The irony of somebody on a human rights community not realizing this guy's human rights were violated because they're so blinded by partisan/nationalistic fervor. Human rights are for everybody, especially people you disagree with. Hunted and imprisoned for 14 years for allegedly violating US law, a nation he is not a citizen of and not located in. His crime? Exposing crimes of the US government and leaking classified documents, a time-honored tradition protected by the UN UDHR and US law which protects us all from corrupt government and tyranny. The documents exposed war crimes, for which nobody was ever prosecuted.

But don't take my word for it, ask these human rights defenders:

UN Special Rapporteur on Torture - "[charges against Julsin are an] abuse of judicial processes aimed at pushing a person into a position where he is unable to defend himself"

Amnesty International - "The US government’s unrelenting pursuit of Julian Assange for having published disclosed documents that included possible war crimes committed by the US military is nothing short of a full-scale assault on the right to freedom of expression."

Freedom of the Press Foundation: "The indictment of Mr. Assange threatens press freedom because much of the conduct described in the indictment is conduct that journalists engage in routinely—and that they must engage in in order to do the work the public needs them to do. Journalists at major news publications regularly speak with sources, ask for clarification or more documentation, and receive and publish documents the government considers secret. In our view, such a precedent in this case could effectively criminalize these common journalistic practices"

The Guardian: "The US should never have brought the case against the WikiLeaks founder. This attack on press freedom must be rejected."

New York Times: "The new charges focus on receiving and publishing classified material from a government source. That is something journalists do all the time. They did it with the Pentagon Papers and in countless other cases where the public benefited from learning what was going on behind closed doors, even though the sources may have acted illegally. This is what the First Amendment is designed to protect: the ability of publishers to provide the public with the truth."

Language like that plus the failure to treat the subject of discussion to dignity was almost enough for me to remove this comment, on it's own. Thankfully, the community has spoken using the tools available to them to indicate that your behavior is unacceptable. Keep it up and you'll be removed.