4 ms·

I wouldn't say "insane," but it's comical to watch an organization ostensibly dedicated to shining the light of truth into the dark places of power crawling thi

I wouldn't say "insane," but it's comical to watch an organization ostensibly dedicated to shining the light of truth into the dark places of power crawling this far up its own nethers to attempt to damage-control their own leader's bad behavior.

elif 8y ago
Which bad behavior are you referring to?
- fixermark 8y ago
  He's continued to claim asylum to dodge a credible rape accusation rather than face justice. [EDIT: his claims of fear of extradition to the US are credible; there was a leaked charge against him in US courts. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/politics/julian-assange-indictment-wikileaks.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/politics/julian-assang...] At this point, he's dodging Sweden's justice system because he can and because Ecuador allows him to. And all of this distracts from Wikileaks' ostensible goal of shining light into the dark places of power; public trust in them weakens as they continue to refuse to cut ties with an accused rapist dodging charges.
  - elif 8y ago
    At this point, sweden has no investigation or request to interview Assange. He was never charged with a crime, but they were satisfied by their interview 2 years ago and dropped all investigations, as was requested by the alleged victim years prior. Also the sealed indictment allowing for Assange to be extradicted has been leaked. It is very real.
    - fixermark 8y ago
      Sweden has reserved the right to re-open the investigation; the investigation is no longer open because the only person of interest left for them to interact with is Assange, and since he's in asylum they can't. The closure of the investigation is procedural, not comment on his guilt or innocence. I was unaware of the leaked US charges from November however; that's news for me. Thank you for bringing it to my attention (I've updated my original post). Given that, however, I don't believe it's credible to assume that even if he were extradited to the US, he wouldn't have a fair day in court. He's too famous to disappear. So my original contention that he's a stain on the organization due to the fact he's dodging justice because he can stands.
      - thatoneuser 8y ago
        I mean he targeted powerful people and put a lot of information out that they didn’t want exposed. I think to say he’ll get a fair day in court is something that’s easier to say when you aren’t the one with cannons pointed at you. I’ve been profiled by cops various times in my life, and the overwhelming feeling was that if I didn’t do what they wanted (things which I had no legal obligation to do) that they could have found a reason to take me in. I wasn’t doing anything wrong. So if you’re doing something that many people consider wrong, I think there’s plenty of injustice in our history to warrant preemptive protection if ones self. Maybe Assange isn’t innocent. Maybe he deserves to be locked up. I have no idea. But if I were him and I were innocent, I still wouldn’t trust that I’d get fairness.
        fixermark 8y ago
        Have you been profiled by judges? Cops don't get to decide Assange's fate if he's tried in United States court of law. And that trial would have international eyes on it, not a lot of opportunity for shenanigans without lasting repurcussions.
        jancsika 8y ago
        One may look no further than the treatment of Assange's own source for the Afghanistan war logs for clear evidence that "international eyes" do not stop attempts at pre-trial punishment. The lone member of Obama's State Department who spoke out against that treatment-- P.J. Crowley-- had to resign the next day for doing so. If you didn't know about any of those events I'd suggest reading up on them before commenting further on the subject.
        fixermark 8y ago
        ... and one may look no further than the fact that Chelsea Manning is free now to see that being in the public eye has a significant effect on the outcome, because were she not in the public eye, she'd very much still be in jail for espionage. On account of the espionage, which leaked documents adding fuel to the fire-piles that kindled into the political destabilization of several nations in the Middle East and North Africa and the deaths of thousands of people in civil wars, beginning with Libya. She got off very easy for the deaths she (unintentionally) facilitated by deciding her conscience spoke more loudly than the expertise of thousands of State Department operatives trained to deal with delicate international political issues.
  - Varcht 8y ago
    Without making a judgement on the seriousness of the charges, remember, the "rape" in this case is allegedly not stopping upon the tearing of his condom, not forced rape at knifepoint...
  - lawnchair_larry 8y ago
    More ironically, you’ve just demonstrated exactly why they found it necessary to address these incorrect claims.
    - fixermark 8y ago
      Can you clarify which claim is incorrect?
  - billfruit 8y ago
    I am not fully sure, it is the UK parole violation that is causing Assange to stay in the Embassy. Being a relatively minor charge, I do think UK can waive it off, since the original charges in Sweden has been dropped, but UK seems to prefer status quo in this matter, strangely.

