3 ms·

Yah. Then get send over to US and A and killed. Checkmate

shadowgovt 7y ago
The saddest thing about Assange's story is that when one lives in the realm of the paranoid for too long, the paranoia eats them. The US and A isn't in the business of assassinating visible targets. There's plenty of people who believe they are, but there's plenty of evidence they aren't. If they were, Manning wouldn't still be breathing.
- dingoegret 7y ago
  It is in the business of assassinating visible targets. By probability and behavioral record. Unless you have special evidence to contrary.
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    As I said, Manning is still alive, and she's spent an inordinate amount of time under US custody. She's under US custody right now. If the government had "assassination of visible targets" as standard black-ops policy, why is she not dead? Conspiracy theories suffer on lack of consistency.
    - cwkoss 7y ago
      It is plausible that if US govt was't able to contrive her current imprisonment via contempt of court charges, she would be dead. Kind of amusing that a user named "shadowgovt" is vehemently arguing that the government is less malicious than many members of the public suspect.
      - shadowgovt 7y ago
        Theories of grand evil government conspiracies are comforting because they let us believe someone's in charge, that the evils of the world were intended and causal. Intentions can be controlled. The reality is much more boring and much less comforting. Hence, my handle. ;) https://youtu.be/OI6Qdoq679I https://youtu.be/OI6Qdoq679I
        dingoegret 7y ago
        The United States assassinates people. Aspersions about conspiracy theories are in bad faith.
- tremon 7y ago
  Are you asserting that Osama bin Laden wasn't a visible target?
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    I should probably clarify: assassination of high-visibility undisclosed targets. Osama bin Laden was tagged as an enemy combatant quite publicly, and I'm not aware of anyone disagreeing with the US's tactical call to kill him during Operation Neptune Spear rather than take him alive. Some Congresspeople have made ill-advised claims around Assange, but to my knowledge he is not tagged as an enemy combatant in a war on terror and there would be quite a lot of surprise if the US sent in a SEAL team to shoot him.
    - whymauri 7y ago
      Just to clarify, you're saying that the US is not currently in the business of assassinating high-visibility targets. Just clarifying, because there's a history of state-sanctioned assassination attempts and plots during the Cold War.
      - whymauri 7y ago
        Confused by downvotes. It is a historical fact that there were assassinations plots during the Cold War. It was investigated and declassified by Congress. For starters, look at the Church Committee, a U.S. Senate Committee from 1975, that investigated intelligence malpractice. There should be nothing remotely controversial about these events existing. Second, by asking a clarifying question I am not implying that the "US is not currently in the business of assassinating high-visibility targets" because I have no way of knowing this. I just want to clarify this person's point-of-view.
    - tremon 7y ago
      there would be quite a lot of surprise if the US sent in a SEAL team to shoot him. Of course there would be a lot of surprise, that would be an open act of war. The US's preferred method would be a drone strike operated from within the US borders, just as Russia's preferred method is with some radioactive poison.
- rootusrootus 7y ago
  The US definitely wouldn't risk any blowback by killing someone as low value as Assange. What would be the point? Easier just to chuck him in jail forever, and the political consequences are minimal to nonexistent.

The saddest thing about Assange's story is that when one lives in the realm of the paranoid for too long, the paranoia eats them. The US and A isn't in the business of assassinating visible targets. There's plenty of people who believe they are, but there's plenty of evidence they aren't. If they were, Manning wouldn't still be breathing.

dingoegret 7y ago
It is in the business of assassinating visible targets. By probability and behavioral record. Unless you have special evidence to contrary.
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  As I said, Manning is still alive, and she's spent an inordinate amount of time under US custody. She's under US custody right now. If the government had "assassination of visible targets" as standard black-ops policy, why is she not dead? Conspiracy theories suffer on lack of consistency.
  - cwkoss 7y ago
    It is plausible that if US govt was't able to contrive her current imprisonment via contempt of court charges, she would be dead. Kind of amusing that a user named "shadowgovt" is vehemently arguing that the government is less malicious than many members of the public suspect.
    - shadowgovt 7y ago
      Theories of grand evil government conspiracies are comforting because they let us believe someone's in charge, that the evils of the world were intended and causal. Intentions can be controlled. The reality is much more boring and much less comforting. Hence, my handle. ;) https://youtu.be/OI6Qdoq679I https://youtu.be/OI6Qdoq679I
      - dingoegret 7y ago
        The United States assassinates people. Aspersions about conspiracy theories are in bad faith.
tremon 7y ago
Are you asserting that Osama bin Laden wasn't a visible target?
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  I should probably clarify: assassination of high-visibility undisclosed targets. Osama bin Laden was tagged as an enemy combatant quite publicly, and I'm not aware of anyone disagreeing with the US's tactical call to kill him during Operation Neptune Spear rather than take him alive. Some Congresspeople have made ill-advised claims around Assange, but to my knowledge he is not tagged as an enemy combatant in a war on terror and there would be quite a lot of surprise if the US sent in a SEAL team to shoot him.
  - whymauri 7y ago
    Just to clarify, you're saying that the US is not currently in the business of assassinating high-visibility targets. Just clarifying, because there's a history of state-sanctioned assassination attempts and plots during the Cold War.
    - whymauri 7y ago
      Confused by downvotes. It is a historical fact that there were assassinations plots during the Cold War. It was investigated and declassified by Congress. For starters, look at the Church Committee, a U.S. Senate Committee from 1975, that investigated intelligence malpractice. There should be nothing remotely controversial about these events existing. Second, by asking a clarifying question I am not implying that the "US is not currently in the business of assassinating high-visibility targets" because I have no way of knowing this. I just want to clarify this person's point-of-view.
  - tremon 7y ago
    there would be quite a lot of surprise if the US sent in a SEAL team to shoot him. Of course there would be a lot of surprise, that would be an open act of war. The US's preferred method would be a drone strike operated from within the US borders, just as Russia's preferred method is with some radioactive poison.
rootusrootus 7y ago
The US definitely wouldn't risk any blowback by killing someone as low value as Assange. What would be the point? Easier just to chuck him in jail forever, and the political consequences are minimal to nonexistent.