HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Assange v. Zuckerberg - s...

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 06:35 PM

Assange v. Zuckerberg - seen on FB

9 replies, 1218 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
Reply Assange v. Zuckerberg - seen on FB (Original post)
underpants Feb 2013 OP
RoccoR5955 Feb 2013 #1
WillyT Feb 2013 #2
itsrobert Feb 2013 #3
Hissyspit Feb 2013 #4
George II Feb 2013 #6
ghurley Feb 2013 #7
George II Feb 2013 #8
Hissyspit Feb 2013 #9
ReRe Feb 2013 #5

Response to underpants (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:36 PM

1. K & R n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:49 PM

2. K & R !!!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:54 PM

3. Which one rapes girls.

Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to itsrobert (Reply #3)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:57 PM

4. Neither as far as we know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hissyspit (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 09:08 PM

6. That's because Assange is too chicken-shit to face his accusers, as he PROMISED!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #6)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 09:16 PM

7. Didn't the investigators refuse to meet with him in England?

I don't overly follow this story, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading this. Always thought it was odd. He hasn't been charged with a crime, so they just need to question him. But, they refuse to ensure that he will not be extradited to the United States if he shows up in Sweden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ghurley (Reply #7)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:14 PM

8. Actually, he agreed to got to Sweden to be interviewed...........

.........but reneged and decided to hide out in the Equadorian embassy instead.

The ultimate coward, but that's fodder for another discussion elsewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #8)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 04:43 AM

9. Pretty much nothing you typed is accurate.

"Julian Assange voluntarily went into UK custody on 7 December 2010, the same day The European Arrest Warrant was authorised. Assange spent 10 days in solitary confinement in Wandsworth prison. He was kept in solitary confinement in the maximum security ’separation unit’. He was released on £240,000 ($374,000) bail, provided by sureties.

Julian Assange is prevented from responding to the allegations and from giving his version of events as long as the Swedish prosecutor refuses to hear his testimony (this is standard procedure). During the 18 months of extradition proceedings in the UK, Julian Assange’s legal team was prevented from challenging the allegations on the facts of the case or through Julian Assange’s own version of events. Instead, his UK legal team was limited to challenging the validity of the European Arrest Warrant instrument on narrow, mainly procedural grounds. On 14 June 2012, the extradition was approved by the UK Supreme Court. Five days later, Assange applied for political asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

Ecuador offered to accommodate the Swedish authorities if they agreed to question Assange in London. Qustioning supects abroad is a mechanism that Sweden routinely uses, but has refused to follow in Assange’s case."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underpants (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 09:00 PM

5. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread