How do Australians really feel about Julian Assange?

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: How do Australians really feel about Julian Assange?
Panther 12/6/2010 10:24:25 PM

I don't know if this is stirring up a hornet's nest and i do apologize for this not being related to the military, so please forgive me. But my curiosity has been piqued by an Australian buddy from another forum saying that the Aussie view of him is only positive and lovely? Is this true? I do have a hard time believing that to be the case, but then again, what do i know? I figured i would get a second opinion if it isn't too much trouble or won't stir up any of the same!?

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

VelocityVector 12/6/2010 11:20:21 PM

Quote Reply

VelocityVector 12/6/2010 11:22:22 PM

From now on those holding influential positions with various world powers will need to reconsider with emphasis how their supposed hidden actions might be viewed by us commoners should such information come to light. That is a fine thing, more sunshine please. Assange himself is an evil ba$tard who is up to no good. He has damaged operations and jeopardized lives but in the long run western civilization may benefit regardless because heretofor many in power have been quite willing to forfeit others' lives and risk missions as means to further their own personal positions and agendas and now they may be called-out for this. That a commoner has had the gall to play chess for a change may positively influence the game, each of us is a potential publisher, so under appropriate circumstances please do publish both damning public and private disclosures along with supporting evidence. Root out the scum. 0.02

v^2

Quote Reply

DropBear 12/7/2010 6:21:38 AM

Not sure about positive and lovely?

It is getting regular media coverage in the usual places. Can't say it is a huge talking piece at my workplace, more like passing commentary. I haven't heard anyone say they think it is a fabulous thing he is doing. Free speech is great until you put peoples lives in danger. I personally wonder who the thousands of folk are worldwide who are downloading and reading all these transcripts. I couldn't be bothered. They must have a lot of free time.

I have no problem (as far as free speech goes) if he wants to dish the dirt on "who thinks what of whom", however, I don't see why the public really needs to know (or cares) what one country thinks of another in private. Does the average person in the street care if Berlusconi is vain and parties? Angela Merkel is conservative and boring. So what?

I do have issues with pouring out sensitive info on ongoing armed conflicts, their tactics/strategies and terrestrial sites deemed important to national security. Not helpful.

Curious.

Quote Reply

VelocityVector The Facebook Wasn't Lively Enough... 12/7/2010 2:34:37 PM

I wish to contribute the obvious and admit error. I am not Australian but American. This ought to be clear from my inability to communicate in proper English language. I viewed the thread last night on a dinky screen while in bed and opted to post with my thumbs having overlooked the qualifier "Australian." Which is fairly funny I claim given the board is dedicated to Australian topics. Cheers.

v^2

Quote Reply

Aussiegunneragain 12/8/2010 4:08:46 AM

I broadly concur with DB's assessment. I don't give two hoots if he embarresses the US, Australian or any other government by publishing stuff about who said what, or even pictures of a military killing civlians. IMHO those fall into the catagory of the publics right to know.

I do have a huge problem with him telling everybody about strategicly important sites. By doing that he is putting lives at risk during a war, by pointing to the terrorists where they should drive their truck bombs. There are a bunch of people working in an anti-venom factory in Victoria who won't appreciate that very much. I equate that publication with espionage and would be surprised if the Australian government couldn't make a case for trying him for treason, if it really wants to.

Quote Reply

Volkodav 12/9/2010 4:03:15 AM

I'm really not sure what to think.

I am concerned that some of the information has the potential to place some people in danger and I am concerned about who is actually deciding what to release and when to release it. Is it whistle blowing or is there a political agenda?

I am actually appreciative of the info that has come out in reference to Rudd and his stand on China, he has actually gone up in my estimation. The former US Ambassadors opinion of him concerned me as I started to wonder if the revelations about Rudd that cost him his leader ship were driven from out side of Australia but then when it was revealed that Arbib was considered to be a solid gold source it all made sense.

There are some things we are better off knowing and others that we should not know.

Quote Reply

C2 It's interesting... 12/9/2010 10:00:43 AM

Here in Perth I've seen a couple of mini posters proclaiming that Assange was framed and that we should get behind him, but not because he was Aussie but rather because the loudest Uni-students over here are generally misinformed and incapable of forming their own thoughts...

I personally hope he burns at the stake for his rape charge, which is not the kind of thing you can just gt another government to make up for you, as for the Intelligence breach he should be held accountable, it was a dumb ass thing to do that risked quite a lot for some only modest gains in transparency.

At the end of the day he broke NATO distribution of classified information law, whish is there for a good reason, he is a dipshit and he will burn.

Quote Reply

YelliChink 12/9/2010 1:15:45 PM

Not that you should stand behind him, but he was indeed framed by two feminists he had consensual sex with.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/report-assange-rape-case-sparked-std-fears/

Days later, Ardin admitted to a Swedish newspaper that the sex had been consensual and denied charges the CIA or Pentagon had set Assange up. "The accusations were not set up by the Pentagon or anybody else," she said. "The responsibility for what happened to me and the other girl lies with a man with a twisted view of women, who has a problem accepting the word 'no.'"

==================================

It seems that Assange did carry some form of STD after all.

Quote Reply

C2 12/10/2010 4:54:45 AM

How does a "twisted view of women and no understanding of the word 'no' " make him innocent, or them evil feminists? If anything all she said was that no seedy gov. agency was behind it and that she and the other girl took full responsibility for their prosecution.

The term consensual and 'no' are mutually exclusive, if they at any point said no, and he continued, that is rape. Regardless of how consensual previous experiences were.

Quote Reply

YelliChink 12/10/2010 10:19:27 PM

The term consensual and 'no' are mutually exclusive, if they at any point said no, and he continued, that is rape. Regardless of how consensual previous experiences were.

Before you comment, learn to read the article in the link.

Quote Reply

1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT