Martin Luther King was an alcoholic, a gambler, an inveterate womaniser and a Communist --if you believed J. Edgar Hoover's FBI. Even a saint can be made out to be the devil if the political motivation is there --and vice-versa. I would not attach too much significance to the cult of personality.
If the charges were politically motivated then chances are they were an attempt on character assassination. Depending on the nature of the accusation(s), permanent damage could be done to someone's character. Assange is obviously a disliked person, more so in certain circles than others.
Quite so, but if one is intentionally acting guilty, then one cannot criticise those who presume guilt.
There's a huge difference between clearly false allegations and apparently credible ones. Plus what we should do and what we do do are two very different things, it's all too convenient to judge an organisation by its frontman.
What is the difference between clearly false and clearly credible allegations, except our own credulity?
Clearly not all the information we hear about the man is false. I am saying it is not a long stretch of the imagination for me to believe these allegations, or at least nothing I have read has conflicted whith my general impression of him hence I think they are preying on his weaknesses rather than purely inventing nonsense.
We saw the Arab Spring which saw a huge political shift in the middle east. The BBC ran a two part documentary on the effects of the wiki leaks release and the activists who started the revolution directly cited the leaks as one of the major causes.
He lost his extradition to Sweden appeal. If he goes there he could be extradited to America, which will keep him in solitary confinement for decades. That is what he is running from.
He could only be extradited if Sweden and the UK agree to it. Currently he could be extradited to the US if the UK alone agreed to it. Things do not add up with regards to this assertion. That said, I don't think he's guilty of rape, I just think he's paranoid.
That supposition has been challenged, with some pretty convincing arguments against the claims. I agree. I really don't think the Sweden/ US extradition theory holds enough water to be a convincing argument for me. I have yes, and a damned good film it was too. It can hardly be compared to the case of Assange and his actions though, surely?
What SuicideNeil is suggesting is that people who know that others know that they are guilty, an people who think that others think that they are guilty an basically behave in the same way. But I think it is paranoia. Let's assume that he knows he is guilty, and is not afraid of extradition. What is the worst that can happen? He gets found guilty of sexual assault and does a few years tops in a mellow Swedish prison. Instead he is choosing a lifetime in exile in some poor foreign nation where he has no friends, family, means of income and does not even speak the language. It does not add up.
Can you post your sources that no one has died from the leaks? If so please link them. And you have no idea who was put in danger. I'm not trying to be an ass but your basing this on assumption.
You are missing a few points in your argument though Nexxo. If he was found guilty, he would face ridicule from the very same press that he craves the attention from, and would face coming out of prison as someone that time has forgotten, or at the least drawing less attention from the public. I would also hazard a guess that the plan to relocate to the poor foreign country would ensure that short term interest would not wane, with the possibility that he could try and remain in the media's interest. Given his attention seeking habits I think the above motives would most likely have crossed his mind at the least.
The New York Times ran a story on the dangers of the leaked material, after having studied it, and concluded: Another newspaper, the Guardian, claimed that they too found information within the documents that could put Afghan informants lives in danger. Obviously, we would be very lucky to hear how many of these informants fared in the aftermath of the publication, as it would be in the interests of both the intelligence services and Wikileaks to suppress any evidence relating to this. Should just one informant be exposed, it makes the job of recruiting new informants many times more difficult. Source: http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/v...rJz-VHBf0xtDC4_d0L_oQ#search="assange shield"
Again, I think you are minimising his chances of extradition to the US from Sweden, and the obvious consequences this will incur for him. Are you trying to suggest that, even with his legal team, supporters and understanding of power systems, that he's acting alone as some kind of loony paranoid twit by seeking refuge in Ecuador? Come on, as if that is true! He must surely have been told that now he's lost his extradition to Sweden case, this will very likely mean extradition to the States, and secondly, that there are no alternatives than to seek political asylum in an embassy in the UK, or try to take it to the EU Court of Human Rights, to prevent his imminent capture by the States. I mean, it's pretty clear they're serious about getting him when the Chair of Obama's intelligence committee, Dianne Feinstein, has said they're going to prosecute him under the 1917 Espionage Act. His administration are still dealing with bringing about a full prosecution case. So I think you're massively underestimating what he has on his plate here.
My point exactly peoples lives were carelessly put in danger. And no one can deny that there is serious danger to informants. So I think he should be jailed for reckless endangerment at the least, if not attempted murder/attempted man slaughter.
I deny it. You want to assert that bring evidence. Attempted murder is a ridiculous claim. You've said a lot in this thread but you haven't provided a scrap of evidence, and as far as I'm concerned that makes your claims rubbish. You want me or anyone else reading this thread to think your claims are something other than nonsense, you'll need to bring some evidence to the table.
StingLikeABee actually provided evidence to support the claim, look in the post above yours. When you purposely endanger peoples lives you should be punished for it. I will not post any more on this thread for personal reasons.
