WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Discuss events that have an impact on you and the world today. A home for honest, serious, and open discussion.

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Jordan » Fri Dec 10, 2010 9:27 am

WeiWenDi wrote:
James wrote:In other news, Comedy.

:lol:

Indeed. Back when Bush was in power I couldn't stand the fact that people like Marc Thiessen actually had sway over the way we conducted our politics, but since the neoconservative agenda stands largely discredited, Marc's now good for a few belly laughs.

SlickSlicer wrote:He didn't commit rape. Some Swedish women were butthurt that he wouldn't take a test to see if he had STDs, so they accused him of rape later in order to bring him to court. The rape charges were dismissed and only brought to light to begin with because the laws in Sweden are absurd regarding the matter. IIRC, because his condom broke by accident on one occasion, it was considered in the Swedish law books to be the least significant form of rape.


Sorry, Slick. 'No' means 'no' - every damn time. If what they consented to was sex with a condom, and he wouldn't stop once it was off, then he committed rape, and he should be taken to task. Quite frankly, I'm glad he was arrested, so that we can get all this cleared up appropriately. The two problems at this point are: a.) unlike his victims, he's high-profile and has a lot of political power, and b.) the authorities tasked with judging him have an a priori conflict of interest when judging him.

Sorry, got to go. Chinese test in 5.


I don't think he or she knew that the condom broke. Regardless, apparently there was some misunderstanding in general because I'm pretty sure when he went to court on this, the rape charges were dismissed.

To be honest, this shit happens all the time and in my opinion it's very hard to prove that a guy is guilty of rape if he and a woman have consensual sex and the condom breaks. For one thing, did they explicitly agree to have sex with a condom beforehand or did the guy just decide to use one? Second, were both parties aware that the condom broke? Third, did the woman tell him to stop, but the guy refused to heed this warning? I think these things must be taken into account in a case like this. In order for it to be considered rape, in my opinion the guy would have had to continue penetrating after the woman actually said "No," "Stop," etc. Otherwise there would seriously be tons of people in jail for rape. In that case, I think the law would be missing the point of what rape is, which is violating a woman against her will. Then again, whatever Julian was charged with was considered a very minor example of rape anyways. In my opinion, at most it should be considered a misdemeanor rather than an actual rape.

It sounds like it wasn't rape to me because the charges were dismissed. Moreover, the woman in question tracked him down only because of a completely separate matter. She really just wanted him to get tested for STDs, and if he had simply agreed to do that, she would never have brought the rape question to court. The rape question was just a way to pin him down. I posted a link in my previous post which verifies most of what I said. Check it out if you have the time. It's actually pretty interesting imo.

As for the topic as a whole...It doesn't seem like the secrets that he revealed compromised the United States' security in any major way. It sounds like it just embarrassed a bunch of people in politics. If what he did is truly deemed to have been illegal though, I agree that he should be brought to trial. I just don't feel like he deserves a harsh sentence though. From my point of view he's not really a major criminal. I think even a smaller jail sentence would teach him that government secrets aren't for sale.
User avatar
Jordan
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 5884
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:52 am

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Gray Riders » Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:43 pm

SlickSlicer wrote:
If what he did is truly deemed to have been illegal though, I agree that he should be brought to trial.

Maybe it's just me, but it seems rather similar to me to someone who sells stolen cars, knows fully well that they are stolen, but didn't steal them himself. Fencing is quite illegal in most places. Now, Wikileaks isn't making money but I feel the situations are close enough.

I honestly don't trust this sites supposedly noble motivation, for various reasons, which is why I won't lose any sleep if it gets shut down. On the other hand, I don't care enough to hope it does go down because it doesn't seem to actually cause any damage thus far, aside from, as mentioned, embarassing politicians. A few years jail time at most, I'd say. In practice they'll probably try to do as much harm as possible to anyone involved
Gray Riders
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 2055
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:02 am

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Ranbir » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:35 pm

I will have things to day about this but that will be done later. This might be of interest to some:

"The imaginary number is a fine and wonderful resource of the human spirit, almost an amphibian between being and not being." - Gottfried Leibniz
Science snobbery.
User avatar
Ranbir
For Queen and Country
 
Posts: 8516
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 9:27 am
Location: Your heart. <3

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby WeiWenDi » Sat Dec 11, 2010 6:06 am

SlickSlicer wrote:I think these things must be taken into account in a case like this. In order for it to be considered rape, in my opinion the guy would have had to continue penetrating after the woman actually said "No," "Stop," etc.


