerances, unprotected sex, STD and consent.

I read the police report and it’s clear from that they don’t have a case.

Why should I have to have a chat to a woman, are they an authority on the matter? It’s not just women who get raped you realise don’t you? STDs have nothing to do with it either moron. They both consented and that is that.

You clearly have read nothing about the case, where do you get the facts from? One of the women in question consented only if he wore a condom, the allegation is that he didn't want to and pushed her to have sex. It's called sexual assault in Sweden, maybe where you are from it's called being fussy.

Before you call anyone a moron, get your facts straight or that's what you'll look like.

I have read the police report obtained by the guardian newspaper, I’ve linked to it twice in this thread already. Miss A says JA did concede to wearing a condom but it split so she wanted him tested for STDs, in a nutshell both women admitted to having consensual sex with JA and it would never have gone to the police if he just had himself tested for STDs. Go look it up yourself or do I have to spoon feed you everything?

Btw the person I responded to insinuated I didn’t know any women and nothing about rape. Both untrue slights, start making it personal with me and I start making it personal back.

Trump loved wikileaks during the election, now somehow he doesn't seem to know much about it....

Here's a tough life lesson, but one you really need to comprehend: people who are successful do not go around telling everything they are thinking. That's what makes them successful.

Yep, they do a lot of lying and less than ethical things.

a reply to: PokeyJoe

Wikileaks doesnt look for anything on anybody as far as I know. They take submissions from whistleblowers all over the world. Thats why I struggle with Julian Assange being called a journalist. Publisher? Sure. But IMO, he hasnt really actually created any content, only published what others have given him.

Isn't that what true journalism is? Compiling facts no matter the source?

Nowadays people have confused journalism with pundit-ism (not accusing you).

Wikileaks was a platform created to only present facts without opinion and let the people decide for themselves (though their twitter has opinions, and it could be argued the way they conduct themselves may imply there is a hidden motive/agenda).

I think Wikileaks is the closest thing to journalism that exists IMO. Whether I agree with the personal opinions of those who run the organization is irrelevant to the fact they have the best accuracy of any organization out there.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

That a good point.

A lot of "journalism" today if more of the opinion/editorial class, if not straight out propaganda.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

But if Assange conspired to commit a crime in the pursuit of journalism is that legitimate?