I honestly don't know who/what is behind the Assange arrest fiasco-

[Bluerthanblue]

It is true when he says that he's been hurt by the accusation itself- that regardless of the fact that the charges were dropped his "reputation has been harmed".

I can't argue with that. It shouldn't happen and it isn't right.
"Innocent until proven guilty" sounds great, but in reality it's more like "innocent until accused"

I don't condemn Mr.Assange, yet seems to me that perhaps he might have done well to have considered the impact that publishing the documents
containing information which could jeopardize the lives and families of many Afghan citizens might have on them. People who more than likely wouldn't have the luxury of a trial and who stand to lose far more than their reputation.

I believe in "freedom of speech"- and "freedom of information". But with freedom comes responsibility.

The media coverage of Sweden's aborted rape charges against Julian Assange can't be erased. His reputation won't be the same, but he still has his life.

In a statement defending his release of information which could put dozens of Afghan citizens and their families at risk, and downplaying the potential harm that might bring, Mr. Assange dismissed it as "hypothetical blood"
and added " "The grounds of Iraq and Afghanistan are covered with real blood. Secretary Gates has overseen the killings of thousands of children and adults in these two countries."

As if that somehow would make it OK?



Karma?

[yella_dawg]

1. At what point does the public right to know trump the privacy of individuals?

Wish I could figure this one out.


Philosophical questions aside, the on/off rape charges are shockingly inept if meant to intimidate, and I can't imagine they were anything but a botched intimidation attempt. The world gets weirder by the day.

[Bluerthanblue]

2. I'm not sure it's the "privacy" of individuals that is at stake in the

case of the identifying info on Afghan citizens though.

Mr. Assenge admitted that he'd only read 2,000 of some 91,000 documents- and he either didn't consider the potential "collateral damage" of his decision to release the information would have on others, or didn't care.

He identifies himself as a "journalist", yet many journalists have gone to jail rather than expose the names of their "sources".

I'm not trying to say that his actions justifies any trumped up charges that may have been brought against him, I'm just troubled by the way we seem to want others to behave well, and ignore our own errors. Then we use what "they" did to justify doing similar things ourselves and here we sit spiraling as Ghandi and MLK said into the deeper abyss.

thanks for sharing your thoughts.