5 ms·

> If thats right or wrong is anyones guess You're fucking joking right? Something about "cruel and unusual punishment", which is present in both English and A

> If thats right or wrong is anyones guess You're fucking joking right? Something about "cruel and unusual punishment", which is present in both English and American law. Furthermore, there's this little document called the 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights', which has stuff to say on this matter too, and has been signed by both the US and England.

bilekas 7y ago
I'm not joking, what Assange did was at best 'cunty'. He could have been more careful releasing the information but he wasnt. He's being made an example of, its clear as day. My 'if its right or wrong' depends on your side of the argument, so no. I'm not joking. > "cruel and unusual punishment" Couldn't agree with you more, he should not be made to suffer needlessly.. He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped. He knew he was going to be made an example of. This is the result. I'm not saying its nice, but it's not even punishment yet. He will receive much worse later I'm sure.
- AllegedAlec 7y ago
  > I'm not joking, what Assange did was at best 'cunty'. Releasing evidence of governments doing torturing, extra-judicial killings of journalists and children,which violate the Geneva Convention, as well as a slew of other materials isn't 'cunty'. > He could have been more careful releasing the information but he wasnt. In what way was he not careful? > My 'if its right or wrong' depends on your side of the argument, so no. I'm not joking. That's weird, because you are a fucking clown. > Couldn't agree with you more, he should not be made to suffer needlessly.. He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped. He knew he was going to be made an example of. This is the result. I'm not saying its nice, but it's not even punishment yet. He will receive much worse later I'm sure. Look up the definition of cruel and unusual punishment.
  - bilekas 7y ago
    > Releasing evidence of governments doing torturing, extra-judicial killings of journalists and children,which violate the Geneva Convention, as well as a slew of other materials isn't 'cunty'. He released evidence rightly so but compromising a lot of sources, methods and other info. It could have been released better. The info should have been released, my argument is not in defence of the original actions. > That's weird, because you are a fucking clown. Okay
    - AllegedAlec 7y ago
      > He released evidence rightly so but compromising a lot of sources, methods and other info. It could have been released better. The info should have been released, my argument is not in defence of the original actions. According to him and his lawyers he did not. The arguments for this are expanded on in the linked article.
      - bilekas 7y ago
        Well according to the other side, people died because of the releases. Information was lost, sources fled. https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=712659290 https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=712659290 So again, right or wrong depends on your opinion. Also again, I re-iterate and stress. I am not defending the bad actions of the US or anyone, I just don't believe that Assange is this 'holier than though' who needs to be coveted.
        henearkr 7y ago
        You seem to imply that, because there were dramatic consequences from the release, then he was guilty from the release. Again, it seems that the problematic leak (uncensored names) comes from a 3rd party, so your implication is like a sophism.
        FireBeyond 7y ago
        Apparently in your world one cannot be an accessory. If you arranged, assisted with and actively participated in the exfiltration of classified information, handed it on to someone else who agreed with you when you said "states can decrypt this; best just to publish now", apparently you get to say "woah, woah, woah, why are you angry at me, I had nothing to do with people getting hold of the information in these documents!". Who is being sophist now?
  - vinceguidry 7y ago
    This comment violates multiple HN guidelines. In particular "That's weird, because you are a fucking clown." violates this one: When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Your last statement also qualifies as a shallow dismissal, as per this guideline: Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. In case you haven't read them yet, here is a link: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- henearkr 7y ago
  But it seems you think that Assange was responsible for the leak of the uncensored documents. The defense's claim is that it was clearly an unintended release without consent by a third party. So negating this, for now, is quite a stretch.
- fit2rule 7y ago
