Julian Assange free

[Black Diamond]

Assange calls it "scientific journalism". Under his list of professions, the word "editor" is listed. But it looks like hes a computer programmer first and foremost??

[fj1200]

Didn't read over those in detail , what i skimmed seemed like NON-Governmental interference/harassment/crime. Not Journalist being arrested (or censored or banned even) by those I "show appreciation for".

That was kinda the point. That and those you have faith in have no faith in your concerns.

So this area of the constitution will not go down the slippery slope any farther. As other areas have.
the constitutional process will not allow anything further than the spying on journalist and censorship in bookstores and social media that's being allowed at this point.
Your faith is strong, but clearly not based on the evidence of recent history.

Oh brother. The above will quickly devolve into an every-gripe-you-have-at-the-moment listing won't it? This thread is about Assange and I have made my comments about Assange; anything else you read into it is on you.

[fj1200]

Assange calls it "scientific journalism". Under his list of professions, the word "editor" is listed. But it looks like hes a computer programmer first and foremost??

If you call something "________ journalism" does that mean journalism really has no meaning at all?

[Black Diamond]

If you call something "________ journalism" does that mean journalism really has no meaning at all?

Yellow?

[fj1200]

Yellow?

https://www.nationalenquirer.com/

[revelarts]

That was kinda the point.

why would you go into a laundry list of non-governmental interference when the subject is about the gov't vs Assange FJ?

That and those you have faith in have no faith in your concerns.

Not sure how you've missed this.
But I'll state it for the record again.
I have faith in God and certain principals of good govt.. That's it.
I agree with and support any politician (or person) when they support any aspect of freedom, the constitution and biblical principals... policy wise.
When they don't, i don't.
The closest I've come to being a political fan boy is with Ron Paul. And I even disagree strongly with a few of his positions.

[fj1200]

why would you go into a laundry list of non-governmental interference when the subject is about the gov't vs Assange FJ?

Because the question at the time was governmental persecution, or lack thereof, and future governmental persecution, and hopeful lack thereof.

Not sure how you've missed this.
But I'll state it for the record again.
I have faith in God and certain principals of good govt.. That's it.
I agree with and support any politician (or person) when they support any aspect of freedom, the constitution and biblical principals... policy wise.
When they don't, i don't.
The closest I've come to being a political fan boy is with Ron Paul. And I even disagree strongly with a few of his positions.

Good on ya brother.

[revelarts]

Websters

journalist
noun
1a: a person engaged in journalism
especially : a writer or editor for a news medium

b: a writer who aims at a mass audience

2: a person who keeps a journal

...

edit
1 of 2 verb
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/edits
- ed·​it ˈe-dət edited; editing; edits

1a: to prepare (something, such as literary material) for publication or public presentation
edit a manuscript

b: to assemble (something, such as a moving picture or tape recording) by cutting and rearranging
edit a film

c: to alter, adapt, or refine especially to bring about conformity to a standard or to suit a particular purpose
carefully edited the speech
edit a data file

2: to direct the publication of
"edits the daily newspaper"

If we're being honest about definitions that is.
Rather than characterizations that fit our opinions.

[fj1200]

If you think about it none of that really applies to Assange. He didn't write, he didn't edit, he didn't prepare, he didn't assemble, he didn't alter, adapt, or refine. He encouraged to steal and he posted. I did far more editing, preparing, assembling, alter, adapting, and refining in the making of this post than he ever did in posting stolen material.

I was a little surprised that my progressive, journalist friend was not steamed up about this. He acknowledged that theft of source material is not journalism.

Reporter sentenced over Chiquita voice-mail theft

Gallagher had pleaded guilty to felony charges of unlawful interception of communications and unauthorized access to voice-mail systems in October 1998 in the Court of Common Pleas in Cincinnati.

Free Press! Free Press!

[revelarts]

If you think about it none of that really applies to Assange. He didn't write, he didn't edit, he didn't prepare, he didn't assemble, he didn't alter, adapt, or refine. ....

Free Press! Free Press!

Read the definition without your bias.
it says Edit = Publish.
definition (2).
just be honest man. sheesh.

but the thing is if you'd look a bit deeper than to criticize & assume you'd see that he did in fact do "Edit" definition (1) as well.

NPR
JULIAN ASSANGE, Founder, WikiLeaks: So my name is Julian Assange. I am the editor of WikiLeaks.
MARTIN SMITH: [voice-over] WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange unveiled the footage in a press conference in Washington.
JULIAN ASSANGE: The material is dramatic. It was classified— is still classified.
CREW MEMBER: They're taking him!...
MARTIN SMITH: In the end Assange edited the material into a short presentation with a provocative title, "Collateral Murder."

....

https://johnmenadue.com/three-extrao...ilger-assange/

In 2015 Assange edited “The WikiLeaks files: the World According to the US Empire.”...
....
But what makes Assange extraordinary is his work as editor in chief and publisher of WikiLeaks. Following are a few examples of information they have conveyed to the public:

Corruption by family and associates of Kenyan leader Daniel Arap Moi.
Corruption at Kaupthing Bank in the Iceland financial crisis.
Dumping of toxic chemicals in Ivory Coast.
Killing of Reuters journalists and Iraqi civilians by U.S. Apache attack helicopter in “Collateral Murder” video.
92,000 documents on the war in Afghanistan (and civilian casualties previously hidden).
400,000 documents on the war in Iraq (including reports showing the U.S. military ignoring torture by their Iraqi allies).
Corruption in Tunisia (helping spark the Arab Spring).
NSA spying on German leader Merkel, Brazilian leader Roussef, French presidents (Sarkozy, Hollande, Chirac) and more.
Secret agreements in the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership.
Emails and files from the U.S. Democratic National Committee.
CIA spying and other tools (“Vault 7”).
Julian Assange has received many honours, including: the Sam Adams Award, Time’s Person of the Year, Le Monde Person of the Year, Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, Sydney Peace Foundation Gold Medal and the Serena Shim Award.

FREE PRESS! FREE PRESS!

[fj1200]

Read the definition without your bias.
it says Edit = Publish.
definition (2).
just be honest man. sheesh.

but the thing is if you'd look a bit deeper than to criticize & assume you'd see that he did in fact do "Edit" definition (1) as well.

It's a good thing I'm the only one with bias here.

... also, meh, I don't think it mattered to the facts of the case.

As long as you keep ignoring the essential point here I guess we're not going to get any further.

[Gunny]

(1) Who says? "my" gov't?

(2) when criminal acts are "classified" do they have the same legal cover in your view?

I'm sure they have "reasons". And that's fine.
But once it's in the wind ANYONE can publish it. And should be able to without fear of the gov't retribution.
As an American citizen somehow i do have this crazy thought that I'm entitled to see the work and documents that MY gov't produces on OUR behalf. Especially if a gov't employee thinks it's so important that they'd risk stealing & breaking oaths to give to us.
No one is handing out classified docs willy nilly.
Most of that stuff shouldn't be "classified" in the 1st place. this has LONG been an issue.

Plus, "if they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear". right?
Gov't's spying up are arses daily but somehow the gov't's "houses, papers, and effects" ARE protected "against unreasonable searches and seizures" but ours aren't?
that is 100% BASS AKWARD

I already explained why you are wrong and you are a textbook example on the "why". No, you don't have the right to know. Classification is not based on whether or not you agree with it. It is based on criteria. The Nation is more important than the individual conspiracy theory snoop.

[SassyLady]

I already explained why you are wrong and you are a textbook example on the "why". No, you don't have the right to know. Classification is not based on whether or not you agree with it. It is based on criteria. The Nation is more important than the individual conspiracy theory snoop.

How do we the people, aka the Nation, know if the elected are following the law if they have the right to classify their actions as top secret? Without whistleblowers how would we know if our government is corrupt?

[SassyLady]

Screenshot_20240706_144943_Chrome.jpg