reply to post by Xcathdra
Assange is controversial figure and i share the sentiment that i personally dont like him. But personal feelings aside, i think it's perfectly
reasonable for him to believe that the swedish goverment would extradite him to the United States, where he would face trial for exposing National
Secrets or compromising National Security.
What he is assumed to be guilty of or what law he exactly broke, has never been clearly stated.
But the efforts of the U.S. Goverment to set a presedent have become undeniable apparent and that is a political matter. So for him to seek political
asylum and for the ecuadorian government to grant it, is more than justified in light of the above.
The swedish goverment has never explicitly denied, they wouldn't extradite him. They can't be forced to do so, but that is one more reason to act
The United States have made it clear on various occasins that he's wanted, under what charges is still unclear.
Bradley Manning is now for over 800 days in military prison, still without trial.
I understand that the argument, that revealing military or national secrets would threaten national security and jeopardize lives, is often used by
goverments, the military, intelligence etc., i dont expect anything else. But the most incriminating releases were supposed war crimes and this very
same argument has been far to often a justification for actions that caused the death of many peoples, pretty ironic.
If i understand correctly, you said you were trying to highlight the double standard of people assuming what one side might do, by assuming what the
actions of the other side might have done.
It didn't sound like a assumption to me, that's why i'm asking again.
How many people do you think have died because of wikileaks releases?
We have "collateral murder" in the name of national security on one side, what do you have?
edit on 18-8-2012 by talklikeapirat because: "
edit on 18-8-2012 by talklikeapirat because: (no reason given)