JohnPowell wrote:
Firstly he has committed no crime.
I mean, even if you don't think he committed rape, hard to argue that he hasn't failed to appear in court.
Quote:
He seems to be on the spectrum to be honest.
Not really relevant though?
Quote:
he's... a journalist
This will be relevant later.
Quote:
who is being kicked away for exposing mass murder, torture and corruption.
I mean, no. As I understand it there have basically been three investigations into Assange:
1) In the UK he is wanted to obstruction of justice and other technical crimes.
2) In Sweden he was wanted for three sexual crimes which were all the same act. Two of the charges have expired.
3) The US has recently filed charges against Assange for publishing secret documents, and in doing so endangering the lives of many innocent people.
Now you might think that proving some wrongdoing means that endangering lives in the process is OK. Fine. That's a reasonable judgement call. It may even make you admire someone so much that you don't care that they did some bad things. Again... fine. But does that change the fact that they did some bad things? People are often nuanced. Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey are two of my favourite actors but they're also perverts who have ruined many careers. Donald Trump is an idiot who endangers the world and is actively making America a worse place, but he also stood up to Assad's chemical attacks much better than the otherwise-great Obama ever did. Winona Ryder once stole $5,500 worth of goods from a shop when under the influence of drugs, but also gives large amounts of money to Native American charities.
Sometimes good people do bad things, and when they do they should face justice and eventually be forgiven if they repent. Sometimes bad people do good things, and when they do, they should receive measured praise but it shouldn't cancel out their bad deeds unless, again, they repent. Judges can't say "well, you did a really bad thing, but I like you so let's call it even" - that's a much too simplistic way of looking at things.
Quote:
It 100% breaks International Law as the ICC ruled in Assange's favour that he had the right to safe passage.
I couldn't find any information supporting this claim. I found a few articles from 2012 in which Assange's lawyer said he would make that case to the ICJ, but the commentary seemed to view that as a spurious argument as Assange's life has never been under threat. Regardless, the right to safe passage is not the right to smear your s**t on your host's walls.
Quote:
Don't support fascism.
What exactly are you claiming is fascism?
Quote:
Where's the punishment for those responsible for ordering the mass murder of Iraqi civilians including two Reuters journalists?
I would support that, but it's irrelevant to whether Assange committed any crimes.
Quote:
The punishment for every journalist who pushed the lies about Iraq that led to a million deaths?
That seems like an unrealistically high estimate but eh. More to the point, do you want journalists to be punished for doing their jobs now?