Yeah, I think that's precisely what these women accused him of doing. Starts with a condom, condom comes off, woman says 'stop', Assange keeps going. That's assault right there. If Assange was found innocent of that in court, that's another story.

But the rest of your post - indeed, your previous one as well, where you dismissed them as 'butthurt' - just struck me as typical 'blame the victim' garbage. The ones put on trial were not Assange's accusers, nor should they be blamed for bringing a lawsuit just because they want to avoid STD's and unwanted pregnancy. Sorry if I'm coming off as overly blunt, but there are in my personal acquaintance rape victims who have had to put up with this shit themselves; I know what they would say in this situation and they would be saying it far more bluntly than I am here. People accused of rape get off scot-free, particularly if they are considered well-respected, where their accusers are dismissed, ridiculed, bullied into silence (to add further insult to injury).
Some more blood, Chekov. The needle won't hurt, Chekov. Take off your shirt, Chekov. Roll over, Chekov. Breathe deeply, Chekov. Blood sample, Chekov! Marrow sample, Chekov! Skin sample, Chekov! If I live long enough... I'm going to run out of samples.
User avatar
WeiWenDi
Hedgehog Emperor
 
Posts: 3833
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:09 am
Location: L'Étoile du Nord

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Ranbir » Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:37 pm

If Assange was found innocent of that in court, that's another story.


The case was dropped months ago. It is convenient timing a different department decide to reinvestigate it. All rather strange.
"The imaginary number is a fine and wonderful resource of the human spirit, almost an amphibian between being and not being." - Gottfried Leibniz
Science snobbery.
User avatar
Ranbir
For Queen and Country
 
Posts: 8516
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 9:27 am
Location: Your heart. <3

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Crazedmongoose » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:14 pm

I've recently switched from somebody opposed to Assange to, still somebody who opposes Assange, but an Open-leak supporter (the new version coming out) and a severe Assange sympathizer. And my views haven't changed at all. What changed? Well for once I've been exposed to the terror that is how the US, it's government, esp. the Republicans, the press and the people are talking about Assange and wikileaks.

My view was always this.

The modern day media circus and punditry has essentially made real governance and diplomacy impossible. Diplomacy needs to work with a degree of pragmatism and if diplomats and head of states aren't allowed... to put everything on the table and talk in privacy, some of our biggest diplomatic breakthroughs couldn't have happened.

For example:

Egypt would still be a violently anti-West state. The entire 3rd Egyptian army would have been annihilated by Israel during the Yom Kippur conflict.

China would still not have normalized relations with the West. As the Nixon-Mao talks wouldn't have happened in transparency.

And the big one, the Cuban missile crisis would have escalated as both sides are forced to posture. Remember that there was a secret agreement of the US removing missiles of Turkey in exchange for USSR not delivering more missiles to Cuba.

HOWEVER, knowing things like this, it does NOT entitle the US to call for the assassination of the citizen of an allied sovereign nation, or the arrest (for what crime even? He's an Australian citizen living in the UK). The way they bully Paypal, Visa etc. is also draconian. (So in that sense I support Anonymous action against Paypal etc.). I also think Assange should be offered the fullest rights and protection under the law, as well as consular assistance if need be.

BUT, I don't buy the idea even for a second that the Swedish prosecutor are bending to the will of the US and bringing Assange up on phantom charges. And if Assange is convicted on sexual assault charges he should serve his sentence (in Sweden, or Aust. if we can get him back, under NO circumstances should the US even touch a hair of him).

So those are my views. Not too unreasonable I don't think. I hope neways.
User avatar
Crazedmongoose
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:10 am
Location: Sydney, Aus

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Zhuanyong » Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:03 pm

It was only a matter of time before they had to let him out. And as the article states, he had a few friends waiting to pledge funds to bail him out.

Bail set at $317,000
Avatar: N/A

[No comment]
User avatar
Zhuanyong
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 5355
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:58 pm
Location: If I told you, would it really matter?

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Jordan » Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:52 am

WeiWenDi wrote:
SlickSlicer wrote:I think these things must be taken into account in a case like this. In order for it to be considered rape, in my opinion the guy would have had to continue penetrating after the woman actually said "No," "Stop," etc.


Yeah, I think that's precisely what these women accused him of doing. Starts with a condom, condom comes off, woman says 'stop', Assange keeps going. That's assault right there. If Assange was found innocent of that in court, that's another story.

