6 ms·

Assange was chemically lobotomised within days of being admitted to Belmarsh Prison, which has a long and sordid history of providing the military-industrial-ph

Assange was chemically lobotomised within days of being admitted to Belmarsh Prison, which has a long and sordid history of providing the military-industrial-pharmaceutical complex with safe cover for its wet operations. He is, essentially, dead to the world now. However, his legacy remains - you cannot destroy ideas with chemical torture so easily. The next round of whistleblowing will be especially painful to the American people, as yet more evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity is being prepared for release. While we were all being distracted by the scary orange puppet, the US and its coalition partners ratcheted up the tempo of its criminal war operations. Evidence regarding US involvement in Yemen, for example, is going to reveal the true nature of American military power in the 21st Century, and it is not going to be pretty. If you are an American who feels suitably embarrassed by the actions of your oompaloompa in chief, be prepared for a sobering realisation when the next round of whistleblowing starts happening. And, be prepared for the distraction that the military-industrial-pharmaceutical complex has in store for the American people.

dang 7y ago
Would you please stop using HN for political and ideological battle? Regardless of what your politics are, fiery rhetoric is not what this site is for, and we ban accounts that do it. We've warned you several times already, so you need to fix this if you want to keep posting here. When it comes to divisive topics, the guidelines call for comments to become more thoughtful, not denunciatory. Denunciation is a different type of game than the one we're playing here. Your non-denunciatory comments look fine, so this shouldn't be hard. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- fit2rule 7y ago
  You may feel it necessary to your own safety to censor those of us who are paying attention to these things - but as history has proven time and again, you're shooting yourselves in your own feet by banning speech you deem unsuitable for your purposes. Good, interested hackers can without doubt find other places to discuss the very relevant machinations of the military-industrial-pharmaceutical complex and its negative influence in contemporary hacker culture - but if HN is no longer a safe, relevant place to be discussing the nature of whistleblowing, technology, or indeed world politics in the technical age, then so be it: why allow anything to be posted about Assange, at all, then? His story is nothing but political in nature.
  - dang 7y ago
    I posted at length about this the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20013092 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20013092. If, after reading that, you feel like there's a relevant point about how we moderate political threads that it doesn't address, I'd be happy to hear what that is. There seems to be a misunderstanding in this bit: > you're shooting yourselves in your own feet by banning speech you deem unsuitable for your purposes Our purpose is to optimize HN for intellectual curiosity. You're right in that sense, but only that sense. HN moderation has no purpose related to Assange or any other hot topic, nor are we moderating based on what we agree or disagree with. I moderate comments I agree with every single day. Perhaps that sounds weird? After a while, one gets used to it. If you take a step back and look at HN threads on topics with political overlap, you'll find that many HN users have figured out how to express their views thoughtfully, without resorting to fiery rhetoric or denunciation. You'll also find that many of them are expressing views similar to yours. Please be more like them. It's really just for good conversation. No one wants to be in the room that someone is blasting with a megaphone, regardless of the megaphone's views.
    - fit2rule 7y ago
      "Mind your manners", I can agree with. "Don't mention the war", I cannot. I believe that censoring opinion around the subject of the Wests' criminal wars only provides further cover for those who profit from it.
      - dang 7y ago
        Nobody said you can't mention things. You need to drop fiery rhetoric, denunciation, and other weapons of ideological battle when posting here.
dragonwriter 7y ago
> Assange was chemically lobotomised within days of being admitted to Belmarsh Prison You've accidentally, I'm sure, forgotten to provide the support for this claim. Could you, perhaps, correct that oversight?
- MrEldritch 7y ago
  I believe he acquired it through ex culo research, so him providing his source would be rather inadvisable on an SFW website.

dang 7y ago

Would you please stop using HN for political and ideological battle? Regardless of what your politics are, fiery rhetoric is not what this site is for, and we ban accounts that do it. We've warned you several times already, so you need to fix this if you want to keep posting here. When it comes to divisive topics, the guidelines call for comments to become more thoughtful, not denunciatory. Denunciation is a different type of game than the one we're playing here. Your non-denunciatory comments look fine, so this shouldn't be hard. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

fit2rule 7y ago
You may feel it necessary to your own safety to censor those of us who are paying attention to these things - but as history has proven time and again, you're shooting yourselves in your own feet by banning speech you deem unsuitable for your purposes. Good, interested hackers can without doubt find other places to discuss the very relevant machinations of the military-industrial-pharmaceutical complex and its negative influence in contemporary hacker culture - but if HN is no longer a safe, relevant place to be discussing the nature of whistleblowing, technology, or indeed world politics in the technical age, then so be it: why allow anything to be posted about Assange, at all, then? His story is nothing but political in nature.
- dang 7y ago
  I posted at length about this the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20013092 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20013092. If, after reading that, you feel like there's a relevant point about how we moderate political threads that it doesn't address, I'd be happy to hear what that is. There seems to be a misunderstanding in this bit: > you're shooting yourselves in your own feet by banning speech you deem unsuitable for your purposes Our purpose is to optimize HN for intellectual curiosity. You're right in that sense, but only that sense. HN moderation has no purpose related to Assange or any other hot topic, nor are we moderating based on what we agree or disagree with. I moderate comments I agree with every single day. Perhaps that sounds weird? After a while, one gets used to it. If you take a step back and look at HN threads on topics with political overlap, you'll find that many HN users have figured out how to express their views thoughtfully, without resorting to fiery rhetoric or denunciation. You'll also find that many of them are expressing views similar to yours. Please be more like them. It's really just for good conversation. No one wants to be in the room that someone is blasting with a megaphone, regardless of the megaphone's views.
  - fit2rule 7y ago
    "Mind your manners", I can agree with. "Don't mention the war", I cannot. I believe that censoring opinion around the subject of the Wests' criminal wars only provides further cover for those who profit from it.
    - dang 7y ago
      Nobody said you can't mention things. You need to drop fiery rhetoric, denunciation, and other weapons of ideological battle when posting here.

dragonwriter 7y ago

> Assange was chemically lobotomised within days of being admitted to Belmarsh Prison You've accidentally, I'm sure, forgotten to provide the support for this claim. Could you, perhaps, correct that oversight?

MrEldritch 7y ago
I believe he acquired it through ex culo research, so him providing his source would be rather inadvisable on an SFW website.