elif 8y ago

Which bad behavior are you referring to?

fixermark 8y ago
He's continued to claim asylum to dodge a credible rape accusation rather than face justice. [EDIT: his claims of fear of extradition to the US are credible; there was a leaked charge against him in US courts. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/politics/julian-assange-indictment-wikileaks.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/politics/julian-assang...] At this point, he's dodging Sweden's justice system because he can and because Ecuador allows him to. And all of this distracts from Wikileaks' ostensible goal of shining light into the dark places of power; public trust in them weakens as they continue to refuse to cut ties with an accused rapist dodging charges.
- elif 8y ago
  At this point, sweden has no investigation or request to interview Assange. He was never charged with a crime, but they were satisfied by their interview 2 years ago and dropped all investigations, as was requested by the alleged victim years prior. Also the sealed indictment allowing for Assange to be extradicted has been leaked. It is very real.
  - fixermark 8y ago
    Sweden has reserved the right to re-open the investigation; the investigation is no longer open because the only person of interest left for them to interact with is Assange, and since he's in asylum they can't. The closure of the investigation is procedural, not comment on his guilt or innocence. I was unaware of the leaked US charges from November however; that's news for me. Thank you for bringing it to my attention (I've updated my original post). Given that, however, I don't believe it's credible to assume that even if he were extradited to the US, he wouldn't have a fair day in court. He's too famous to disappear. So my original contention that he's a stain on the organization due to the fact he's dodging justice because he can stands.
    - thatoneuser 8y ago
      I mean he targeted powerful people and put a lot of information out that they didn’t want exposed. I think to say he’ll get a fair day in court is something that’s easier to say when you aren’t the one with cannons pointed at you. I’ve been profiled by cops various times in my life, and the overwhelming feeling was that if I didn’t do what they wanted (things which I had no legal obligation to do) that they could have found a reason to take me in. I wasn’t doing anything wrong. So if you’re doing something that many people consider wrong, I think there’s plenty of injustice in our history to warrant preemptive protection if ones self. Maybe Assange isn’t innocent. Maybe he deserves to be locked up. I have no idea. But if I were him and I were innocent, I still wouldn’t trust that I’d get fairness.
      - fixermark 8y ago
        Have you been profiled by judges? Cops don't get to decide Assange's fate if he's tried in United States court of law. And that trial would have international eyes on it, not a lot of opportunity for shenanigans without lasting repurcussions.
        jancsika 8y ago
        One may look no further than the treatment of Assange's own source for the Afghanistan war logs for clear evidence that "international eyes" do not stop attempts at pre-trial punishment. The lone member of Obama's State Department who spoke out against that treatment-- P.J. Crowley-- had to resign the next day for doing so. If you didn't know about any of those events I'd suggest reading up on them before commenting further on the subject.
        fixermark 8y ago
        ... and one may look no further than the fact that Chelsea Manning is free now to see that being in the public eye has a significant effect on the outcome, because were she not in the public eye, she'd very much still be in jail for espionage. On account of the espionage, which leaked documents adding fuel to the fire-piles that kindled into the political destabilization of several nations in the Middle East and North Africa and the deaths of thousands of people in civil wars, beginning with Libya. She got off very easy for the deaths she (unintentionally) facilitated by deciding her conscience spoke more loudly than the expertise of thousands of State Department operatives trained to deal with delicate international political issues.
- Varcht 8y ago
  Without making a judgement on the seriousness of the charges, remember, the "rape" in this case is allegedly not stopping upon the tearing of his condom, not forced rape at knifepoint...
- lawnchair_larry 8y ago
  More ironically, you’ve just demonstrated exactly why they found it necessary to address these incorrect claims.
  - fixermark 8y ago
    Can you clarify which claim is incorrect?
- billfruit 8y ago
  I am not fully sure, it is the UK parole violation that is causing Assange to stay in the Embassy. Being a relatively minor charge, I do think UK can waive it off, since the original charges in Sweden has been dropped, but UK seems to prefer status quo in this matter, strangely.