I have not read his works so I can’t form an opinion

because he didnt provide any statement that he did or any pictures or any other evidence

I agree with jerry

You clearly don't because you've formed quite the opinion already

somewhat agree

<:kek:538084230408830987>

what a leftist

bald headed

beta

<:kek:538084230408830987>

C

U
C
K

<:kek:538084230408830987>

also most of the article he made, is what other people said, he didnt provide any evidence but other people's quotes, also the article is 15 paragraphs with sentences in each one, nothing much to prove anything.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47891737

Welp this is a suprise

Who is Julian Assange? Heard of him but no clue who he is

Founder of WikiLeaks

@The Lemon in Israel the wall reduced immigration by 99% it is more than likely a barrier will have positive effect on illegal immigration.

The professor in sociology... that field is infested with marxist ideology

And you know more about sociology than him because?

Also being against the wall is absolutely nothing to do with marxism @kotten

And fun fact, Israel is not the same country as America and likely doesn't have the same type of circular flow of immigrants because of the different geopolitical conditions

That's assuming your statistic you sent with no source and no way to back it up is true

Claiming it would not have any effect is frankly stupid.

You can be a gender professor and say there are 52 genders but that doesnt make it so in reality.

I just dont attribute his statue as being a professor as being enough as "I should shut up". Especially in such a subjective and tangiable field as sociology.

blogs.timesofisrael.com/israels-wall-and-what-the-us-could-learn

Islam bad. Change my mind

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-arrested-police-london-n991236
An AMAZING day for JUSTICE!

>risks lives of soldiers.
>risks lives of innocent Iraq/Afghan civilians
>exposes sources, methods, etc.
>doesn't show any crimes or wrong-doing.
and that's just from the Manning leaks.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3933088/Department-of-Defense-Final-Report-of-the.pdf

And no, wikileaks/Assange/Manning, etc are not whisteblowers:

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R45345.pdf
```Whistleblowing is “the act of reporting waste, fraud, abuse and corruption in a lawful manner to those who can correct the wrongdoing.”```
or, https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/Whistleblower.PDF
```A whistleblower is an employee or contractor who reports to authorised individuals certain classified & unclassified matters that involve: A violation of any law, rule or regulation. Gross mismanagement. A gross waste of funds. An abuse of authority. A substantial and specific danger to public health & safety... *Making an unauthorised disclosure of classified information does not constitute whistleblowing nor is it an act of free speech.* "```

Can’t believe they finally got him

DRUMPF IS DONE FOR

NO MORE 2020 RUSSIAN LEAKS

It surprises me that you're not skeptical of a definition of whistleblowing that inherently relies on the exact same authority to determine what constitutes "legal" reporting as what might be doing the unethical thing in the first place.

Put simply, if you do not allow for the reporting and release of materials that a naturally corrupt government would consider _illegal_ to produce, you've a lot wrong with your worldview. Case in point, you could not consider North Korea unethical if it shoots people for attempting to spread news of the outside world. For in their government such activity is illegal.

If law itself is what makes a thing right, then you cannot criticize any state for any law.

So, no, this is not justice. Not unless you equally define justice, arbitrarily, as merely the enforcement of law however unethical the law is. Such a poverty of a definition that would be, I don't believe you truly believe it.

<:kek:538084230408830987>

For that matter, I don't care whose lives were "endangered" or "risked" for unethical, occasionally illegal, and downright maliciously lied about, activities in foreign countries we shouldn't have been in. I would equally have no pity for CIA agents who, giving the cartels ridiculous amounts of money to enhance instability in Mexico, would be murdered by being discovered. Why should I, under any definition, have pity for such persons?

You do list yourself as a "statist", so perhaps you do unironically believe (as statism philosophically and originally implied) that whatever a state says is "right".

Wikileaks is a scam in a way or another

Don't ask

most of the democratic candidates has little to no fucking plans