My Problem with Wikileaks

[zecarlo]

@chris_ottawa

the El Salvador government that was carrying out massacres and abducting children,

Exactly.

[chris_ottawa]

I don’t think you understand, the US was complicit in the actions of the government of El Salvador. They funded them through the whole thing too.

@zecarlo

Bin Laden wasn’t on US soil when 9/11 occurred but that doesn’t mean he didn’t commit a crime we could punish him for.

Yeah, but now they back Al Qaeda in Syria. Now it’s shifted from a war on terrorism to a war on journalism. Freedom of speech is a threat to democracy.

[pfury]

@chris_ottawa

but he didn’t commit any crimes in the US

I believe being a co conspirator in a crime commit within a country counts as committing crimes in that country. I know that applies to “computer based” crimes but tbh I’m not sure if it’s what’s being applied here.

[Mufasa]

@chris_ottawa

…a war on journalism…

I’ll say it again, @chris_ottawa:

If Wikileaks had released volumes upon volumes of information on Russia, Trump, China, Iran, the RNC and others…you would have much more of an argument.

However; this one-sided/asymmetric release of information; that looks and feels very “agenda” driven; causes me a LOT of pause; especially when an organization like Wikileaks gets on the “freedom of speech/journalistic freedom and integrity” bandwagon.

[chris_ottawa]

How does any country have the right to pass a law to govern the actions of non-citizens on foreign soil.

Alcohol is illegal in Saudi Arabia. If you have a beer tonight, can you be extradited to Saudi Arabia? What if you blaspheme the prophet Muhammad? And you thought those were the fanatics…

[chris_ottawa]

There could be some sort of hidden agenda, but that doesn’t change the fact that what was released is true and relevant.

[anon10035199]

Assange said he would release dirt on trump, if he had any… (who knows if that’s true or not). Which “side” do you believe they are helping?

Like with the Manning leak, it made the U.S look bad, I wouldn’t say it was on political lines.

Maybe he was being honest, maybe Hilary is just the rat that we all know she is.

What good would releasing atrocities committed by Russia and Iran do? They don’t give a fuck, they aren’t the “policeman” of the world. Russia is helping Assad, and Iran currently runs destabilizing operations in Yemen. Hard to get egg on your face, when its already covered in blood.

[Mufasa]

@chris_ottawa

“…that doesn’t change the fact that what was released is true and relevant…”

I never have argued this point.

[zecarlo]

@chris_ottawa

I don’t think you understand, the US was complicit in the actions of the government of El Salvador. They funded them through the whole thing too.

The fact that those countries had governments with people who could do those things to their own people says that they were going to be screwed up regardless. It’s like blaming an American drug addict for a Mexican cartel decapitation.

[zecarlo]

@chris_ottawa

How does any country have the right to pass a law to govern the actions of non-citizens on foreign soil.

Reciprocity.

[Mufasa]

@anon10035199

“…Assange said he would release dirt on trump, if he had any…”

…Right…

[pfury]

@chris_ottawa

How does any country have the right to pass a law to govern the actions of non-citizens on foreign soil.

Do not quote me on this, but I believe it’s due to UN agreements. Furthermore the country that is doing the extraditing is known for having the ability to exercise EXTREME bias. In a practical sense it seems to solely be up to the country hosting the criminal (or embassy, as it tends to be these days).

@chris_ottawa

Alcohol is illegal in Saudi Arabia. If you have a beer tonight, can you be extradited to Saudi Arabia?

Now you’re crossing things. Saudi laws do not apply on American soil. Me drinking a beer on American soil doesn’t violate a Saudi law, as Saudi laws apply within their borders.

Assange is accused of computer crimes IN America. Courts have ruled the jurisdiction of computer crimes to the place the victim is in most cases. The analogy doesn’t have legs.

[Mufasa]

@anon10035199

“…They don’t give a fuck…”

(The same could actually be said for Trump…)

But don’t turn around and get on some “Freedom of Speech/Journalistic Integrity” bandwagon like you are the Mother Theresa of both.

[Californiagrown]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but journalists have the legal right to publish confindential information, as long as they neither broke nor encouraged the breaking of any laws to come by that info.

[pfury]

@Mufasa

Journalistic Integrity

I still need serious convincing that Assange is even a journalist. When your entire history shows such a clear path of bias that even Infowars and WaPo shudder, you don’t stop being state sponsored propaganda just because you’re doing it through a website.

[anon10035199]

@Mufasa

(The same could actually be said for Trump…)

Are we talking about individuals here, or Nation states? Cant really compare them.

If he had released dirt on trump, It COULD affect his presidency.

If they release dirt on Iran or Russia, nobody , and I mean NOBODY, will give a fuck.

[chris_ottawa]

@Mufasa

@chris_ottawa

“…that doesn’t change the fact that what was released is true and relevant…”

I never have argued this point.

So basically you ae just disappointed that they only released info on the US, and not Trump, correct?

@zecarlo

@chris_ottawa

I don’t think you understand, the US was complicit in the actions of the government of El Salvador. They funded them through the whole thing too.

The fact that those countries had governments with people who could do those things to their own people says that they were going to be screwed up regardless. It’s like blaming an American drug addict for a Mexican cartel decapitation.

No, it was a US-backed puppet government that came into power through a coup and received military aid from the US. You should go and read about this rather than arguing about things that you neither know nor understand.

@pfury

Assange is accused of computer crimes IN America. Courts have ruled the jurisdiction of computer crimes to the place the victim is in most cases.

Which courts? American? Which other country can do this?

@Californiagrown

Correct me if I’m wrong, but journalists have the legal right to publish confindential information, as long as they neither broke nor encouraged the breaking of any laws to come by that info.

So it was the last I heard.

[pfury]

@chris_ottawa

Which courts? American? Which other country can do this?

Any country. It would simply need to submit its proof along with request for extradition to the host country.

But even then, you’re still at the mercy of the EXTREME discretion of the host country. Short of international war crimes, it practically seems to be always at the host country’s discretion.

(googled it this time. seems pretty straightforward, but very power dependent)

edit: for reference

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/extradition.html

[zecarlo]

@chris_ottawa

No, it was a US-backed puppet government that came into power through a coup and received military aid from the US.

Who did the killing of their own people? I guess it’s all America’s fault.

[strongmangoals]

@chris_ottawa

That’s weird because he never committed any crimes on US soil and isn’t a US citizen, how does the US have the ability to prosecute non-citizens for supposed crimes outside their borders?

This isn’t unusual, it is usually attached to free trade agreements or some other incentive. I buy your corn for cheap and you buy my sugar for cheap… also we guarantee to buy a billion tonnes of corm if you hand over anyone who shares national secrets