  The real cunts are those justifying war crimes and continued criminal, illegal crimes against humanity in the form of the 5-eyes imperialist wars. Not a word of criticism about those guys, eh - no, instead, we'll just shoot the messenger. There will be more leaks, Assange or not. The truth is, there are far, far more worse crimes committed by the 5-eyes Coalition to be revealed on the horizon. Assange is just one of many who are working on blowing the lid on the Wests' illegal, criminal behaviour. Unfortunately for those who believe in the moral authority of the 5-eyes coalition as being irreproachable, you can't easily cover up crimes against humanity. Be prepared for more leaks, folks. This isn't going to stop just because Assange has been kidnapped by his enemies.
  - bilekas 7y ago
    > The real cunts are those justifying war crimes and continued criminal, illegal crimes against humanity in the form of the 5-eyes imperialist wars. Not a word of criticism about those guys, eh - no, instead, we'll just shoot the messenger. Thats a different topic and a different discussion, but sure, you just throw them all in together becase you have an opinion on one of them. > blowing the lid on the Wests' illegal, criminal behaviour Now you're throwing all the 'West' in with Assange, great. > This isn't going to stop just because Assange has been kidnapped by his enemies. Good, genuinely good, accountability is needed. But make no mistake, Assange is a terrible martyr to go by.
    - raxxorrax 7y ago
      > Thats a different topic and a different discussion No, it is the reason for the prosecution.
    - fit2rule 7y ago
      The West = The 5-eyes Coalition. The ones who tried to start World War 3 in 2003, and haven't stopped trying since. 2,000,000 innocent people murdered. That is quite cunty. Assange is a shining light on the darkness that is Western ignorance of the true cost of its heinous, illegal wars.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 7y ago
  The post is interesting. I had a similar revelation when my wife, a self-professed history buff, said she won't read My Struggle, because she will be put on the list somewhere. I initially found it amusing, but then I understood that even though she apparently does not seem to care much about privacy, she instinctively understands how weird things have become today. She does not want to address it, but she adjusts her behavior to fit the mold. Bilekas post is the same. It attempts to present a neutral position. It recognizes current state and assumes that this is just how things are. Personally, I find it chilling that an individual today is willing to effectively say the following: 1. Assange may be innocent, but it does not matter as the real verdict was already rendered. This is just a formality. 2. His pre-punishment punishment is not as bad as it could have been somewhere else. 3. Assange knew what he was getting into, therefore he does not have basic human rights ( variation of: you don't kick the bear argument )
  - bilekas 7y ago
    > 1. Assange may be innocent, but it does not matter as the real verdict was already rendered. This is just a formality. 2. His pre-punishment punishment is not as bad as it could have been somewhere else. 3. Assange knew what he was getting into, therefore he does not have basic human rights ( variation of: you don't kick the bear argument ) I get what you mean and yes, you have a point. I guess I'm just surprised that people are getting annoyed this is happening now when it was always going to happen. It's like constantly reminding someone that the boiling water will burn your hand, the boiling water will burn your hand, the boiling water will burn your hand. Then people being surprised and outraged that the water burnt your hand. This outrage just seems almost topical. It should have been made earlier, it wasn't so this is the result.
    - lolc 7y ago
      It's easy to say this was going to happen. (Especially after it happened.) But it's not a natural law like boiling water burning one's hand. Proteins are always going to be damaged by heat. But here we observe due process being violated. It's not a natural law that due process is going to be violated. Violations depend on attitude, checks and incentives. As a society, we can shape those to a large degree! We could have complained earlier, in other instances. You can say we should have been more alert. There were victims we ignored. But that does not invalidate our complaints now!
- simion314 7y ago
  >He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped. Solitary confinement without any justified reason is a form of torture and from the UN employee documents linked in this thread it is illegal and against human rights. FYI you could have torture that is not physical in case you did not know. For this individual that was not proven guilty and is not a danger he must be treated as any other individual, not that if he is guilty you can torture him anyway.

bilekas 7y ago

I'm not joking, what Assange did was at best 'cunty'. He could have been more careful releasing the information but he wasnt. He's being made an example of, its clear as day. My 'if its right or wrong' depends on your side of the argument, so no. I'm not joking. > "cruel and unusual punishment" Couldn't agree with you more, he should not be made to suffer needlessly.. He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped. He knew he was going to be made an example of. This is the result. I'm not saying its nice, but it's not even punishment yet. He will receive much worse later I'm sure.

AllegedAlec 7y ago
> I'm not joking, what Assange did was at best 'cunty'. Releasing evidence of governments doing torturing, extra-judicial killings of journalists and children,which violate the Geneva Convention, as well as a slew of other materials isn't 'cunty'. > He could have been more careful releasing the information but he wasnt. In what way was he not careful? > My 'if its right or wrong' depends on your side of the argument, so no. I'm not joking. That's weird, because you are a fucking clown. > Couldn't agree with you more, he should not be made to suffer needlessly.. He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped. He knew he was going to be made an example of. This is the result. I'm not saying its nice, but it's not even punishment yet. He will receive much worse later I'm sure. Look up the definition of cruel and unusual punishment.
- bilekas 7y ago
  > Releasing evidence of governments doing torturing, extra-judicial killings of journalists and children,which violate the Geneva Convention, as well as a slew of other materials isn't 'cunty'. He released evidence rightly so but compromising a lot of sources, methods and other info. It could have been released better. The info should have been released, my argument is not in defence of the original actions. > That's weird, because you are a fucking clown. Okay
  - AllegedAlec 7y ago
    > He released evidence rightly so but compromising a lot of sources, methods and other info. It could have been released better. The info should have been released, my argument is not in defence of the original actions. According to him and his lawyers he did not. The arguments for this are expanded on in the linked article.
    - bilekas 7y ago
      Well according to the other side, people died because of the releases. Information was lost, sources fled. https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=712659290 https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=712659290 So again, right or wrong depends on your opinion. Also again, I re-iterate and stress. I am not defending the bad actions of the US or anyone, I just don't believe that Assange is this 'holier than though' who needs to be coveted.
      - henearkr 7y ago
        You seem to imply that, because there were dramatic consequences from the release, then he was guilty from the release. Again, it seems that the problematic leak (uncensored names) comes from a 3rd party, so your implication is like a sophism.
        FireBeyond 7y ago
        Apparently in your world one cannot be an accessory. If you arranged, assisted with and actively participated in the exfiltration of classified information, handed it on to someone else who agreed with you when you said "states can decrypt this; best just to publish now", apparently you get to say "woah, woah, woah, why are you angry at me, I had nothing to do with people getting hold of the information in these documents!". Who is being sophist now?
- vinceguidry 7y ago
  This comment violates multiple HN guidelines. In particular "That's weird, because you are a fucking clown." violates this one: When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Your last statement also qualifies as a shallow dismissal, as per this guideline: Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. In case you haven't read them yet, here is a link: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
henearkr 7y ago
But it seems you think that Assange was responsible for the leak of the uncensored documents. The defense's claim is that it was clearly an unintended release without consent by a third party. So negating this, for now, is quite a stretch.
fit2rule 7y ago
The real cunts are those justifying war crimes and continued criminal, illegal crimes against humanity in the form of the 5-eyes imperialist wars. Not a word of criticism about those guys, eh - no, instead, we'll just shoot the messenger. There will be more leaks, Assange or not. The truth is, there are far, far more worse crimes committed by the 5-eyes Coalition to be revealed on the horizon. Assange is just one of many who are working on blowing the lid on the Wests' illegal, criminal behaviour. Unfortunately for those who believe in the moral authority of the 5-eyes coalition as being irreproachable, you can't easily cover up crimes against humanity. Be prepared for more leaks, folks. This isn't going to stop just because Assange has been kidnapped by his enemies.
- bilekas 7y ago
  > The real cunts are those justifying war crimes and continued criminal, illegal crimes against humanity in the form of the 5-eyes imperialist wars. Not a word of criticism about those guys, eh - no, instead, we'll just shoot the messenger. Thats a different topic and a different discussion, but sure, you just throw them all in together becase you have an opinion on one of them. > blowing the lid on the Wests' illegal, criminal behaviour Now you're throwing all the 'West' in with Assange, great. > This isn't going to stop just because Assange has been kidnapped by his enemies. Good, genuinely good, accountability is needed. But make no mistake, Assange is a terrible martyr to go by.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    > Thats a different topic and a different discussion No, it is the reason for the prosecution.
  - fit2rule 7y ago
    The West = The 5-eyes Coalition. The ones who tried to start World War 3 in 2003, and haven't stopped trying since. 2,000,000 innocent people murdered. That is quite cunty. Assange is a shining light on the darkness that is Western ignorance of the true cost of its heinous, illegal wars.
A4ET8a8uTh0 7y ago
The post is interesting. I had a similar revelation when my wife, a self-professed history buff, said she won't read My Struggle, because she will be put on the list somewhere. I initially found it amusing, but then I understood that even though she apparently does not seem to care much about privacy, she instinctively understands how weird things have become today. She does not want to address it, but she adjusts her behavior to fit the mold. Bilekas post is the same. It attempts to present a neutral position. It recognizes current state and assumes that this is just how things are. Personally, I find it chilling that an individual today is willing to effectively say the following: 1. Assange may be innocent, but it does not matter as the real verdict was already rendered. This is just a formality. 2. His pre-punishment punishment is not as bad as it could have been somewhere else. 3. Assange knew what he was getting into, therefore he does not have basic human rights ( variation of: you don't kick the bear argument )
- bilekas 7y ago
  > 1. Assange may be innocent, but it does not matter as the real verdict was already rendered. This is just a formality. 2. His pre-punishment punishment is not as bad as it could have been somewhere else. 3. Assange knew what he was getting into, therefore he does not have basic human rights ( variation of: you don't kick the bear argument ) I get what you mean and yes, you have a point. I guess I'm just surprised that people are getting annoyed this is happening now when it was always going to happen. It's like constantly reminding someone that the boiling water will burn your hand, the boiling water will burn your hand, the boiling water will burn your hand. Then people being surprised and outraged that the water burnt your hand. This outrage just seems almost topical. It should have been made earlier, it wasn't so this is the result.
  - lolc 7y ago
    It's easy to say this was going to happen. (Especially after it happened.) But it's not a natural law like boiling water burning one's hand. Proteins are always going to be damaged by heat. But here we observe due process being violated. It's not a natural law that due process is going to be violated. Violations depend on attitude, checks and incentives. As a society, we can shape those to a large degree! We could have complained earlier, in other instances. You can say we should have been more alert. There were victims we ignored. But that does not invalidate our complaints now!
simion314 7y ago
>He's not in a labor camp, he's not being whipped. Solitary confinement without any justified reason is a form of torture and from the UN employee documents linked in this thread it is illegal and against human rights. FYI you could have torture that is not physical in case you did not know. For this individual that was not proven guilty and is not a danger he must be treated as any other individual, not that if he is guilty you can torture him anyway.