What did Assange do wrong?

[Estro Felino]

I think a lot of rumors and conspiracy theories about the FBI, CIA, NSA, and other such agencies stem from perceptions that they are super-secretive and that their motives are not related to genuine matters of national security (which is generally reflected in US policies which are known to the public).

In other words, if a politician or other official states a motive which can not be justified by a legitimate national security need, then that's generally a clue that something foul is afoot.

To point out an obvious example, anyone who could read a map and discern the distance between Vietnam and the United States could easily tell that any tales about a communist insurgency in that far-away country threatening US national security were fabricated nonsense. When the government is caught in a blatant lie like that, then it creates a palpable atmosphere of distrust between the government and the people.

CIA officials under Trump discussed assassinating Julian Assange – report

Mike Pompeo and officials requested ‘options’ for killing Assange following WikiLeaks’ publication of CIA hacking tools, report says

www.theguardian.com

This article is clear. Why do they want to get rid of him?
Because his work disclosed those emails...those emails that made Hillary lose the elections in 2016.
They want to get revenge on him. And they are getting revenge on him.
To punish him for disclosing the truth about the squalid things that woman did.

The truth is: who is the bad guy here? Hillary or Assange?

 

[Estro Felino]

I'm in no position to give him to you.
Besides, I don't trust Italians...if the winds
change, they might kill Ukrainians instead.

I was kidding of course.

 

[Revoltingest]

I was kidding of course.

I was serious.
I can't give you Assange.
He isn't even in USA.

 

[Stevicus]

I didn't make these claims.

CIA officials under Trump discussed assassinating Julian Assange – report

Mike Pompeo and officials requested ‘options’ for killing Assange following WikiLeaks’ publication of CIA hacking tools, report says

www.theguardian.com

I guess it would depend on whether there's a legitimate national security interest in going after Assange. I doubt that there actually is any legitimate US interest here. Again, the best way to gauge that would be to look at current US foreign policy and the national security perceptions as publicly stated by US officials. This article suggests that the US government's motive towards wanting Assange is more personal, driven by revenge and emotionalism, not anything that can be identified as a rational, practical US national interest.

If nothing else, at least it demonstrates a certain level of emotional instability, obsessiveness, and irrationality at the highest levels of power in the US government. Granted, that may not prove any specific "conspiracy theory" or rumor, but it does call into question the sanity and moral character of those who are running the government.

 

[Revoltingest]

If nothing else, at least it demonstrates a certain level of emotional instability, obsessiveness, and irrationality at the highest levels of power in the US government. Granted, that may not prove any specific "conspiracy theory" or rumor, but it does call into question the sanity and moral character of those who are running the government.

Don't forget who was Prez at the time.
It could be that he (not the CIA) was the
one who broached the issue of assassination.

I'll wager that this whole thread
is really about George Soros.

 

[Estro Felino]

I guess it would depend on whether there's a legitimate national security interest in going after Assange. I doubt that there actually is any legitimate US interest here. Again, the best way to gauge that would be to look at current US foreign policy and the national security perceptions as publicly stated by US officials. This article suggests that the US government's motive towards wanting Assange is more personal, driven by revenge and emotionalism, not anything that can be identified as a rational, practical US national interest.

If nothing else, at least it demonstrates a certain level of emotional instability, obsessiveness, and irrationality at the highest levels of power in the US government. Granted, that may not prove any specific "conspiracy theory" or rumor, but it does call into question the sanity and moral character of those who are running the government.

Don't forget who was Prez at the time.
It could be that he (not the CIA) was the
one who broached the issue of assassination.

I'll wager that this whole thread
is really about George Soros.

If we think of the so called MIC conspiracy theory, if it's proved to be right, politics is irrelevant since both parties serve the MIC.

 

[Estro Felino]

I was serious.
I can't give you Assange.
He isn't even in USA.

Ok...but do you think he should be extradited to the US?

 

[Revoltingest]

If we think of the so called MIC conspiracy theory, if it's proved to be right, politics is irrelevant since both parties serve the MIC.

Does George Soros run it?
Or the Jews?

 

[Revoltingest]

Ok...but do you think he should be extradited to the US?

I think he should be released,
& given a ticker tape parade,
& the Medal Of Honor.

 

[Estro Felino]

I think he should be released,
& given a ticker tape parade,
& the Medal Of Honor.

That's good. Thanks.

 

[Estro Felino]

Does George Soros run it?
Or the Jews?

Not one single person. And I believe they are all atheists,..so I wouldn't bring up religion.

 

[Stevicus]

Don't forget who was Prez at the time.
It could be that he (not the CIA) was the
one who broached the issue of assassination.

That could very well be true. But it's also not the first time the CIA has considered assassinating someone.

I'll wager that this whole thread
is really about George Soros.

Does George Soros have a problem with Assange?

 

[Estro Felino]

That could very well be true. But it's also not the first time the CIA has considered assassinating someone.



Does George Soros have a problem with Assange?

Soros and Hillary are one thing.
Assange basically exposed Hillary's deeds.

 

[Stevicus]

If we think of the so called MIC conspiracy theory, if it's proved to be right, politics is irrelevant since both parties serve the MIC.

I'll reserve comment on whatever both parties might be serving, although it seems painfully obvious that they're not serving the interests of the U.S. or the American people.

That may be a key point of contention that underlies a lot of conspiracy theories against the government. It's not just about allegations of possible wrongdoing or corruption by government officials, but it also carries the insinuation that there are some in power who have divided loyalties.

I recall when I was on a message board discussing the JFK assassination, there were some positions which were somewhat unique, such as those who believed that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK, but believed it was done for patriotic, pro-American reasons. I don't agree with that kind of reasoning or justification, but the idea that "they did the wrong thing for the right reasons" has come up quite a bit in our history and political culture.

I don't really think of conspiracy theories as anything to be proven. I see them more as challenges to governments and political parties to demonstrate where their loyalties lie.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not one single person. And I believe they are all atheists,..so I wouldn't bring up religion.

Atheists aren't all that common here.
Nearly all politicians are Christians.
There are a very few Muslims.
How do we atheists gain such control over all Christians without ever holding office?
Oh, right...George Soros & the Jews!

 

[Revoltingest]

Does George Soros have a problem with Assange?

No.
Assange is 2nd in command behind
George, the Grand Poobah of the Jewish
Nazi Military Deep State Industrial Complex.

 

[Estro Felino]

I'll reserve comment on whatever both parties might be serving, although it seems painfully obvious that they're not serving the interests of the U.S. or the American people.

That may be a key point of contention that underlies a lot of conspiracy theories against the government. It's not just about allegations of possible wrongdoing or corruption by government officials, but it also carries the insinuation that there are some in power who have divided loyalties.

I recall when I was on a message board discussing the JFK assassination, there were some positions which were somewhat unique, such as those who believed that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK, but believed it was done for patriotic, pro-American reasons. I don't agree with that kind of reasoning or justification, but the idea that "they did the wrong thing for the right reasons" has come up quite a bit in our history and political culture.

I don't really think of conspiracy theories as anything to be proven. I see them more as challenges to governments and political parties to demonstrate where their loyalties lie.

Europe and the US are very different, culturally and juridically.
Just think that there is a continuum between 1776 and 2023...that is, there is the same constitution, the same political parties and the same élites.

Continental Europe went out of the ancien régime, the absolutism in 1789.
We are a nation that was born in 1861, and that adopted a Constitution entirely based upon Enlightenment and the Napoleonic law.

America has always relied on the philosophy of pragmatism, that really includes (not openly) the dogma "the end justifies the means".

Our juridical tradition is not pragmatic, it is redundant and based upon the Nation, and the notion of State. As Kant and Voltaire taught us.
Patriotism here means to serve the State (and we are all the State) so by serving the State you serve yourself too; so privacy and private are perceived as individualistic and egoistic interests.

In my language there was not such a notion as privacy. We imported it from English. We say la privacy, feminine noun.

 

[Revoltingest]

For the record: according to the Italian law, Judaism is a religion, is not a race.

Did you know that atheism isn't a race?
It's true!

 

[Estro Felino]

Did you know that atheism isn't a race?
It's true!

Religion is something you choose.
You were not born an atheist. I was not born a Christian.

 

[Revoltingest]

Religion is something you choose.
You were not born an atheist. I was not born a Christian.

I had no choice of religion.
I was born not believing any of those loopy fantasies,
& remained a non-believer because my brain would
never allow me to believe that sky fairies are real.
Anyway, atheism is still not a race, no matter what
you & the running dogs of communism say.