But the rest of your post - indeed, your previous one as well, where you dismissed them as 'butthurt' - just struck me as typical 'blame the victim' garbage. The ones put on trial were not Assange's accusers, nor should they be blamed for bringing a lawsuit just because they want to avoid STD's and unwanted pregnancy. Sorry if I'm coming off as overly blunt, but there are in my personal acquaintance rape victims who have had to put up with this shit themselves; I know what they would say in this situation and they would be saying it far more bluntly than I am here. People accused of rape get off scot-free, particularly if they are considered well-respected, where their accusers are dismissed, ridiculed, bullied into silence (to add further insult to injury).


I completely respect your opinion, and in many cases I would agree with what you're saying. It is true that some rather dirty tactics are used against people in order to, as you say, blame the victim.

As Ranbir pointed out and as the link I posted previously showed though, in this case it really does seem like Assange is being targeted for other reasons, and I really do think that in this particular case he is innocent of this particular crime.
User avatar
Jordan
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 5884
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:52 am

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Zhuanyong » Wed Dec 15, 2010 2:12 pm

SlickSlicer wrote:As Ranbir pointed out and as the link I posted previously showed though, in this case it really does seem like Assange is being targeted for other reasons, and I really do think that in this particular case he is innocent of this particular crime.


I believe that he is being targeted for other reasons as well. I do believe that the rape charges to be just the face purpose for detaining him until they can figure out, if possible, a way to nail him. Not to diminish anything that he could have done in regards to rape but, I don't believe the powers to be are really purposeful in that issue at all. It looks to be just a sidebar to 'their' real issue with him.
Avatar: N/A

[No comment]
User avatar
Zhuanyong
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 5355
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:58 pm
Location: If I told you, would it really matter?

Re: WikiLeaks: Revealing Open Secrets

Unread postby Ranbir » Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:10 pm

Okay:

Assange and Wikileaks are not the problem. American's security and classification policies are.

The first worrying aspect is:

Why did SIPRNet have unencrypted, supposedly private, archives? The media needs to be focused on this. the failure of SIPRNET management.

The security of a file is based on who the least secure person has access to it: if any of those files required a lot of security; why was a Private able to access it?

The fact it was a Private that accessed them highlights a problem the US government has had since its founding; and one that any and every nation has had since their respective births: Insider threat.

Why was so much material categorised incorrectly within the archive?

Access logs; why was it that they could not discover who a. accessed and b. downloaded the archive?

As to what wikileaks stands for; it is just a platform. If it didn't exist, these files would have found themselves on a usergroup mailing list or a torrent site. The convenient thing here, for the US, is that there is a 'face' to their problem, his name is Assange.

And just to quip briefly on Assange; his aim in all this is thus: He wants toruin government conspiracies(secrets that go against the will of the people; which is why they are kept secret). The concept is drive the cost of keeping a secret up to a point where it where it will eventually fail to be worth it. In this aspect it can be analogous to a terrorist as their goal is to drive up the cost of anti-terror measures.*

*Bear in mind, while the cost increases, the effectiveness to combat their respective threats does not.


@crazed

I have to disagree. Governments are supposed to act in our interests and by the moral structure we as a society have developed. My view is, if my government is having to do something in secret, then it must be doing something that I am not in favour of or thinks so little of my value as an electing citizen it rather do it without having a reasoned dialogue with me; like a government officially denouncing torture but then going about doing it anyway.

For all the posturing between US and Russia during the cold war, I don't believe its people were in favour of any military outcome. They can play active agents in pressuring their respective governments to find a peaceful solution; and if they have the transparency to see who is being the stumbling block towards such an outcome; they are much better positioned to do something about it. What was it about a seemingly reasonable agreement that they felt their peoples would not understand?

It is because governments can act in secrecy from its people that democratic actions fail. What good was the incredibly large anti-Iraq war demonstration in London and national opinion; when there was no way to see how ministers orchestrated a war that was not based on fact?

I think it reveals a serious issue if the assumption is that diplomacy must be based on lies.
"The imaginary number is a fine and wonderful resource of the human spirit, almost an amphibian between being and not being." - Gottfried Leibniz
Science snobbery.
User avatar
Ranbir
For Queen and Country
 
Posts: 8516
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 9:27 am
Location: Your heart. <3

PreviousNext

Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved