HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Assange has requested pol...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:52 PM

Assange has requested political asylum & is in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London

ALERT:
Julian Assange has requested political asylum and is under the protection of the Ecuadorian embassy in London
(Tweet from Wikileaks)

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is seeking political asylum in Ecuador and is in its London embassy, the country's foreign minister has said.
"Ecuador is studying and analysing the request," Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino told reporters in Quito.
<snip>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18514726

Muh!?




304 replies, 20332 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 304 replies Author Time Post
Reply Assange has requested political asylum & is in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London (Original post)
Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 OP
Octafish Jun 2012 #1
randome Jun 2012 #16
EFerrari Jun 2012 #19
randome Jun 2012 #23
EFerrari Jun 2012 #29
randome Jun 2012 #65
EFerrari Jun 2012 #76
librechik Jun 2012 #81
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #86
randome Jun 2012 #99
WillyT Jun 2012 #107
girl gone mad Jun 2012 #117
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #118
DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2012 #189
PufPuf23 Jun 2012 #209
randome Jun 2012 #210
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #251
randome Jun 2012 #258
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #265
randome Jun 2012 #267
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #282
randome Jun 2012 #283
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #284
randome Jun 2012 #286
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #292
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #301
cali Jun 2012 #32
EFerrari Jun 2012 #41
cali Jun 2012 #48
EFerrari Jun 2012 #52
cali Jun 2012 #55
EFerrari Jun 2012 #104
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #91
former9thward Jun 2012 #174
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #176
former9thward Jun 2012 #181
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #178
former9thward Jun 2012 #182
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #197
former9thward Jun 2012 #260
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #263
former9thward Jun 2012 #270
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #281
Savannahmann Jun 2012 #36
EFerrari Jun 2012 #43
Gregorian Jun 2012 #151
PufPuf23 Jun 2012 #208
randome Jun 2012 #78
shcrane71 Jun 2012 #96
EFerrari Jun 2012 #101
inna Jun 2012 #250
Tarheel_Dem Jun 2012 #114
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #123
shcrane71 Jun 2012 #168
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #200
roody Jun 2012 #80
randome Jun 2012 #90
ljm2002 Jun 2012 #121
randome Jun 2012 #139
RobertEarl Jun 2012 #154
PufPuf23 Jun 2012 #212
Yurovsky Jun 2012 #196
tsuki Jun 2012 #111
TexasProgresive Jun 2012 #22
randome Jun 2012 #24
EFerrari Jun 2012 #27
Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 #31
EFerrari Jun 2012 #37
randome Jun 2012 #39
EFerrari Jun 2012 #49
tsuki Jun 2012 #113
treestar Jun 2012 #164
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #167
treestar Jun 2012 #173
PufPuf23 Jun 2012 #217
treestar Jun 2012 #254
reorg Jun 2012 #274
randome Jun 2012 #275
reorg Jun 2012 #277
randome Jun 2012 #278
reorg Jun 2012 #280
treestar Jun 2012 #304
treestar Jun 2012 #303
treestar Jun 2012 #302
struggle4progress Jun 2012 #187
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #242
struggle4progress Jun 2012 #245
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #247
Octafish Jun 2012 #46
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #84
randome Jun 2012 #95
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #106
tsuki Jun 2012 #115
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #120
tsuki Jun 2012 #158
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #252
tsuki Jun 2012 #253
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #266
randome Jun 2012 #128
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #132
randome Jun 2012 #135
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #143
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #179
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #147
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #58
Octafish Jun 2012 #108
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #119
Octafish Jun 2012 #122
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #124
Octafish Jun 2012 #125
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #126
Octafish Jun 2012 #129
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #130
Octafish Jun 2012 #131
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #134
Octafish Jun 2012 #140
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #136
Octafish Jun 2012 #138
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #141
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #146
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #148
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #153
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #155
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #159
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #175
vanlassie Jun 2012 #240
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #243
vanlassie Jun 2012 #248
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #249
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #290
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #184
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #186
randome Jun 2012 #188
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #192
randome Jun 2012 #194
DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2012 #199
apocalypsehow Jun 2012 #216
EFerrari Jun 2012 #2
TBF Jun 2012 #127
Puglover Jun 2012 #261
Oilwellian Jun 2012 #3
malaise Jun 2012 #4
EFerrari Jun 2012 #5
treestar Jun 2012 #163
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #166
treestar Jun 2012 #170
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #172
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #185
treestar Jun 2012 #255
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #262
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #206
randome Jun 2012 #207
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #213
randome Jun 2012 #218
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #231
treestar Jun 2012 #257
Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 #6
EFerrari Jun 2012 #7
Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 #9
malaise Jun 2012 #28
EFerrari Jun 2012 #30
malaise Jun 2012 #109
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #112
hack89 Jun 2012 #11
malaise Jun 2012 #33
GarroHorus Jun 2012 #75
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #8
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #10
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #13
EFerrari Jun 2012 #15
xiamiam Jun 2012 #269
LeftyMom Jun 2012 #201
randome Jun 2012 #203
LeftyMom Jun 2012 #211
randome Jun 2012 #224
LeftyMom Jun 2012 #226
EFerrari Jun 2012 #12
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #14
EFerrari Jun 2012 #17
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #35
EFerrari Jun 2012 #45
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #51
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #53
randome Jun 2012 #57
EFerrari Jun 2012 #61
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #59
EFerrari Jun 2012 #62
randome Jun 2012 #69
EFerrari Jun 2012 #72
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #79
EFerrari Jun 2012 #87
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #88
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #93
EFerrari Jun 2012 #98
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #137
EFerrari Jun 2012 #177
DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2012 #205
xiamiam Jun 2012 #271
randome Jun 2012 #273
reorg Jun 2012 #279
Tarheel_Dem Jun 2012 #56
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #73
Tarheel_Dem Jun 2012 #85
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #97
randome Jun 2012 #100
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #110
randome Jun 2012 #133
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #144
randome Jun 2012 #145
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #150
randome Jun 2012 #102
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #94
Are_grits_groceries Jun 2012 #26
tsuki Jun 2012 #157
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #193
Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2012 #18
EFerrari Jun 2012 #21
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #20
malaise Jun 2012 #34
EFerrari Jun 2012 #25
Warren Stupidity Jun 2012 #38
treestar Jun 2012 #40
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #42
treestar Jun 2012 #63
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #195
treestar Jun 2012 #256
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #264
randome Jun 2012 #268
backscatter712 Jun 2012 #44
randome Jun 2012 #47
EFerrari Jun 2012 #54
randome Jun 2012 #60
Savannahmann Jun 2012 #64
randome Jun 2012 #67
EFerrari Jun 2012 #70
Savannahmann Jun 2012 #77
randome Jun 2012 #83
EFerrari Jun 2012 #92
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #116
Savannahmann Jun 2012 #156
randome Jun 2012 #161
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #162
randome Jun 2012 #165
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #169
randome Jun 2012 #171
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #225
EFerrari Jun 2012 #68
EFerrari Jun 2012 #66
randome Jun 2012 #71
EFerrari Jun 2012 #74
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #82
EFerrari Jun 2012 #89
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #142
girl gone mad Jun 2012 #149
tsuki Jun 2012 #160
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #239
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #103
EFerrari Jun 2012 #105
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #50
Catherina Jun 2012 #180
EFerrari Jun 2012 #191
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #232
EFerrari Jun 2012 #237
warrprayer Jun 2012 #152
Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #183
EFerrari Jun 2012 #190
randome Jun 2012 #198
EFerrari Jun 2012 #202
randome Jun 2012 #204
EFerrari Jun 2012 #220
randome Jun 2012 #227
Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #215
randome Jun 2012 #219
EFerrari Jun 2012 #221
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #234
Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #214
LeftyMom Jun 2012 #222
Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #228
LeftyMom Jun 2012 #230
EFerrari Jun 2012 #236
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #241
Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #285
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #287
randome Jun 2012 #288
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #293
randome Jun 2012 #295
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #289
Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #291
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #294
reorg Jun 2012 #296
randome Jun 2012 #297
reorg Jun 2012 #298
randome Jun 2012 #299
reorg Jun 2012 #300
EFerrari Jun 2012 #223
Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #229
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #233
EFerrari Jun 2012 #235
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #238
TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #244
EFerrari Jun 2012 #246
warrprayer Jun 2012 #259
Puglover Jun 2012 #276
xiamiam Jun 2012 #272

Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:53 PM

1. Hope he gets it.

Uncle Sam wants to frame the guy, Big Time.

His crime? Telling the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #1)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:44 PM

16. Actually, Sweden wants him, too.

You know, for those pesky rape and assault allegations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #16)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:46 PM

19. If those allegations were that pesky, why hasn't he been charged?

I can't believe that anyone can still defend this lynching. It's repulsive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #19)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:49 PM

23. If he hasn't been charged, why is he afraid to go to Sweden?

'Lynching', my ass. His former coworkers thought he was an asshole. He has made the absolutely empty threat of revealing even MORE damaging material to the world.

He has fought extradition and lost.

These are not the actions of someone devoted to the truth. Wikileaks performs a great service. I can support them and at the same time see Assange for what he is -an idiot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:58 PM

29. There is no reason for him to go to Sweden. He has not been charged with anything at all.

And you read somewhere on the intertubes that some people don't like him, so you want this person to be shipped off to solitary and a secret trial for charges that haven't even been filed yet? That's fucking disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #29)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:29 PM

65. What 'secret trial'? I want him to answer the rape allegations.

That's all.

It's a well-known fact that his co-workers thought he did not use good judgment when releasing the information that might have endangered our own soldiers and spies. He refused to listen to them. They thought he would damage Wikileaks' credibility. And that's what he has done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:40 PM

76. Bullshit. And if Sweden ever files charges, the trial is held in secret.

That is their law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:44 PM

81. innocent til proven guilty, that's why. It's a universal value.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:47 PM

86. It is a well known fact that after two years, there are NO charges, and btw, there were never

allegations of rape. So why are you spreading false rumors put out by Karl Rove's rightwing friends in Sweden?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #86)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:00 PM

99. Rove? What the hell does he have to do with this?

Read the BBC story linked in the OP. 'Alleged sex crimes'. Is that a more understandable term?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to randome (Reply #99)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:52 PM

117. There are no rape allegations.

Please answer why you are spreading right-wing lies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #99)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:53 PM

118. As I said, you appear to have zero knowledge of this story.

Hard to believe you are completely unaware of the Rove connection in this case. It was certainly widely covered at the time.

Btw, whatever happened to Rove's subpoenas from Congress? Did he ever show up? We know he traveled to Sweden during that time as he tried to avoid those subpoenas.



Rove Might Be Trying To "Pull A Siegelman" With Julian Assange

Karl Rove was an adviser to his old friend and Swedish PM at the time Assange was in Sweden when these allegations first surface, naturally in one of Sweden's most rightwing news publications. After all charges were dropped, it seems someone wasn't happy.

The Rove allegations were all over the Swedish Media, which made poor Karl very angry along with his friend the PM. But if it looks like a duck, as the old saying goes.

What on earth was Rove doing in Sweden at that time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:20 PM

189. No. That's not really what you want. You're more transparent than you apparently think you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:44 PM

209. Have you no shame?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PufPuf23 (Reply #209)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:48 PM

210. None at all.

Why would I since I don't care about being right or wrong? I just want to see things the way they truly are.

And I think Assange exhibits all the behaviors of a guilty man trying to avoid his accusers.

On edit: I DO care about punctuation and grammar, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #210)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:04 AM

251. Did you think anyone thought you did?

What you provided was an opportunity to provide facts for those reading this thread who are interested in the truth. Your comments, not really taken seriously after the first few, were used very effectively to provide the facts of this story and debunk the right wing smears, (thank you for providing them so we could knock them down one after the other).

You provided a very useful service. Many more people now have facts rather than the fiction of the Right wing media thanks to your efforts, even if that was not your intention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #251)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 11:35 AM

258. Nice passive-aggressiveness on your part.

You should know by now that it never works on me.

But I'm glad you appreciate my 'service'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #258)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:51 PM

265. I thought it was pretty straight forward.

I never saw the point of wasting opportunities to provide facts for those who actually want them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #265)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:59 PM

267. I will never state that only I know the facts.

We fundamentally disagree that facts can be interpreted more than one way. You may not believe me but I do appreciate your pointing out alternatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #267)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:32 PM

282. Facts ARE facts, there is no disputing 'facts'.

A 'fact' cannot be 'interpreted in more than one way' to turn it into a lie, that is why it is called a 'fact' not 'an opinion'.

When a lie is told, such as 'Assange is wanted on charges of rape', that is not just a wrong opinion, it is a lie.

The fact, which cannot be interpreted in more than way' is that Assange is NOT wanted on rape charges because there are no such charges and never were. That is a fact.

How do you interpret that fact in 'more than way'?

If you are Fox, there is only one way to do that, you continue to lie about it.

And who would want to 'interpret the fact in more than one way'? War criminals and their supporters. Because Assange revealed evidence of their crimes.

Ethical people otoh, regardless of their political views or dislikes want the facts and will not, once they have them, attempt to 'interpret them in more than one way'. That is how we recognize ethical people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #282)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:40 PM

283. Technically, you are correct that 'charges' have not been filed.

But since nearly every story about Assange uses the word 'charges' instead of 'allegations', it should be easy for understand why the word 'charges' gains traction.

Regardless of the semantics involved, Assange is still wanted by Sweden. An arrest warrant was issued. An extradition order was issued. Australia issued a 'declaration of abandonment' meaning they don't think the issue is worth fighting.

So if there is a conspiracy, it would need to involve the following: Karl Rove, the governments of Sweden, Australia and the United States.

And if anyone wanted to 'get' Assange, they would not have concocted this ridiculous conspiracy to 'embarrass' him, knowing he could drag the matter out for 2 years.

We are mostly not arguing about 'facts' but our interpretation of them. I can look at the same facts as you and still see Assange as a narcissistic idiot. That's my opinion of the facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #283)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 05:27 PM

284. We are arguing about the very reason for the existence of Wikileaks, and now other

fact telling media thankfully, in the first place. The corruption of the Corporate Media owned by huge conglomerates all over the world such as the Murdoch Empire which has inserted itself into every corner of the world.

The MSM is a propaganda tool for those whose interests do not include keeping the people informed.

So of course they distort the issue of what is going on with Assange.

And since most of us Democrats have been aware of this for a long, long time, we do not ever rely on the Corporate Media for facts. Which is why I, when this began, chose as I always do regardless of the subject matter, to look to some more credible sources for the facts. It wasn't hard, the facts were easy to find. Court documents, official statements, statements from the women etc, made you wonder why the Corporate Media got it so wrong, IF you care about truth and justice.

I assumed this is what most Democrats have been doing for a long time. I know it is what a majority of people around the globe do, which is why Assange and Wikileaks are higher in the polls Globally, than those who are wrongfully pursuing him in order to silence an International News Organization. People are no longer manipulated easily by the Corporate media, much to their chagrin.

Why did Sweden change its mind and decide to pretend they wanted to ask him a few questions but couldn't have done while he was there or by video conference, through his attorneys, or in their embassy in London?

Why, for something that is so minor, did Sweden and the US Government go to so much trouble to pursue this one individual with nothing to justify it?

The reasons are clear. It has happened before throughout history. Good people who think truth-telling is important, are rotting in jails even now, in oppressive countries. I guess their persecutors would try to excuse what they are doing also. And they too have their 'believers' and defenders.

All he had to do was to remain silent about war crimes and corruption around the globe, but especially during the Bush years, and he would be fine.

He is a political target and is viewed as such everywhere except here where the propaganda still works, although not as effectively as it once did.

The US illegally destroyed Wikileaks' business, by pressuring other businesses not to deal with them. Even China did not dare to that.

So support all this if you wish, turn a blind eye, it is your right to do so, but thankfully it is so transparent at this point, that a vast number of people see all of it for what it is.

And surely you are not surprised by Australia's neo-con lackey taking the same position as her neo-con buddies, Rove et al. Another Corporate-backed tool who hopefully will be tossed in the next election.

Assange never expected support from her, and good for him for exposing her enslavement to her corporate bosses once again, as he has done before. And that is why she hates him, Wikileaks exposed a lot about Australia's elections etc. She too has her reasons for wanting him silenced. The truth hurts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #284)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:22 PM

286. I don't think the U.S. government has anything to do with the Swedish filings.

I have not seen anything that would indicate that.

If the U.K. did not think Sweden was in the right, they would not have approved the extradition request. Unless the U.K. is also in on the conspiracy, which means they could have avoided this 2 year delay by handing him over to the U.S.

The conspiracy falls in on itself.

But I agree with you completely that the U.S. trying to shut off Wikileaks' funding was beyond the pale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #286)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:53 PM

292. The only conspiracy is the one that claims 'he is fighting charges'.

There are no charges. And when the Conspiracy Theorists are asked to prove their claims, they never can.

There are only the inconvenient facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #283)

Thu Jun 21, 2012, 06:26 PM

301. The Prime Minister has been rebuked by Senate: backs highest level of consular support for Assange

THE Australian Senate has called on Prime Minister Julia Gillard to ensure Julian Assange is provided with the highest possible level of consular support.

It also called on the Prime Minister to retract "prejudicial statements" that claimed the WikiLeaks founder had broken the law in publishing secret US diplomatic cables.

The motion, proposed by Australian Greens senator Scott Ludlam, passed with coalition backing today.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/australian-senate-backs-aid-to-julian-assange/story-fn7x8me2-1226404424251

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:59 PM

32. personally, I find the guy a sickening narcissist, but those charges are ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #32)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:07 PM

41. I don't need to be in love with him to recognize a multi-state lynching party.

And the British court decided the matter on a point that wasn't even argued before them, which apparently has never happened before. We knew the fix was in but man, what an ugly day for the British justice system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #41)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:13 PM

48. I wish people would stop misusing the word lynching, and as I said, I think the rape charges are

ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #48)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:17 PM

52. There are no rape charges. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #52)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:20 PM

55. alright, let me put it this way, I think the two women accusing him of rape are full of shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #55)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:13 PM

104. It's disgusting that they are using a rape charge

to pin Assange. Just like it was disgusting that they used a fake vaccination drive to try to get Bin Laden DNA.

It speaks to how much our government considers public health consequences, not at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #48)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:50 PM

91. There are no charges. He has never been charged, nor were there allegations of 'rape'.

The allegations were only for what is a misdemeanor, not wearing a condom, but Rove and his buddies in Sweden deliberately mischaracterized the allegations and now people here who should know better are using the world 'rape' also.

Why has he never been charged? Why did they not ask their questions at the Swedish Embassy, or in Sweden when he was there? He was not prevented from leaving, why not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #91)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:25 PM

174. Now Karl Rove is running Sweden?

Classic. I'm sure the Swedish people will be interested to find that out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #174)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:36 PM

176. Rove was the Prime Minister's political consultant.

Reinfeldt and his Moderate Party hired Karl Rove as a political consultant to help with the election coming in 2010.

http://www.socialdems.com/page.asp?PID=1406

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #176)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:04 PM

181. So that means he is running Sweden's justice department?

ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #174)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:45 PM

178. ???

Were you talking to me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #178)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:06 PM

182. Yes.

"but Rove and his buddies in Sweden " -- from your post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #182)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:26 PM

197. Are you saying Rove doesn't have buddies in Sweden? That is what I am understanding from

your comment, buddies at the highest level of Government. Is that not a fact?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #197)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:32 PM

260. I have no idea if Rove "has buddies" in Swedish government.

And I doubt if you do either. What I am sure of is that Rove is not running Sweden's justice department. The Swedish people would be laughing at these posts but if CTs make your day go for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #260)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:41 PM

263. The Swedish people are not laughing, since unlike you, they are aware that their PM

hired Karl Rove, war criminal, neocon, liar, as his political adviser for two years. So no, most of the Swedish people did not find it amusing at all. Just as we here do not find his involvement in our politics amusing.

Links have been provided in this thread, Karl Rove most definitely has buddies in Sweden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #263)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:08 PM

270. Since you are speaking for "The Swedish people"

Why did they elect him? Please don't say Citizens United. That does not apply in Sweden and that is not how they do elections there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #270)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:20 PM

281. Rove has buddies in high places in the Swedish Government.

Rove was a political adviser to Sweden's PM, often described as 'Sweden's Ronald Reagan'.

So now you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:03 PM

36. Extradition usually is preceded by actual charges.

Right now, Sweden demands he be interviewed about the possible crime in Sweden. Apparently, none of their investigators can be spared to fly to London. Which is what has been requested.

He may be an asshole. I'll even go this far, I'll agree he is an asshole. Yet Sweden is hardly clean as a whistle regarding extradition. They participated in Rendition. The illegal kidnapping and torture of other people you probably consider assholes.

So why can't Sweden talk to him, interview him in London? Oh no, it must be done in Sweden. That way they can charge him. This doesn't stink to high heaven to you?

When a story doesn't add up, you don't have to know all the facts to know some of the information is missing. The story doesn't add up. If you were in California, and had been accused (NOTE accused not charged with a crime) in Florida. Florida investigators would fly to interview you in California. If they had the evidence, they could charge you in Florida, and request extradition from California. That is the NORMAL way this is done. Except with Assange is involved. The Rape charge is interesting. Many many years ago, I spent a small amount of time as a Security Guard. We were told that if we arrested someone, that we should tell any witnesses that the suspect was a rapist, a child molester, or something else heinous. No matter what crime they had actually committed. This would color the opinion of the witnesses, and change their story subtlety.

Instead of "That security guy bashed the head of that poor man with his nightstick." It became "That horrible man refused the reasonable request of that nice security man and was hit while resisting."

Everybody hates rapists, child molesters, and people who rob the elderly. So anytime I hear that claim, I am suspicious until I hear the details. I'm not saying the woman is lying, what I am saying is that there is something really strange here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #36)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:10 PM

43. Eric Holder said out loud on camera that he believed there were tools to handle Assange.

Which translates to looking for a crime to charge him with. Which is illegal.

There's nothing strange happening here. The US government wants to put him away for revealing their crimes and otherwise abhorrent conduct. It's up front and blatant, in our faces.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #43)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:11 PM

151. Can I get an AMEN.

That's about as succinct as it gets.

How on earth do we hold the real criminals accountable if those with power stifle all of our attempts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #43)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:43 PM

208. Bingo! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #36)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:41 PM

78. Why won't Sweden interview him in London?

I don't know the answer to that. But he did lose the extradition hearing, which makes me think he's in real trouble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #36)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:58 PM

96. My understanding is that neither woman is even calling it rape.

This is over zealous policing due to Assange's notoriety.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shcrane71 (Reply #96)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:04 PM

101. No, it's persecution at the behest of the Obama DoJ. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #101)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:59 AM

250. exactly nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shcrane71 (Reply #96)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:42 PM

114. Do you have a link to your "understanding"? If it's true that the women in question.....

don't want to pursue the case, then it's all speculation? I see some have an issue with the word "charge" as opposed to allegation, but someone should alert the media to the difference:

By David Zielenziger
June 19, 2012

Wikileaks’ Assange Flees To Ecuador London Embassy

Julian Assange, the head of Wikileaks, has fled to the Ecuadorean embassy in London to avoid extradition to Sweden, Foreign Minister Ricardo Patrino said.

Assange, 40, an Australian citizen, was ordered returned to Sweden, where he faces trial on two rape charges. Assange denied the charges but lost his last appeals against extradition in the Supreme Court of England.


http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/354056/20120619/assange-wikileaks-ecuador-rape-sweden-extradite.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #114)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:01 PM

123. Actually, Wikileaks supporters have repeatedly succeeded in making news orgs

retract the "charge" statement. They've been successful because saying that Assange has been charged with a crime is false.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #114)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:32 PM

200. That is a false report. He has never been charged, nor have the women even alleged rape.

You cannot deny non-existent charges, or even allegations. The women emphasized in an interview early in this case that there was no rape, that they had never intended for this happen, that he was not 'violent' and that they had no fear of him. What they wanted was clear. How it got so distorted is the question and always has been. Who is behind the propaganda? That is what a lot of people want to know.

For a Business and Law site, that is grossly inaccurate reporting. Pretty much discredits them as any kind of credibly source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:43 PM

80. Being an asshole and an idiot is not a crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roody (Reply #80)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:50 PM

90. No. It is not.

But put it all together and it looks to me like he has done some seriously terrible things that he needs to answer for.

The question on everyone's mind should be: "Why is Assange afraid of the truth?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #90)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:59 PM

121. No, the questions on everyone's mind should be...

...why was Assange held without bail when he has even now not been charged with any crime? and why was Sweden unwilling to question him via telephone, a routine procedure for the kind of crime he was supposedly suspected of? and why was this misdemeanor-level crime enough to get him high on the list of the Interpol network -- higher even than many suspected terrorists? Normally, an issue such as the one claimed, would not even get on the radar of international law enforcement, and they would be unwilling to expend their time and resources on it.

We all know the answer: because the United States wants to make an example of him. In that, our country is behaving as any imperial power behaves: show anyone who dares to actually question them, how tough you can make it for them, thereby having a chilling effect on others who might be so inclined.

Yes, Wikileaks revealed secret information, some of which was arguably evidence of war crimes (in my mind, it is unarguable, but whatever). So why, again, is it a crime for a journalist to reveal secrets that have been revealed to him? Answer: it isn't, but our country's government would LIKE for it to be one, so we have conspired with authoritarian elements in Sweden and the UK to make life hard on the man. Because we can't have people going around and revealing secrets to the Great Unwashed, egad man! They might get ideas...

It is very easy to smear someone, and this is an excellent study in how it's done. Go against the most powerful state in the world, and the state will retaliate. Even though Assange is not a citizen of the U.S., and therefore one might think he would be out of reach for the U.S. for merely plying his trade. But he had the audacity to set up a system using (gasp!) encryption, for the purpose of (double gasp!!) allowing people to reveal secret information that otherwise would go unreported. For that he must be punished.

He doesn't have to be a "nice" man in order for anyone with a brain and a conscience to see how bent this is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ljm2002 (Reply #121)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:43 PM

139. I don't know the answers to your question about a phone interview.

But he was held because an extradition order was issued and he was fighting it. He is the one who dragged this out for 2 years.

I truly doubt there is a conspiracy here. With the entire world watching what happens to him, do you really think he's going to 'disappear' or something? There must be a more plausible reason he keeps fighting this -other than 'the government is out to get me'. The most plausible reason is that he is afraid he will actually be charged with a crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #139)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:18 PM

154. So now you know?

And you admit that he has not - even 2 years later - been charged with a crime?

Doesn't that make you think for just one f'n second that something about them chasing him around for 2 years without a formal charge is conspiratorial? How could you not?

Randome wrote: "The most plausible reason is that he is afraid he will actually be charged with a crime."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #90)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:51 PM

212. The question is why are the leaders of the USA and western allies afraid of the truth.

Our leaders lie and hurt people in the USA and elsewhere to support the wealthy and entrenched special interests.

I am old enough to die before this is rectified (if ever which I doubt), what is your excuse?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roody (Reply #80)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:25 PM

196. Good thing - my ex woulda had me tossed in the slammer....

Those were her pet names for me... Of course she's now married to a Republican, so I guess Karma is taking care of business...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:37 PM

111. Because Sweden and the US worked together on rendition. Sweden's

human rights record is not so hot. They only got skiddish when they lost a lawsuit and were exposed worldwide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #16)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:48 PM

22. If he is extradited to Sweden they will send him on to the US

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasProgresive (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:53 PM

24. So he should have diplomatic immunity from now on?

He can commit any offense and we'll just blithely put it down as some government plot? He needs to face the music.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #24)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:55 PM

27. What music would that be?

He hasn't been charged with a crime in Sweden. Maybe turn down your speakers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #24)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:59 PM

31. At this point,

anything remotely connected to Assange is suspect.
You can blithely trust that all is right and good and that his rights are protected. More fool you. Assange is number one with bullet on the US government's most want to get their hands on list.

I don't trust any of them.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Reply #31)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:04 PM

37. I will never forget Hillary saying Cablegate had revealed no wrongdoing.

It was so sad to see her do that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Reply #31)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:05 PM

39. I don't trust anyone.

Men who are suspected of rape and assault and do their damnedest to avoid facing their accusers -I trust them even less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #39)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:13 PM

49. Um, Assange has made himself available to the Swedish government

over and over. So, you can't be talking about him or you don't know the facts of this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #24)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:42 PM

113. I don't see why not. The US wrote the Pinochet law that said

that Pinochet could not be extradited or prosecuted from or in the US for Crimes Against Humanity, rape, murder, torture. The UK was on overtime not to extradite Pinochet to Spain where there was an indictment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasProgresive (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:51 PM

164. So what - he'd get a trial

Persecution has a definition. It does not include being charged with crimes for which there is probable cause you committed them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #164)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:59 PM

167. What crimes do you think he's been charged with? The correct answer is ZERO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #167)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:17 PM

173. There is some basis for extradition

If it is not a crime, then it is even less so that it's persecution:


The Definition of a Refugee

International legal protection of refugees centres on a person meeting the criteria for refugee status as laid down in the 1951 Refugee Convention. Under Article 1(A)2, the term “refugee” shall apply to any person who:

“...owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.”

Thus, according to this provision, refugees are defined by three basic characteristics:

they are outside their country of origin or outside the country of their former habitual residence;
they are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted; and
the persecution feared is based on at least one of five grounds: race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.
It is important to stress that the term “asylum seekers” refers to persons, who have applied for asylum, but whose refugee status has not yet been determined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #173)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:59 PM

217. What won't you apologize for? The revelation of systematic

war crimes, coverups, and general maliciousness for greed and power seem to be OK.

There are far bigger crimes and evil committed and ongoing by our own leaders and WikiLeaks is an imperfect and persecuted whistle blower.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PufPuf23 (Reply #217)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 10:39 AM

254. WTF has that got to do with the fact that Julian is not subject to persecution in Sweden

Or the United States? He's just his usual melodramatic self.

He's not even being charged with a crime in Sweden as people have said. It's just to be interviewed or some such thing. That's not even near persecution. Why did you ignore the definition of persecution in my post?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #254)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:21 PM

274. Once you familiarize yourself with the facts of the case

you will learn that "just to be interviewed or some such thing" means imprisonment. The pretext for imprisonment is a creative interpretation of the Swedish penal code that has never been applied in any other case.

Show me where anybody else in the world has been arrested for not using a condom and you'll be the winner. I doubt you'll be able to, so there you go with prima facie evidence of persecution and that the law is not applied in a fair and equal manner in Sweden.

Within minutes of determining that such creative interpretation of the law should be attempted, an arrest warrant (detention in absentia) was issued, anonymously leaked to the press, and - in breach of the Swedish confidentiality rules for preliminary investigations - the name of the person to be arrested confirmed.

This deliberate and illegal smear campaign against someone whose political activism had made him famous worldwide in the previous months was the prime reason to suspect foul play on the part of elements in the prosecutor's office and has been widely discussed. The prosecutor's superior and the one actually in charge didn't stand for it and reversed what could be reversed, but, as we all know, the story didn't end there. Assange has been under judicial pressure and under arrest for some 500 days now and it could get much worse.

We'll see if the Ecuadorian authorities can recognize a turkey when they see one. I'm sure they are aware of American interests and influence, so I hope they are going to help Assange and will celebrate them if they do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #274)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:30 PM

275. So instead of getting the U.K. to extradite him, Karl Rove -at the behest of Obama-

constructed an elaborate ruse involving the Swedish authorities so they could delay getting their hands on Assange for 2 years.

It all becomes clear now...

Sorry for the snark. I just don't get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #275)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:04 PM

277. they immediately got what they wanted

Assange was in Sweden in order to apply for citizenship and open up shop there. The deliberate and illegal smear by elements of the prosecution in Stockholm prevented that.

His legal troubles and continuing arrest alone constitute political persecution, carried out by elements of the judiciary in Sweden who might or might not have reasons of their own. Nobody denies who is the real enemy here and why, though. Some individuals on this very board have expressed their desire to see Assange "answer" for the work he has done. We see them squealing with glee when he gets in trouble. Not sure why, but apparently they feel harmed when activities of their government and the military are being exposed for all the world to see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #277)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:11 PM

278. Don't jump to conclusions about those who look askance at Assange.

He comes across as a narcissistic idiot. His own country -Australia- issued a 'declaration of abandonment', which I guess means they don't want to defend him, either.

Just because Assange -and Wikileaks- have done some good doesn't mean Assange is golden in everything he does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #278)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:19 PM

280. Because Assange and Wikileaks have done good

they deserve to be defended against ill-informed and vicious smears as well as against the apparent political persecution he is subjected to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #280)

Thu Jun 21, 2012, 11:14 PM

304. Smears are not persecution

He is not persecuted simply by having to answer to charges. The rest of us would have to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #277)

Thu Jun 21, 2012, 11:13 PM

303. Er, no, he simply has to answer to the swedish law

per the Swedish system, which has never been said to be totalitarian or tyrannical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #274)

Thu Jun 21, 2012, 11:12 PM

302. Please, this is Sweden

Often praised by us for being socialistic.

They have a fair system and no one can prove otherwise.

Julian is a drama king, milking money out of people who fall for his victim act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasProgresive (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:19 PM

187. It would be much easier to extradite him directly from the UK: under current EU agreements, if

the UK extradites him to Sweden, Sweden can't extradite him to the US without UK permission

So if the US wants Assange, it would be much easier for the US to request extradition direction from the UK, as Assange would have appeal only to UK courts in that case. Extraditing Assange to the US, by first extraditing him from the UK to Sweden, and then from Sweden to the US, makes the process at least four times as complicated: first, Assange gets to fight extradition, from the UK to Sweden, in UK courts; and afterwards Assange gets to fight extradition, from Sweden to the US, not only in both UK and Swedish courts, but also in EU courts as well

There's also the itsy-bitsy point that the US has not requested extradition of Assange

Bottom line: Assange is a twit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to struggle4progress (Reply #187)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:07 PM

242. Actually, there is a bilateral agreement between the U.S. and Sweden

that would allow both governments to by pass any extradition hearing.

And this:
http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA
Wouldn’t the UK be more likely to extradite Assange than Sweden?

If the Justice Department were actually to issue charges against Mr. Assange while he was still in Britain there could be potentially a decision for the UK government whether to extradite him to Sweden or to the United States, and that could get to be a complicated clash between the two different requests which would put the UK government in a difficult position. - John B. Bellinger III on Fox News


Some critical voices claim that the UK-US extradition treaty is more permissive than the Sweden-US extradition treaty. Extradition to the US, they claim, would be simpler from the UK than from Sweden.

This argument fails on several points:

- The UK’s extradition treaty does not have the temporary surrender (’conditional release’) clause. The UK’s judicial review process, while far from perfect, has a number of practical review mechanisms. The nearest equivalent case, of Gary McKinnon - a UK citizen who has been charged for hacking US military systems - has been opposed in the courts for 8 years.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #242)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:32 PM

245. Swedish prosecuting authority website says that if Sweden extradites someone from another

EU country and then a non-EU country wants to extradite the person, Sweden needs permission from the first EU country

So for the US to extradite Assange from Sweden after UK delivers him to Sweden is procedurally more difficult than for US to extradite Assange directly from UK

Facts about extradition and surrender
... Due to general agreements in the European Arrest Warrant Act, Sweden cannot extradite a person who has been surrendered to Sweden from another country without certain considerations. Concerning surrender to another country within the European Union, the Act states that the executing country under certain circumstances must approve a further surrender. On the other hand, if the extradition concerns a country outside the European Union the authorities in the executing country (the country that surrendered the person) must consent such extradition. Sweden cannot, without such consent, extradite a person, for example to the USA ...
http://www.aklagare.se/In-English/About-us/International-prosecution-operations/Facts-about-extradition-of-a-person-who-has-been-surrendered

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to struggle4progress (Reply #245)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:57 PM

247. You are right to the extent that Sweden could exercise "conditional release" with

little political or legal ramifications:

Legal Safeguards under Temporary Surrender

The retired Swedish judge Brita Sundberg-Weitman (who testified at the first extradition hearing in February) wrote to SwedenVersusAssange.com and explained that Sweden’s Act regarding Criminal Extradition (Lag 1957:668 om Utlämning för Brott) requires the Swedish government to apply to the Supreme Court for permission to exercise the "conditional release" mechanism.

Sundberg-Weitman notes, however, that the government could ignore that requirement with little risk to itself; the legal and/or political repercussions, if any, would most likely be negligible. They would in any event be too late to be of any use to Julian Assange, who would have already been turned over to the U.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #16)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:12 PM

46. The allegations made up by the CIA contract agent lady?

She must have an oath or a paycheck to answer to.



Assange Accuser Worked with US-Funded, CIA-Tied Anti-Castro Group

By: Kirk James Murphy, M.D. Saturday December 4, 2010 9:20 pm
NewsFromUnderground

Yesterday Alexander Cockburn reminded us of the news Israel Shamir and Paul Bennett broke at Counterpunch in September. Julian Assange’s chief accuser in Sweden has a significant history of work with anti-Castro groups, at least one of which is US funded and openly supported by a former CIA agent convicted in the mass murder of seventy three Cubans on an airliner he was involved in blowing up.

Anna Ardin (the official complainant) is often described by the media as a “leftist”. She has ties to the US-financed anti-Castro and anti-communist groups. She published her anti-Castro diatribes (see here and here) in the Swedish-language publication Revista de Asignaturas Cubanas put out by Misceláneas de Cuba. From Oslo, Professor Michael Seltzer points out that this periodical is the product of a well-financed anti-Castro organization in Sweden. He further notes that the group is connected with Union Liberal Cubana led by Carlos Alberto Montaner whose CIA ties were exposed here.


Quelle surprise, no? Shamir and Bennett went on to write about Ardin’s history in Cuba with a US funded group openly supported by a real terrorist: Luis Posada Carriles.

In Cuba she interacted with the feminist anti-Castro group Las damas de blanco (the Ladies in White). This group receives US government funds and the convicted anti-communist terrorist Luis Posada Carriles is a friend and supporter. Wikipedia quotes Hebe de Bonafini, president of the Argentine Madres de Plaza de Mayo as saying that “the so-called Ladies in White defend the terrorism of the United States.”


CONTINUED...

http://my.firedoglake.com/kirkmurphy/2010/12/04/assanges-chief-accuser-has-her-own-history-with-us-funded-anti-castro-groups-one-of-which-has-cia-ties/



Hey! Whaddyaknow? Posada Carriles is puro BFEE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #16)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:46 PM

84. Why are there no charges from Sweden? Karl Rove's friend over there couldn't come up with

some charges?

They've had two years to file charges, but still haven't done it. Why do you think that is? And why was the 'story' leaked by a far rightwing publication in the first place, and why did the prosecutor find nothing to hold him for?

Why did they not ask the questions when he made himself available and why would anyone on a Dem board not know all the circumstances of this phony, excuse to politically persecute an award-winning publisher and editor, who did nothing but provide facts for the public?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #84)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:55 PM

95. There are allegations, apparently, not charges.

I don't presume to know much about Sweden's judicial process but the flip questions should also be asked: "Why is Assange fighting so desperately to avoid going to Sweden to answer the allegations?"

An allegation of rape should not be presumed 'phony' until an investigation of some sort is done. Assange is fighting that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #95)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:17 PM

106. Well, I could help with knowing about Sweden's judicial process which would have helped

you avoid making incorrect allegations throughout this thread. Assange did NOT fight desperately or otherwise to avoid going to Sweden. He was IN Sweden and made himself available to answer questions and left after doing so with no problem.

There are no allegations of rape. There are allegations of what is a misdemeanor under Swedish law, so why are you using the word 'rape' ? Where did you get this information?

And when has a country ever pursued someone who has never been charged, not even on the misdemeanor allegation which would amount to a fine, with a warrant from INTERPOL?? Got any other cases like this you can cite?

Not to mention he and his lawyers have made him available totally since Sweden contradicted itself after first declaring there was no misdemeanor committed, (and even the women have never, no, they have insisted there was no rape) and decided they had some questions to ask him. Why haven't they asked those questions? They've had plenty of opportunity to do so.

Why are there no charges? I think the world out side the far rightwing in this country, know the answer to these questions. Which is why he remains among the most respected public figures on the International stage.

And I have a question, why did you jump into this thread when you admit now you know nothing about this case. Which is clear from your comments btw.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #106)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:46 PM

115. The information used is from the

Aluminatti, CNN, FOX or MSNBC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tsuki (Reply #115)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:57 PM

120. Well, you said it. I wouldn't have said it, but the 'facts' you have been spreading here

sure sounded like they came from the US Corporate media which I remember well at the time. Like everyone else, naturally, I checked their Sarah Palin and Joe (let's also lock up the NY Times Editors') Lieberman 'facts'(yes he really did say that in trying to defend going after Assange) and it was not hard to see how absolutely untruthful they were. Which is why the US Media now ranks around #47 on the World Free Press chart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #120)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:40 PM

158. Randome is the one spreading 'facts'. I just have heard clips where the Aluminatti

were misforming. I don't trust them either and feel better off without them on my TV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tsuki (Reply #158)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:12 AM

252. Oops, sorry, sent that post to you by mistake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #252)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:22 AM

253. I figured as much.

I just wanted to point out I am not part of the poutage. I am so tired of the trolling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tsuki (Reply #253)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:53 PM

266. You and a lot of other people!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #106)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:23 PM

128. The same reason anyone 'jumps into' a thread.

The topic interests me. I'm drawn to subjects that seem to be unresolvable.

Just about every article about Assange refers to the 'rape allegations' so you'll need to excuse those of us who think there is some merit to that, especially since a warrant for his arrest was issued.

I don't think it's up to me to try and refute a woman's charges. The quote you supplied from the
Salon article is interesting and I will read it more carefully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #128)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:34 PM

132. The women did not charge rape. I have already provided their own words, refuting that

charge which you know. I had no more information than you did about this case, but unlike you apparently, I did not jump into threads spreading the smears before finding out what lay behind them.

What I, and everyone else who checked the sources and the facts, found was that the smears all came from super right wing sources, while the facts, such as the women's own words, came from reputable sources. I mean NOT Fox or Sweden's equivalent of Free Republic.

I don't see why after all this time, anyone does not know the facts, especially on a Democratic Board where the facts were posted many times when the story first surfaced and before the smear merchants scrubbed as much as they could of exculpatory evidence.

It is not wise to make definitive statements about anyone, based on rumor and innuendo regardless of who they are. I asked you to prove what you said. That is a normal request when someone appears to be so certain of something. But now you are asking me to do that work for you. When someone makes a claim, it is up to them to prove it.

I take it you cannot, nor did I think you could having fully researched this story from the beginning.

Again, so you do not make the mistake again of claiming the women accused him of rape:



One of two women involved told Aftonbladet in an interview published today that she had never intended Assange to be charged with rape. She was quoted as saying: “It is quite wrong that we were afraid of him. He is not violent and I do not feel threatened by him.”


And since no charges have ever been filed, not even misdemeanor charges, where did these false allegations come from? You say you are interested in this story, have you tried to find out who is contradicting the women themselves and lying about rape charges?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #132)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:38 PM

135. Right. And they went to the authorities in the first place because...

...they like talking about their sex lives to strangers?

Sorry, they may have backed off from their original allegations but that doesn't mean Assange is blameless. I agree, though, that if they ARE backing off, then probably Sweden should, also.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #135)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:49 PM

143. Actually Aiden made that statement a day or two after they went to the police...

And the original reporting about this says that they went to the police solely to see if they could force Assange to take a test for sexually transmitted diseases. (By the way, the defense also has evidence that the women discussed selling their story to a Swedish tabloid.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #143)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:03 PM

179. Yes, you are correct. The reason for that was a broken condom. Nothing to do with rape.

She had also IM's friends reporting on the great time she had and no mention of any problems.

Much of those original reports, along with her own words, were scrubbed from the internet, but not before some of it was C&P into other articles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #135)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:02 PM

147. I really wish you would do your own work as I don't have time to re-write this

story all over again. They did what people in Sweden do when they have a question about something, they did NOT go to the police to file charges, or to report a crime. They had a question, presumably about a man wearing a condom or not. Sweden has some very strange laws governing adult sexual relationships, unheard of in other countries. But that's a whole other story, complete with some lunatics, one of whom got himself involved in this case, no surprise, a world class lunatic.

So, what they did was to go to the place where questions such as 'if someone doesn't wear a condom, can I sue him' etc. etc. And somehow the police, who broke the law btw, made those questions public and they appeared almost immediately in one of Sweden's most right wing news publications. Almost as if it was all planned.

The case should be, and originally was supposed to be, an investigation into who leaked this, against Sweden's laws, to the equivalent of Fox or FR. So far, we do not know if that investigation has taken place.

No charges were filed, no allegations of rape were ever made, a question about a possible misdemeanor was escalated, then shut down by a Sr. Prosecutor after reviewing the questions. And then, it was resurrected for the purpose of smearing a News Organization that had revealed inconvenient facts about the Bush war crimes.

Would Rove, at the time an 'adviser' to the Swedish PM, have had an interest in getting revenge against someone who did what he was able to keep the US media from doing, expose the crimes of his boss? Imo, there is no doubt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #1)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:24 PM

58. Notice you don't get down to "Creative Speculation" much after the big move...

...and the updated TOS...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #58)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:26 PM

108. So what do you know about Assange?

Going from what you post, apocalypsehow, it's not much.

Otherwise, you would understand what his arrest, extradition and trial as an enemy of the state -- just for telling the truth -- means.

“There are all kinds of reasons to suspect that Assange is the victim of a political persecution and that the extradition being sought by and to Sweden is merely to enable his further extradition to the U.S. for having published information revealing U.S. government wrongdoing.” - Colleen Rowley, attorney and former FBI agent

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #108)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:54 PM

119. So what do you know about the new TOS in "Creative Speculation"?

Going from the fact that you're pretty scarce down there, I'd wager you read it well:

"Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.
Democratic Underground is not intended to be a platform for kooks and crackpots peddling paranoid fantasies with little or no basis in fact. To accommodate our more imaginative members we tolerate some limited discussion of so-called "conspiracy theories" under the following circumstances: First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like). In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism, and Democratic Underground has zero tolerance for bigoted hate speech. In short, you take your chances."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice



You said: "Going from what you post, apocalypsehow, it's not much."

Ah, still the charmer: can't just ask me my opinion without lapsing into the usual personal attacks. Ask me my opinion regarding Assange like a civil human being, and I'll give you a civil answer.

Until then: I'm lovin' on that new TOS in CS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #119)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:59 PM

122. You've nothing to say on Assange, but plenty about your victimization.

Keep on playing that card. It's a win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #122)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:01 PM

124. First class projection! Nice....that new TOS is a real downer, eh?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #124)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:07 PM

125. Here's a video on why Assange should matter to all who care about freedom of the press...



I don't find people messing with the First Amendment funny. It is what separates free people from tyranny.

Almost forgot: Good luck on that TOS, apocalypsehow. You really should start a journal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #125)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:15 PM

126. I'll take a look at your vid as long as it doesn't lapse into anti-semitism

or other racist diatribes or implications. A lot of the "links" you provide to "prove" this or that conspiracy theory do just that, and I want no part of it.

As to the "TOS," I don't need any "luck" on it: I'm not apt to post things in Creative Speculation that are likely to "stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like). In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism, and Democratic Underground has zero tolerance for bigoted hate speech."

But I'll bet you I know someone who just might.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #126)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:26 PM

129. That's a lie, apocalypsehow. Kevin Zeese is no anti-Semite.

In fact, feel free to go through any of my posts on DU, going back to 2002 when I was Oblomov. You'll find there is no anti-Semitism, bigoted or hate speech in them.

PS: Are you still angry I asked you about that bibliography you promised but never sent?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #129)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:28 PM

130. It's not a "lie," Octa, since (1) I didn't say "Kevin Zeese" was anything, and (2) you

HAVE posted links to websites in the past that contained anti-semitic implications.

So there you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #130)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:33 PM

131. Show me where I posted something containing ''anti-semitic implications,'' apocalypsehow.

Otherwise, we'll have to take your word on it. Not that that doesn't mean anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #131)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:36 PM

134. Repeatedly on DU2, especially in the 911 forum.

The articles themselves weren't openly anti-semitic, but the sites they squatted on had plenty of that kind of rubbish hanging around - and you well know it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #134)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:43 PM

140. So you DON'T have a link to show what you allege, apocalypsehow.

I always include links and sources, so that you and everyone else who reads my post knows where I got the information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #129)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:39 PM

136. As for the "PS" in this post, for anyone interested enough to bother with it,

the answer to this laughable carrying on about every time Octa has been beaten on the facts is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x292552#308814

He trots that out every time when he's on the retreat, and has got nothing else.


Edit: fixed link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #136)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:41 PM

138. So, what have you to say about Assange, apocalypsehow?

Anything?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #138)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:44 PM

141. Sure. I think he embarrassed the U.S. government, and exposed some scummy business

our government was doing in our names, and for that I commend him.

I still think he needs to go back to Sweden, and get that mess cleared up. I'm not judging him, or saying he's guilty, but I think he should fight the charges if they're not true.

There you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #141)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:59 PM

146. There are no charges. Assange has never been charged with any crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #146)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:02 PM

148. Great! Then it should be no problem for him to return to Sweden and set them straight.

Win-win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #148)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:13 PM

153. I believe that there is a problem and so does Assange. He has repeatedly offered to

answer questions and Sweden has repeatedly turned him down. Holder has flat out stated that there is a criminal probe into Assange and the cable leaks. The chances of Assange being extradited from Sweden to the U.S. are greater than not.

So yes, if I were Assange, I would take every legal avenue available to avoid extradition to the U.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #153)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:18 PM

155. Okay, great! We have a difference of opinion: I think he should return to Sweden, and

you think he should not. Your reason for holding this view is that you apparently believe that he will be extradited to the U.S. if he does go to Sweden. Fine: you could be right. I still think he should take his chances, and fight these accusations (not charges; thanks for correcting me above) if they are untrue. Until those are cleared up, right-wing scum everywhere will use them to attempt to discredit the useful information revealed by Wikileaks.

So, we'll have to agree to disagree on that one point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #155)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:41 PM

159. There is no way in hell that I would surrender myself to a country that is more

likely than not willing to extradite me to another country that has admitted it was looking for ways to prosecute me for espionage for which, if convicted, I COULD RECEIVE THE DEATH PENALTY.

This is precisely why Assange sought sanctuary at the Ecuadorian embassy... (link contains a somewhat okay translation of the embassy's statement in regards to the basis of Assange's request.

https://twitter.com/ravisomaiya/status/215157793953562624/photo/1/large

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #159)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:30 PM

175. That's nice. We'll just have to agree to disagree about this point, as I politely

informed you above. Why you seem determined to keep discussing this with me, when you are aware my opinion differs from yours and is highly unlikely to change, is a passing curiosity.

Again, I think Assange should return to Sweden to answer these accusations, and clear the whole matter up. You do not. We have a disagreement. We will have to agree to disagree. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #175)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:59 PM

240. You DO know he is not Swedish?

You do know Bradley Manning was held in solitary confinement until "about April 2011, (when) 295 academics – many of them prominent American legal scholars – signed a letter arguing that the detention conditions violated the United States Constitution." There were claims that the US treatment constituted torture and Manning's mental stability was a cause of concern after such treatment?

You really think this is a simple matter of just going to Sweden and "clearing up the matter...?" Really? REALLY? How Adorable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanlassie (Reply #240)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:16 PM

243. You DO know that if you travel to a foreign country, then are accused of committing an offense

in said country, it is irrelevant whether you are a citizen of said country or not? Or is that concept just a tad too, I don't know, difficult to grasp?

"You do know Bradley Manning was held in solitary confinement until "about April 2011, (when) 295 academics – many of them prominent American legal scholars – signed a letter arguing that the detention conditions violated the United States Constitution." There were claims that the US treatment constituted torture and Manning's mental stability was a cause of concern after such treatment?"

Irrelevant and non-responsive to my reply.

"You really think this is a simple matter of just going to Sweden and "clearing up the matter...?" Really? REALLY? How Adorable."

No, I "think" precisely what I posted: he should go to Sweden and confront his accusers, and thereby clear the matter up. Not much "simple" about it other than making himself available in Sweden to do just that.

Another thing I think is that you should exercise some civility when talking to your fellow DU'ers, and cease putting words in their mouths, stop talking about irrelevant matters that do not address what they originally replied about, etc., etc.

You will not, as anonymity on a discussion board tends to make those who delight in snarling at others who do not share their precise views 100% bold. But it's just a suggestion.


Edit: typos.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #243)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:57 PM

248. The terrible treatment of Bradly Manning

is most certainly relevant Assange must consider the real possibility that he will receive similar or worse. This is not about two women accusing a man of not using a condom. This is about a real US threat to get it's hands on Assange and lock him up forever. You minimize the threat he is under when you say he simply needs to "clear it up.". I find your comments disingenuous. I was wrong to call them adorable. They're not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanlassie (Reply #248)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:12 AM

249. It is not relevant, no matter how much you wish it were. What is relevant is that

Mr. Assange has had accusations lodged against him in Sweden that has compelled a British court to detain and hold court hearings about sending him to Sweden to answer to those accusations.

He should go to Sweden and deal with those accusations. All the rest of that jazz you posted is just speculation laced with personal attacks on a fellow DU'er who simply holds a different opinion than yours on this one issue.

Reasonable observers can draw their own conclusions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #249)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:38 PM

290. What accusations? That a condom broke? And for that INTERPOL

was hired to go hunt him down? It's like a skit from a comedy show. It's laughable that they thin they are fooling people. And this case and will go down in history for what it is.

The women have stated there was no rape. So what are these charges you think deserved to become an International incident?

No rape, no charges of rape, no accusations of rape. So, that leaves the actual reasons for all of this, which fortunately outside the US, most of the world's people know and understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #119)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:11 PM

184. Reading this exchange between you and Octafish, it looks to me like you are

avoiding answering questions about the actual topic of the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #184)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:16 PM

186. As I didn't post the OP or write the article I'm under no obligation to "answer" anything about it.

But, of course, I did:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=830085

That short attention span hauls folks who like to punch that Post my reply! too quick up short every time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #184)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:19 PM

188. LOL! I think there's some history between these two!

S'okay, this thread could use some entertainment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #188)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:22 PM

192. Yeah, I miss my 'ole buddy Octafish down in CS. He wisely steers clear of it these

days thanks to the updated TOS, but I think he's missed down there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #192)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:24 PM

194. Got ya!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #58)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:29 PM

199. You're going to want to back the fuck away from baseless allegations about Octafish

And while I'm at it, get up off the ground. You look ridiculous laughing at your own weak copy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #199)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:54 PM

216. As they are far from "baseless," I think not. But thanks for weighing in!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:00 PM

2. If Correa grants this, he'll be taking his life in his hands.

On the other hand, the infiltrated national police already tried to kill him once. He has scores to settle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #2)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:17 PM

127. That's exactly what I was thinking -

I hope he grants it but I know who will come after him ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:37 PM

261. I would'nt be surprised if he did.

I loved it when Bush demanded that he renew the US base in Manta and Correa's answer. When you allow Ecuador a naval base in Miami we'll talk.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2007/10/22/ecuador-base-idUKADD25267520071022

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:11 PM

3. This is great news n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:16 PM

4. LOL - just saw your thread

He picked a good country with no extradition treaty with the US

Good luck Julian

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:19 PM

5. This is really risky for Correa.

TPTB hate him.

And in an ironic twist, the slobby Committee to Protect Journalists and US Hegemony has been attacking him all over the internet for weeks now. It would be a blow to their smear campaign if Assange took refuge in Ecuador. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:50 PM

163. Because he'll have established a precedent

by which he would have to grant asylum to any person in the same situation - and that could be any charges at all. People who are charged with crimes here could just ask for asylum.

That is, if there is any consistency in their law. Their law would be mighty generous.

People get asylum when they are a well founded fear of persecution. Facing some kind of interview is not considered persecution.

This makes Julian look hysterical.

Even if he were brought to the US as alleged he would be facing a trial, not a firing squad. People on this board praising this don't know what persecution is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #163)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:58 PM

166. You do know that a conviction of espionage in the U.S. does carry the possibility of the death

penalty, don't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #166)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:06 PM

170. a "conviction"

there is a trial first. Facing trial in a court of law is not "persecution."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #170)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:15 PM

172. Yes. I know that there would be a trial first. A trial that could result in a death sentence...

If it were me, I'd take every legal path available to avoid that trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #170)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:15 PM

185. Facing false charges of 'espionage' because you are a journalist most certainly is persecution.

It happens all the time, and we generally condemn it. In fact, it just happened recently although the death penalty was not a threat to dissidents in China. They felt that speaking the truth was treasonous against their government. We here in the US were horrified as we believe in the freedom of the press.

So, what would Assange, an award-winning Editor and Publisher of an International News Agency be facing trial for in this country?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #185)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 10:42 AM

255. NO, it is not

Facing charges of any kind is not "persecution." Look up the definition the UN and international law give. If you have a chance to defend yourself at a trial, then you are not being persecuted.

Persecution is being jailed without trial for one of five reasons which have nothing to do with violating the law. Just because you don't like the law and think you should be able to violate it and not have to face the consequences (trial) does not make you persecuted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #255)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:39 PM

262. There are no charges. And there are no accusations of rape.

Being pursued using INTERPOL of all things, and held for over 18 months, destroying your business for no obvious reason, thank you, but if that happened to me, I would definitely believe I was being persecuted, add to that a secret document stating you have been indicted by a secret GJ by a foreign Super Power, with no representation, no knowledge of what the charges are, that IS persecution and frankly what has been done to Wikileaks and Assange is generally viewed world wide as political persecution. I certainly hope we do not accept these kinds of actions against Journalists, Editors, Publishers as normal, ever, in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #163)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:38 PM

206. How does it make him look hysterical? There have been reports that the US has

obtained a secret Grand Jury indictment against him, waiting for his extradition to Sweden in order to extradite him to the US and charge him, falsely, with espionage. If that happens, then they will have to indict the NY Times, The Guardian, La Monde and every other news media that carried the news stories Wikileaks broke. It will also have a chilling effect on journalism, already almost dead in this country, but now in other countries, as far as using whistle-blowers or other sources in order to bring facts to the public.

Lieberman, who was one of the main instigators regarding charging Assange was asked about this and he responded that the NYT, Guardian and La Monde should also be charged. If anyone in this country supports this, we may as stop claiming to respect our own Constitution. No one will ever trust this country again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #206)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:41 PM

207. What does the Constitution have to do with conspiring with a member of the armed forces...

...to obtain 250,000 documents and dump them into public view without reviewing them? That was not investigative journalism. That was a bone-headed stunt that even the other Wikileaks operators were against.

Some good came of that document dump. Also, the lives of soldiers, diplomats and spies were put at risk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #207)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:51 PM

213. Unbelievable.

No lives were put at risk. Gates confirmed this himself. Most of the documents were vetted by some of the world's largest News Organizations. The first dump was the only one that was not vetted although Wikeleaks asked the US Military to help with redactions before publishing. The USM refused. So had any lives been endangered, it would have been the fault of the USM. After the first dump, Wikileaks went to the press who had more staff to review the material so most of it WAS vetted.

Wikileaks like every other news organization, uses sources, often those sources are whistle-blowers. This is an undeniable right of the Fourth Estate not just in this country, but in every civilized country around the world. To charge a News Organization with spying and apply the death penalty for doing their job, for using sources every news agency uses, would put the US in the category of every dictatorship we so often condemn for doing the same thing.

I cannot believe that any American would support such a crime. And it would be a crime, a crime against the Constitution and would make a laughing stock of this country in the eyes of the world. More than that, it will become an international travesty and we can kiss all claims to being a democracy goodbye. When a nation starts convicting journalists of espionage, that is a sad day for democracy everywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #213)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:59 PM

218. I don't see Wikileaks as a news organization.

I approve of their operation and I disapprove of the government trying to punish them by cutting off their funding. But what Assange did was not investigative journalism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #218)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:24 PM

231. Wikileaks Receives Prestigious Australian Award for Most Outstanding Contribution to Journalism'

WikiLeaks receives Australian Journalism Award

The Walkley Foundation has awarded WikiLeaks for 'Most Outstanding Contribution to Journalism' and cited the group's courageous commitment to journalism and for applying new technology to reveal the inconvenient truths of governments worldwide.

The Walkely Awards which the foundation hands out, are the Australian equivalent of the American Pulitzers and is the nations' most prestigious award for excellence in journalism.


Just one of many awards for outstanding journalism, hardly given to an organization that is not a News Organization.

Do you know the history of Wikileaks? Why it was founded? Who was involved in its founding? Are you familiar with China's record of suppression of the press sometimes brutal suppression? Did you know that Chinese dissidents were involved in the founding of Wikileaks as a Borderless News Organization to overcome the oppression of governments like China against Journalists getting the truth to the people?

How ironic that it should be the US, not China, that is now attempting to prosecute what has become a World Symbol of Free Press. How low we have sunk, even China hasn't attempted to prosecute Assange despite the many documents released about them by Wikileaks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #206)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 10:48 AM

257. Again, that is not "persecution"

Because you've decided the charges are "false" doesn't make it persecution for a government to press them. He would have all rights to trial by jury, cross exam of witnesses, counsel, etc. You are not realizing what persecution, for purposes of asylum, is.

And as to just labeling the charges "false" then to be consistent you'd have to allow the cops to let Zimmerman go without charge - after all they decided the charges were "false."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:20 PM

6. Correa likes Assange.

He was just interviewed for the program Assange broadcasts.
I hope it's granted.


(Teh Twitter knows all)





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Reply #6)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:25 PM

7. Do you remember when the national police turned on him

and kept him hostage in a hospital for hours?

it was downplayed in the Brit and American press but one of his bodyguards was killed protecting him.

Yeah, he has skin in this game.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #7)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:31 PM

9. Yep!

Assange and Wikilieaks revealed how much the US is all up in their business. He was glad for the info.
I think we are all up in everybody's business.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #7)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:56 PM

28. This is fascinating on several levels

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #28)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:59 PM

30. This is the Big Game, malaise, right in front of our faces.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #30)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:33 PM

109. Yes indeed

Which of the South American countries does not have an extradition treaty with the US?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Reply #6)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:38 PM

112. Assange has many friends among world leaders. The new President of Tunisia also gave

an interview on Assange's show and told him how he credited Wikileaks in part for helping Tunisia remove their dictatorship and that if he ever needed to 'visit' Tunisia, he would be very welcome there.

He, btw, the President, was a Human Rights Activist who was held and tortured by Tunisia's Ben Ali dictatorship and who is now president. And there are many others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:33 PM

11. Might want to double check your facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #11)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:00 PM

33. Indeed

My bad. I read that there was no extradition treaty with Ecuador.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #4)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:38 PM

75. Yes, but the embassy is in London and the courts in the UK are who wants to extradite him,

 

It;s going to be difficult for him to get out of the country. They can give him asylum in the embassy, but getting out of the UK is simply not doable. He cannot be given diplomatic immunity as he is not a diplomat and he is a fugitive in the host country.

This seems to me to be a delaying tactic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:28 PM

8. Yeah, those fascist Swedes and their fascist rape and sexual assault laws

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #8)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:32 PM

10. Interesting enough, he has not been charged with any crime but has been

under house arrest for nearly 2 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:39 PM

13. Kinda weird losing an extradition hearings if there's no crime suspected

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #13)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:43 PM

15. Some government suspects you of something, they say.

So it must be true. Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #15)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:03 PM

269. actually he has already been called a terrorist by this administration

without a trial..the president also has a kill list of terrorists..they've boxed him in a corner for telling the truth..the world changed because of it..yet he could be killed by this administration without a trial because they have determined him to be a terrorist. I never thought I would see the day that a journalist could be killed for telling the truth in my country. I hope Ecuador accepts him. I also hope everyone watches every episode of his show for the past couple months. That's journalism and that's the truth whether it conforms the the narrative being told in this country or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #13)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:33 PM

201. I suspect you keyed my car. You'll need to come to CA to interview. No, I haven't filed charges.

Which flight will you be on?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #201)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:36 PM

203. Good point. But why did the UK side with Sweden? Are they part of a conspiracy, too?

And why did the UK Supreme Court side with Sweden? Are they part of a conspiracy, too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #203)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:51 PM

211. Damned if I know.

I'm not an expert on UK extradition treaties, nor do I play one on the internets.

What does seem awfully strange to me is going to all that trouble to extradite somebody for an investigatory interview, when the flight over to interview the guy in the UK and avoid the legal kerfuffle and delay would have cost all of £30. They seem bound and determined to get him back in Sweden, which seems disproportionate to the accusations and thus suspicious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #211)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:04 PM

224. I don't understand that part, either.

But if these monolithic state governments were determined to get him, I don't see why they would be going to all this trouble to do everything in a legal and convoluted manner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #224)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:14 PM

226. He's white, a citizen of a friendly country, not a Muslim, and in the public eye.

Any three of the four are probably enough to keep him from getting black bagged.

If his last name was Ali he'd have spent the past two years getting jumper cables attached to his twig and berries in some semi-friendly dictatorship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #8)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:37 PM

12. Yes, it is fascist to imprison someone without charge for years

as Luminous Animal points out. But I guess once you cooperate with extraordinary rendition, the slope only gets more slippery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #12)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:41 PM

14. rendtion? Where do you even come up with that?

He had a public extradition hearing with representative counsel and he lost. And we're talking about Sweden here, not Syria.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #14)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:44 PM

17. That would be this Sweden:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #17)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:02 PM

35. And yet

we're reading about a public extradition hearing with opposing counsel, not some midnight snatch-and-grab operation. If Assange committed sexual assault he needs to be held to account. Telling women who might be rape victims to just lie back and relax because their attacker has gained folk hero status is creates more injustices than it presumes to remedy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #35)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:12 PM

45. If Sweden has charges to file, they should file them

and stop obstructing due process of law.

No one is telling rape victims to close their eyes and think of England. That's just bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #45)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:17 PM

51. Apparently Sweden filed something, hence the public extradition hearing with opposing counsel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #51)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:18 PM

53. Again, there has been no charges leveled against Assange...

None, nada, zero.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #53)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:24 PM

57. Not every country operates according to our rules.

Technically, they are 'allegations', not charges. Why is he fighting so desperately to avoid testifying about baseless allegations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #57)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:26 PM

61. He has made himself available to testify from London.

And this fact has been reported over and over again right here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #53)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:25 PM

59. So why the hearing all the way up to the UK supreme court?

Supreme courts aren't in the business of adjudicating non-issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #59)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:27 PM

62. They are when the United States wants them to.

Assange embarrassed the State Department, the Pentagon and the White House.

Do you really think they are going to just let him do that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #62)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:35 PM

69. Our government is embarrassed every single day!

Assange is nothing now but an accused rapist trying desperately to avoid facing his accusers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #69)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:36 PM

72. Wrong but, since that has been pointed out to you repeatedly to no effect

I can only assume you don't care if you are wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #62)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:42 PM

79. It must be nice to retreat to paranoid fantasies everytime reality intrudes

You refuse to even offer victims of a potential serial rapist a chance to have their allegations properly investigated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #79)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:48 PM

87. Um, you seem to be the one toting paranoid fantasies

when you credit allegations that haven't even resulted in charges.

And of course, Assange has made himself available to the Swedish government all this time.

Good grief. Talk about a flight from reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #59)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:49 PM

88. Why don't you tell me why this farce when he has not been charged with any crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #88)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:54 PM

93. Unless you want to say multiple accusers suddenly fabricated a spree of rapes

I think their claims deserve a fair hearing. Instead of spending years on extradition hearings and now asylum stunts perhaps Assange should face his accusers. For a PR persona based on transparency and accountablility Assange sure seems averse to that which he demands of everyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #93)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:58 PM

98. There can be no fair hearing until there are charges. ASSANGE isn't holding that up.

In your zeal to smear him, you forget that fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #98)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:40 PM

137. Nobody threw him over the fence of the embassay.

And nobody can smear Assange except Assange.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #137)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:42 PM

177. Assange cannot prevent Sweden from filing charges against him. And they have not. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #137)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:37 PM

205. Nobody can smear Assange except Assange? Christ, I hope your vocation doesn't count on logic

You may need to rethink your stream-of-consciousness sentence-like construct above.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #93)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:13 PM

271. a broken condom does not translate to a spree of rapes..get your facts straight ..nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xiamiam (Reply #271)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:16 PM

273. So it's "he said/she said". Glad that's been cleared up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #273)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 03:16 PM

279. not at all

Nobody alleges "a spree of rapes", except for the odd mis-informed poster here.

What actually happened and how the participants portray it is not the issue, it is the creative interpretation of law and the behaviour of some elements within the judicial system that raises concern.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=833837

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #35)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:21 PM

56. What's a little rape and pillage as long as you have solid anti-American street cred?



To hear "progressives" give every benefit of the doubt to a man accused of such heinous acts is truly baffling. I'll give you this though, if the accusations are true, he certainly gave himself great cover. Because of his Wiki connection, he can literally get away with crimes, and claim it's all down to "political persecution". Smart dude. However, the women who may have actually been harmed, are now caught up in the celebrity worship of his feckless defenders, and sadly those women are on the losing end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #56)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:36 PM

73. I don't get it

It's as if those women aren't even entitled to a hearing of the facts. If Assange were fighting extradition to the US on espionage charges some of his defenders might have a case but we're talking multiple rape/sexual assault allegations from women who were apparently his supporters prior to being attacked.

http://www.salon.com/2010/12/07/julian_assange_rape_accuser_smeared/

Some GOPers are too emotionally immature to hear the word "vagina" uttered in their presence and no amount of electronic ink is too much to spill in the name of high-minded condemnation -- but if a serial rapist is on the loose? Well, the first question that naturally arise is: What's his political affiliation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #73)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:46 PM

85. Notice who the "defenders" are. They're the ones who repeatedly tell Democrats how we.....

should open our minds to the possibilities that the big bad government is out to kill and enslave us all, but these same folks choose not to entertain even the possibility that these women might have a case against this creep? How's that for "justice for all"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #85)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:58 PM

97. Maybe you should have listened to the women themselves, if you're so concerned

about them. They never claimed rape, but why would anyone care about THEM, when there is a chance to silence a journalist who exposed the lies of the Bush administration. Surely you are not defending the Bush Administration and Karl Rove? Or is it that you have no clue what this was all about??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #97)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:01 PM

100. Why don't you link to something that tells us what the women have said?

That might help clarify matters.

On edit: Then there is this Salon article: http://www.salon.com/2010/12/07/julian_assange_rape_accuser_smeared

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #100)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:34 PM

110. Lol, how did I know you would find that article. The women were not smeared btw, unless

printing their own words is a smear. Words like this spoken in an interview given by the woman herself. I guess she never meant to give that interview??

One of two women involved told Aftonbladet in an interview published today that she had never intended Assange to be charged with rape. She was quoted as saying: “It is quite wrong that we were afraid of him. He is not violent and I do not feel threatened by him.”


Aftonbladet should have kept that interview secret I suppose.

I have not made the false allegations of rape. You have done that so it is on you to find some credible legal sources, and there are many of them, proving the allegation you have made. I have already written about this case, as it happened. I am not about to rewrite it here. But since you made the charges the onus is on you to prove them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #110)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:35 PM

133. Looking more carefully at the details, I think there IS room for doubt about either side.

And it sounds like the Swedish authorities are pushing something that the first prosecutor dismissed as 'groundless'.

That doesn't explain why Assange is fighting this so badly. I don't see a conspiracy here. I see a man who wants to use his celebrity-hood as a means to avoid embarrassing himself.

You can support Wikileaks and still see Assange as an ass. And that's how he comes across to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #133)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:49 PM

144. I don't care whether he is an ass or not. I care that an editor and publisher of an award

winning News Organization which has for years, uncovered corruption, in Tunisia, in Egypt, in Syria, in many African nations, often saving lives and in some instances helping to end dictatorships, while working with courageous reporters who put their own lives at risk to get the truth about Dictators out to the world is being smeared and silenced by Far Right elements, because he also published Bush era war crimes. Until then, no one had anything but good things to say about this new, innovative International News Organization.

Wikeleaks has received multiple awards from eg, Amnesty International and from many organizations that issue awards for excellence in journalism.

But uncovering the Bush era war crimes was apparently not going to be tolerated. So this obvious smear with its Rovian taint, despite being judged to be baseless by one of Sweden's Senior prosecutors, persisted in the Right Wing media until a new prosecutor was found. And even then, NO CHARGES were ever filed. Why? You saw the women's own words, how can a prosecutor file charges when no one has made them? It is a PLOY to silence the new media, otherwise charges would have been filed by now.

Again, he is NOT fighting answering questions. He is fighting what we know is a ploy, (revelations prove the US's intentions) to get him to Sweden and then to the US. And he is absolutely right to do so.

Fye, Wikileaks uncovered a CIA document right before this happened, AND published it on their site, plotting how they would stop Assange and Wikileaks, and settling on 'we can always get him accused of rape'.

So after having read all sides of this 'story', it is clear to me that the CIA's little plot has been put into action, and until someone provides some evidence that any of this is true, that is the consensus of a majority of people around the world.

The US will disgrace itself if they prove all of us right. What should have happened after the War Logs were revealed, is that this country should have started prosecutions of the War Criminals, instead they are going after the messenger. Shameful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #144)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:55 PM

145. Not buying it.

Just because there COULD be a conspiracy doesn't mean there IS one. Politicians are not so easily embarrassed.

You keep talking about what MIGHT have happened instead of focusing -as you did earlier- on the women and their allegations. That should be where this begins and ends, not by constructing an elaborate conspiracy theory that just happens to exonerate Assange.

If the allegations are baseless, he should confront them and be done with this. His actions label him as a man who is afraid, no doubt, but of the Swedish criminal system, not shadowy ties to the U.S. government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #145)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:08 PM

150. I am not interested in whether you buy it or not. You have admitted to knowing nothing

about this case, so an opinion based not on facts, but on right wing media smears, is not really going to influence anything.

He HAS confronted the allegations. Did you miss that part? He did speak to the Swedish police. In fact he waited in Sweden longer than he was supposed to be there once the false story appeared in the Right wing media there, in order to talk to them. He was no hurry to leave, and when there were no charges, no restrictions on him leaving, he left. He did not run away, he continued on his journey to England, hardly a place to hide considering they have an extradition agreement with Sweden.

No one asked him to remain any longer in Sweden. Anyone giving that impression in any media, is either lying, or too lazy to bother uncovering the facts.

'Believe' what you choose to believe, I believe the facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #73)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:08 PM

102. Sorry, NU.

I just re-linked to the same article without realizing you posted it first!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #56)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:55 PM

94. He was never charged nor was rape even alleged. Where do you get your information?

What's a little false rumor of rape when you are an award-winning editor and publisher who publishes facts.

Was he anti-Nigeria, anti-Brazil, anti-France, anti all the other countries he published facts about? Why does the Right Wing in this country always think that if anyone publishes facts about the Bush years, they must be anti-American? I think that makes him pro-American, as we on the Left have always been when we tried to tell the truth about the Bush Administration.

Seems you don't know much about the facts of this story.

So could you link to the 'rape' charges please, not from Breitbart.com, from a credible source, or even to the 'rape' allegations?? I have yet to see them, but you appear to have info the rest of the legal world does not have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #14)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:53 PM

26. Prime Minister Reinfeldt

has walked hand in hand with whatever the US government has wanted. He couldn't be happier to oblige. He heads a center-right party, and they aren't exactly rooting for rights.
Olaf Palme may spin out of his grave and strangle Reinfeldt.

This isn't your grandfather's Sweden.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #14)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:36 PM

157. Sweden was a partner in rendition. They knowingly

let the flights come and go. Their human rights record is not so hot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #8)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:24 PM

193. There are no charges, nor even any allegations of rape.

No one has alleged, especially the women who have actually denied any allegations of rape, that he is wanted to answer questions about rape charges OR allegations.

Sweden's rape laws therefore have nothing to do with Assange.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:45 PM

18. Good for him. And, bravo for exposing the corruption.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #18)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:47 PM

21. Assange handed many, many gifts to leftist leaders in Latin America.

I hope they can figure out how to give him one back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:47 PM

20. Link to Assange interview with Correa...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #20)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:01 PM

34. Thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:53 PM

25. Embassy statement:


Statement on Julian Assange
June 19, 2012

This afternoon Mr Julian Assange arrived at the Ecuadorian Embassy seeking political asylum from the Ecuadorian government.

As a signatory to the United Nations Universal Declaration for Human Rights, with an obligation to review all applications for asylum, we have immediately passed his application on to the relevant department in Quito.

While the department assesses Mr Assange’s application, Mr Assange will remain at the embassy, under the protection of the Ecuadorian Government.

The decision to consider Mr Assange’s application for protective asylum should in no way be interpreted as the Government of Ecuador interfering in the judicial processes of either the United Kingdom or Sweden.

http://www.ecuadorembassyuk.org.uk/news/statement-on-julian-assange

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:05 PM

38. Good for him. Ecuador should accept him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:07 PM

40. Based on what?

He simply has to answer to a minor charge - no one's threatening him with execution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #40)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:09 PM

42. There are no charges. He has never been charged with anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #42)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:28 PM

63. Whatever, they got an order of extradition

And they aren't going to execute him. Asylum takes a true fear of death. Sweden is not known for doing anything like that to people via its legal system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #63)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:25 PM

195. And you know that is not the issue. Sweden is not the issue. Everyone in the world knows

what the issue is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #195)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 10:44 AM

256. THat is a meaningless post

However, he is not being persecuted for being interviewed in Switzerland. One does not get asylum for things like that.

One gets asylum for things like: the person will be jailed for their political opinion if they return - i.e. Benazir Bhutto during the years the opposition was in power.

Or people who will be executed just for being a nationality or ethnic group, i.e. people fleeing Rwanda during the genocide.

Julian's claim is frivolous and makes a mockery of people who truly are persecuted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #256)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:46 PM

264. Since the revelation in the Anonymous leaks that the US has indicted Assange in a secret

GJ and since this country still engages in the barbaric practice of the death penalty, he is seeking asylum from being extradited by the US and jailed and falsely accused, possibly held and tried in a military tribunal now that this is the law, thanks to the vile NDAA. This is a clear case of what can happen to someone under those laws.

The US can make a statement that there is no indictment and that they have no intention of charging and/or extraditing him. But they have not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #264)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:01 PM

268. The Swedish maneuverings only delay his possible extradition by the U.K.

If the U.S. government is so intent on getting him, why wouldn't they just get him now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:10 PM

44. Nice! Hope Ecuador grants him asylum.

And I see the usual suspects are already here attacking Assange and advocating for what is an obvious case of political persecution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #44)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:12 PM

47. Sure. It's so 'obvious'.

Just because the U.S. government is not happy with him does not mean he gets diplomatic immunity wherever he goes. He should talk to the Swedish authorities if he has nothing to hide.

Ironic, isn't it? The former head of Wikileaks trying to hide from the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #47)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:19 PM

54. Baloney. He has made himself available to the Swedish government from "go".

You really should read something about this case because you don't seem to have the facts in hand.

And yes, everyone is entitled to due process of law. Even people you personally don't like. Especially them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #54)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:25 PM

60. So what was this whole etradition fight going on, then?

He wants to answer accusations from afar. If he provided any information, apparently it was not enough because Sweden is not satisfied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #60)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:29 PM

64. Then you CHARGE him.

Accusations fly all the time. Until you are charged with a crime, you aren't required to appear. Except in this case. Isn't that strange to you?

Think about it for a minute. Accusation means that someone investigates. Charges mean that someone must answer the charges in court. They want him to appear in Sweden to answer accusations, but not charges. I've never heard of that before, have you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #64)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:32 PM

67. I don't pretend to understand Sweden's judicial process.

And they are not required to follow our rules. It was a serious allegation that went to the Supreme Court, for Christ's sake. Call it allegations or charges or whatever, the plain fact of the matter is that he fought like hell to avoid having to respond.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #67)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:35 PM

70. No. Charges can be answered in court. Not fiiling charges but continuing

to PERSECUTE someone is, in itself, obstruction of justice.

And no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still bs. Assange has responded, look it up. And he has made himself available. Look that up, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #67)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:40 PM

77. We call it Charges.

There are other terms. Indictment for example. It is an official accusation made by the court. The accused is required to answer those charges at peril of life, or freedom. IT IS OFFICIAL AND HANDED DOWN THROUGH COURTS.

The Police in Sweden want to interview Asange in Sweden. Not in London. They can't spare an investigator to fly to London you see. Instead they send dozens of Lawyers to argue that Asange should appear in Sweden for the INVESTIGATION. Not the trial, the investigation.

Something about that stinks like a week old fish. Now I am not an expert on Sweden's legal system. But the only thing they have done so far is the equivalent of a Subpoena, demanding that Asange appear in answer the accusation for the investigation. No warrant for his arrest.

He MAY have done it. He may NOT HAVE. But that is determined in a trial. Right now, Sweden isn't even planning one. They're just planning an investigation. Until this is explained in such a way that it makes some sort of sense, I'm staying on the side of the doubters. Especially since the same Government so worried about the victims of these alleged rapes, is the same one who let CIA agents torture other people in their nation. Rape is bad, I'll give you that. It's a horrible crime and an unforgivable violation. But doesn't it bother you that the same Government was involved in Torture? That Government of Sweden that was exposed by Asange and Wikileaks. Doesn't that bother you at all?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #77)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:45 PM

83. Yes. It does bother me.

I still think the weight of evidence to those of us who speculate on this leads me to believe he did some seriously terrible things. I don't think there is a government conspiracy to 'pay him back' for the release of secret information.

I think his former co-workers were against the mass release that he did for fear that it would imperil our own soldiers and spies.

I think he threatened to release some TRULY damaging material that made him out to look like the boy who cried 'wolf'.

All this, in sum, makes me believe he really needs to face whatever music there is for whatever may or may not have occurred in Sweden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #83)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:53 PM

92. LOL. This is why we can't have nice things. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #83)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:48 PM

116. You mean those former co-workers who stole from Wikileaks and claimed that they

were going to start their own leaks organization but then never did?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #83)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:34 PM

156. I think it's time for a reality check.

The Pentagon Papers saved lives, because the people were informed that their President was lying about the reasons we got into Viet-Nam. That truth reduced our involvement in Viet-Nam eventually. It took years for that truth to have the effect it should have always had. Without that truth eroding public support, we would likely have stayed in Viet-Nam as we stayed in Korea. A warmonger like Nixon would have loved to bomb the Communists into the pages of history. Instead he ran on getting us out, giving the majority the idea we could have peace with honor. We Democrats lost that election because we just wanted out period. Honor be damned, we shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Cablegate as it's known, was a disaster from the get go. First, when I was 19 years old, and in the Army. Nobody gave me the keys to all the secrets in the world. Why? I was 19 and let's be honest, while legally a man, and couldn't drink, everybody knows that people of that age are going to make mistakes. So the dunce that gave the keys to all the secrets in the region to a 19 year old kid should be held at least partially responsible.

Second. The Government once they realized that this was going on could have pre-empted the move and released all the documents with redaction of sources and means in order to protect the secrets. Instead they railed and denounced and demanded people listen to them. Stupid.

Third. Going after wikileaks was just asinine. First to pressure banks to keep them from getting donations, then shutting them down on pay-pal, and then going after their servers AFTER the information was released was juvenile. It was the action of a powerless parent taking away a child's toy for insubordination. If you have a real criminal charge, bring it. If you don't, then leave the petty crap at the door.

Fourth. Assange is an asshole. But we're back to the original topic now. Does an Asshole have rights? If you are going to tell me it is standard practice in Sweden to have all participants in place before you investigate a crime, I'll call you a liar right now. Nobody has that policy. Now, demanding that the participants be present for a trial, that is one thing. But again, there has been nothing equivalent to an indictment. Sweden is demanding extradition for the investigation. I can see no logic in that move. NONE. The only possible answer is that the United States has a deal to intercept and introduce Asange to the Rendition program first hand. It is the only logical answer.

Again, let's say you were in Florida on vacation. You return home to California. Florida says that they have an accuser who says you raped them. You say it wasn't rape. Instead of sending the cops to talk to you, they demand you return to Florida for the investigation. I would say bite me. If you want to talk to me, here I am. If you want to charge me, I'll show up, and prove my innocence. However, just to interview me? Not in this lifetime.

I would smell a rat. Wouldn't you? I saw a news story where A Disney cruise ship had a crew member disappear while at sea. They were flagged out of the Cayman islands. Instead of the FBI, or the Mexican Police, they had the disappearance investigated by the Cayman Island police. One cop flew to Los Angeles, and interviewed a bunch of people. They didn't have the entire ship show up in the Cayman Islands to ask questions. They didn't take anyone to the Cayman Islands to be questioned. They did it there. The family thinks they should have done more to discover what happened. Which of course is how it ended up in the news.

Nobody demands that a suspect show up for questioning in that kind of situation. Nobody. I smell a rat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #156)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:44 PM

161. You and some other posters have raised some good points.

And yes, going after Wikileak's sources of funding was based on vindictiveness, not legal reasoning.

I don't necessarily smell a rat, any more than I did when what's-his-name -Strauss-Khan or whatever- was accused of sexual misconduct and rape. His actions were the actions of a guilty man.

I think the same can be said of Assange.

But I have no agenda to push here so I will admit to not having all the answers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #161)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:50 PM

162. So, you would be willing to put yourself into the hands of one set of state actors

who may deliver you to another set of state actors who are on record of seeking to prosecute you for a crime that could result in the death penalty.

No me. No way. No how. I would take every legal action available to avoid, not only the charge of espionage, but the possibility of being killed if convicted of that crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #162)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:57 PM

165. Probably not.

But there is the extradition order. The UK's Supreme Court decision. And what if Ecuador refuses to grant him asylum? That's a lot of judicial power that does not believe he has a case.

Manning was rightfully prosecuted because he broke his oath and endangered soldiers and spies. Assange can be said to have done the same, regardless of who he might have embarrassed in the process.

'Getting the goods' on the government does not absolve one of culpability for the results of one's actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #165)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:02 PM

169. Assange was the public spokesperson for a jounalistic organization...

Getting the goods on the government is one part of a journalist's job and reporting (yes, even classified) information has never been a crime in the U.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #169)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 08:06 PM

171. Agree.

But Assange put information out there without even reviewing most of it. That wasn't investigative journalism, that was a document dump. Not in the same league as the Pentagon Papers and such, IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #156)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:07 PM

225. Actually, cablegate was only a disaster for anyone who was involved with

supporting dictators, or with lying to the public, or with admitting to knowing about corruption but choosing to ignore it for political reasons, or with anyone from the US State Dept ordering the illegal spying on member states at the UN.

Iow, we learned an awful lot about what our government does with our tax dollars, some of it was not bad, but a lot of it was pretty revealing and covered both political parties. What we learned also is that the US does not respect human rights, despite their public pretense of doing so. Iow, we know now how far both Parties will go to protect war criminals. As citizens, this is vital information, it explains why there were no prosecutions of war crimes here. We no longer have to guess, or wonder 'when will the rule of law be applied'. Those cables made it clear that the US does not have any interest in prosecuting its own war criminals, while going after others.

But not just the US. We learned about corruption in India, fixing of votes eg, which had been suspected, but was finally confirmed. That helped clean up India's corrupt government, or at least start the process.

Every country in the world was represented in those cables, corruption in governments was revealed, or confirmed, as in Tunisia, Nigeria, Uganda and the dealings of the Western nations with their 'allies', many of them dictators, as in Uzbekistan.

Much good came from those revelations as corrupt governments scrambled to try to stay in power, failing in some cases such as Tunisia. The new president of Tunisia recently thanked Assange for helping to rid their country of their corrupt dictatorship. He himself a Human Rights activist who was imprisoned and tortured under that corrupt regime.

So to say they were a disaster, only for anyone who anything to hide. We the people pay for the diplomatic services and have a right to know what and who they are dealing with.

While the cables were pretty much not covered by our cowardly media here, in other parts of the world they were viewed as extremely important news and are still exposing facts about many countries around the world.

If a Government is operating honestly, they had nothing much to worry about with the release of those cables.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #64)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:33 PM

68. It's such obvious bullshit.

I hope Rafael Correa does this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #60)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:32 PM

66. Sweden cooperates with the US on rendition, for starts.

Then, when you are awaiting trial for these charges that haven't been filed yet, they isolate you in custody and if the thing goes to trial, the trial is held in secret.

The Swedish government has not interviewed Assange so far even though he made repeated offers through his lawyers to be interviewed.

So, you tell me, why hasn't the Swedish government bothered to interview him or to file charges if they are so sure of their case?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #66)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:36 PM

71. Because they are part of the conspiracy, man!

And they are being so obvious about it, too! Just to make it look like that, I suppose!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #71)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:38 PM

74. Trotting out the word "conspiracy" doesn't let you off the hook. Sorry.n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #74)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:44 PM

82. Nor does trotting out paranoid fantasies let a potential serial rapist off the hook.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #82)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:49 PM

89. LOL. Yeah, this guy is so dangerous, no one has filed a charge. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #89)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:44 PM

142. Are you calling his accusers liars?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #142)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:05 PM

149. You seem to have a personal vendetta.

Facts are not on your side here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #142)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:42 PM

160. No, you are. They never accused him

of rape. You did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #142)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:58 PM

239. His 'accusers' have stated publicly that there was no rape, no accusations from them. So who

is misrepresenting these women? Who is ignoring their public statements? And why? You are misinformed. Maybe because you are relying on the US Media but there were no accusations of rape. Which is probably why there have been no charges. You have to have an accusation at least, to file charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #71)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:08 PM

103. Well you've been all over this thread, but not producing any facts. So, since you have

formed such strong opinions, could you please back them up with some links please. Eg, 'rape charges'. Where did you get that from? Please link to the charges, or even 'allegations' of rape from the women themselves.

There is no conspiracy, there are facts which some of us are in possession of and clearly a couple of people in this thread have no clue about.

I will check back for a reliable source linking to the rape charges and to whatever information you seem to think you have that there is no plan to extradite an International Publisher and Editor to the US.

Sarah Palin, Karl Rove and Joe-I'm-Not-A-Democrat-Lieberman and Hannity, O'Reilly and the rest of the far right have been the sources for this story which involves crimes committed by the Bush administration. I have zero problem with the truth being told about Bush's wars and lies.

Sarah Palin re Assange: HE'S A TRAITOR! God, that woman is stupid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #103)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:15 PM

105. Sara Palin is an insult to stupid people.

lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:15 PM

50. Sample letter to for the Ecuadorian Embassy

Last edited Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:27 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.ecuadorembassyuk.org.uk/contact

Letter to the Ecuadorian Embassy. #Assange

Dear H.E. Ana Albán Mora,

I am writing in support of Mr. Julian Assange's application for political asylum in your country, as I believe he is in the dangers he has outlined to you in his application.

Also, I would like to bring your attention to the following facts:

He is only wanted for questioning in Sweden for what amounts to misdemeanor level offences.

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Ireland has ruled that it is illegal to use European Arrest Warrants for the mere questioning of a potential subject. This means that the precedent for the handling of such warrants has been set in the Irish Courts, and therefore, across the whole of the European Union.

Therefore, by refusing Mr Assange's case, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has acted unlawfully in rejecting his claim that Sweden does not have jurisdiction to extradite him for questioning without first being charged with a criminal offence.

Finally, our law courts no longer serve We the People as they have become treasonous against us, setting punitive sentences against the lower classes while allowing the ruling elites to get away with their crimes relatively unscathed. I would like to refer you back to both the Houses of Parliament expenses scandal and the punishments meted out upon the rioters of August 2011. The few MPs and Lords that were prosecuted were given unduly lenient sentences while working and middle class rioters were handed down extremely draconian sentences which were unlawful and unconstitutional according to the British 1689 Bill of Rights, and I quote:

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted;" (Paragraph 27)

There is no justice or rule of law in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and both the government and judiciary are lawless and treasonous.

I thank you for your time,

Yours sincerely,

xxxxxx xxxxxxx

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #50)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:04 PM

180. Thank you! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #50)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:21 PM

191. That address is bouncing. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #191)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:26 PM

232. Here is the contact link on the embassy website...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #232)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:41 PM

237. Thank you. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:11 PM

152. I hope

Julian slips the noose. Do I think he will? Not likely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:06 PM

183. He sure is running scared. Innocent people don't usu. do that. Like O.J., when he ran.

It's often a sign of guilt. Legally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #183)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:20 PM

190. He's being stalked by the US government. Of course he's scared.

Only an idiot wouldn't be scared. We hold people without charge indefinitely and our president has claimed the "right" to assassinate anybody anywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #190)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:26 PM

198. He did a document dump of 250,000 documents without reviewing them.

He put soldiers and diplomats and spies at risk. Did some good come of that? Sure. Undoubtedly, some bad came of it as well.

Assange is not a hero. The other Wikileaks operators were against the document dump for this very reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #198)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:35 PM

202. Also incorrect. You're batting 1000 today.n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #202)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:37 PM

204. Incorrect in what way?

I'm willing to listen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #204)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:01 PM

220. Facts and myths in the WikiLeaks/Guardian saga

Facts and myths in the WikiLeaks/Guardian saga
A series of accidental events led to the publication of 251,000 diplomatic cables in unredacted form
By Glenn Greenwald

http://www.salon.com/2011/09/02/wikileaks_28/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #220)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:17 PM

227. Interesting reading. Thanks for the link.

Not trying to dodge this but it's way past time I took care of some non-DU-related activities. Later!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #198)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:53 PM

215. He's fleeing sexual assault charges. Nothing to do with his business. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #215)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:00 PM

219. Yeah, I wish the topic would stay there.

But it too often gets conflated with the other stuff so it's hard to separate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #215)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:02 PM

221. Incorrect. There are no charges as you would have to have seen

had you read this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #215)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:37 PM

234. No, he is not. He has never been charged or even accused of rape.

Have you read this thread? It's sad that you have absorbed the phony claim that he was ever charged or even accused of rape, he has not even been charged with a misdemeanor.

The claim is that they merely want to ask questions. But about what? He answered questions in Sweden. He has been available for two years, yet the Swedish Govt can't seem to come up with the questions they claim they want to ask, nor can they file charges. Because this is a phony ploy, as he and has attorneys have alleged, to get him to the US through Sweden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #190)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 09:53 PM

214. He's avoiding Sweden and the U.K. Charges of sexual assault. His fleeing is evid. of guilt.

Legally, fleeing when accused of a crime is often evidence of guilt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #214)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:02 PM

222. I suspect you keyed my car. You'll need to come to CA to interview. No, I haven't filed charges.

If you're not on the next flight I can take that as evidence of your guilt, no?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #222)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:18 PM

228. Sexual assault is not keying a car. But if someone accused me of molestation in CA...

If I had ever been in CA, and if someone paid my way, & if it were something serious...yes, I'd go to CA and clear the matter up, so the authorities can move on and find the person responsible. Or at least clear my name.

No one wants a cloud over his name to be thought of as a possible sexual assaulter. Sure, he'd want to clear his name. Unless he knows he's guilty and it's unlikely his name can be cleared.

Just sayin'. Legally, as I said, fleeing can be used in a court as evidence of guilt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #228)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:22 PM

230. I don't see a flight number.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #228)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:40 PM

236. He didn't flee. He stayed in Sweden for a month to clear it up.

And he was released by the Swedish prosecutor. Just sayin'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #228)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:01 PM

241. But what if no one accused of molestation but a government demanded you

turn yourself over for 'questioning'? What would you do, especially when the 'alleged victims' have publicly stated they have NOT accused you of molestation? What would you think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #241)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:07 PM

285. That's not the case. The women have a lawyer who has made a statement for them about

Assange trying to flee to Ecuador. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jun/20/julian-assange-asylum-tragedy-lawyer.

Whatever has been filed by and/or with Swedish authorities was enough to get extradition on him from the U.K.

Methinks the political views of the possible rapist are what's foremost in the minds of most progressives. If he were a Republican, many in this forum would be singing a far different tune.

But to me, an investigation into rape and sexual assault charges are what matters most. And fleeing IS considered actual evidence of guilt in some courts of law. That's because it often IS evidence of guilt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #285)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:24 PM

287. Your link does not work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #287)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:29 PM

288. There is a period at the end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #288)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:57 PM

293. Borgström has been reported to the Bar Association for his statements.

Last edited Thu Jun 21, 2012, 11:29 AM - Edit history (1)

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&u=http://www.dagensjuridik.se/2012/06/claes-borgstrom-anmals-till-advokatamfundet&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.dagensjuridik.se/2012/06/claes-borgstrom-anmals-till-advokatamfundet%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DtzB%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-USfficial%26prmd%3Dimvns&sa=X&ei=um3iT6DdE8TM2AWK67WzCw&ved=0CDQQ7gEwAA

(Replace the stupid happy face in the link with a colon and a lower case o - no space between them)

It is a result of these statements that legal security organization now reports Claes Borgström the Bar Association's disciplinary committee.

"When Borgström says he aims Borgström on Assange and the statement is a clear insinuation that Assange owe, which is to say the least an odd statement when the accusation is not yet even been prosecuted," they write in their notification.

"A lawyer shall not make offensive or derogatory statements about the other party, if not in the current situation seems justifiable to take advantage of their clients' interests, and it can not be asserted in this case," they continue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #293)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 09:22 PM

295. That's interesting info.

But Honecombe8's link didn't really make the lawyer that believable in the first place. Any attorney would speak in defense of his client(s) and against the accused. Apparently someone thought he was out of line and the Bar should deal with that.

It still doesn't make it likely that some far-reaching conspiracy is at the heart of this matter. If the U.S. wanted Assange, the U.K. would have handed him over, not help concoct a 2 year snail's crawl of a case to embarrass Assange.

Assange should still answer to the extradition order and be done with it.

Australia doesn't even want to defend him. And I get tired of insinuations that THEY are part of the conspiracy, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #285)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:32 PM

289. What is foremost in the minds of people everywhere, except for a few with

clear agenda is that the women spoke for themselves. Not just once, but several times.

One of two women involved told Aftonbladet in an interview published today that she had never intended Assange to be charged with rape. She was quoted as saying: “It is quite wrong that we were afraid of him. He is not violent and I do not feel threatened by him.”


They spoke also in IMs and to friends and there was never an accusation of rape, and that is the real reason why there have been no charges, because there never was a case. And most decent people will not support falsely accusing anyone, even someone they do not like, of an egregious crime for blatantly political purposes.

All those witnesses, all the emails, and IMs will be produced IF there are ever charges, which most people familiar with this travesty, always predicted would never happen. Looks like they were right. Nearly two years to file charges, but they cannot, because there are none.

Not to mention, hilariously, that Wikileaks obtained and published a CIA memo plotting on how to 'silence him', dismissing the usual methods, and settling on 'accusing him of rape' just months before, coincidentally, lol, that is exactly what happened.

Really, they are not very good at this any more. There is too much evidence available, before they had time to scrub it, which, were it not so sad for the innocent people involved, it would all be laughable.

But there are always the few who will believe anything their government or Corporate media tells. I mean look at all those who believed Bush's lies about Iraq. While the rest of the world knew he was lying, there was nothing that would convince his true believers that he was after all, lying to them.

'There are none so blind as those who will not see'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #289)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 08:46 PM

291. Where's your link? Did you read the statement by their lawyer? Could be that one of the women

is claiming coercion or assault, but the other is claiming rape.

The accusations are: rape, sexual assault/molestation, and sexual coercion.

I think a formal statement by an attorney representing the women to a recognized news source trumps a tweet. Even if the tweet were verified to be one of the accusers who hired the attorney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #291)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 09:00 PM

294. Yes, nearly two years after the fact, and unfortunately for the lawyer, the evidence in their

own words, exists, that neither claimed any crime was committed and said so. That is why there have been no charges.

Your link doesn't work. But if it's still the same lunatic 'lawyer' who inserted himself into this case, his 'claims' mean nothing. Let them file charges and let's see all the evidence in court. Why will they not do that? Assange and his attorneys and everyone else have asked that if they have a case, file it. They have no case, that is why it will never be filed.

Look up the interview, I provided you with the name of the publication. I have written about this case since it began and nothing has changed, except for some words with no backing, from a questionable attorney assuming it's still the same one, in the face of the actual evidence which they dare not face in court.

Nearly two years ago it was predicted by most people who observed this as it developed, that there would never be any charges filed. They were laughed at by the 'true believers' on the Right at the time. So far, those predictions have turned out to be true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #291)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 10:23 PM

296. just so you don't have to rummage through current news pages

to find out what the women may have claimed, here is the summary of someone who was following the developments from the start in Sweden:

The allegation is that, after complainant SW and Mr Assange had consensual sexual intercourse several times through the night and early morning, Mr Assange again initiated intercourse with SW while she was either 'drowsy' or 'asleep' ('drowsy' / 'halvsov' according to text messages from SW, 'asleep' according to the police report). SW expressed concern about continuing without a condom, but agreed to continue without one.

http://rixstep.com/1/20120420,00.shtml


I have read the leaked police files and the above perfectly summarizes the "rape claim". Sofia Wilen (SW) has never claimed to be raped, but the (current) prosecutor saw fit to proceed with the "investigation" nevertheless, into whether the event described could somehow be interpreted as taking sexual advantage of a person that is unconscious or otherwise mentally incapacitated.

As to the statement by the clown who poses as an attorney (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m for further clues), I believe you have confused the qualifier "formal" with "generic". What amazing insights he imparts on the unsuspecting reader. "Victims want to put these things behind them in order to be able to get on with their lives"? Wow. It's a "tragedy" that they have to wait? Sure, I guess we are supposed to picture them holding hands during breaks in their rape victim support group with tears rolling down their faces. Because, you know, during sexual intercourse, one of them "expressed concern about continuing without a condom, but agreed to continue without one." I'm close to being devastated by the emotional impact of that lawyer's statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #296)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 10:34 PM

297. None of us should be arrogant enough to argue the faults of a sexual encounter.

The central point is still that this is unlikely part of a wide-ranging conspiracy since Assange has delayed matters for nearly 2 years now. If the U.S. government wanted to 'get' him, they would have had him extradited long ago.

For this to be a conspiracy, it needs to involve the U.S. government, the Swedish government and judiciary, the U.K. government, the Australian government and, apparently, Karl Rove.

And that's discounting the fact that this conspiracy to 'get' Assange unnecessarily delayed 'getting' him. Pretty pathetic for the shadowy arms of the powers that be.

When that number of moving pieces is required to support a conspiracy theory, it becomes too top-heavy to stand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #297)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 11:20 PM

298. Nobody should be arrogant enough to dismiss the facts of the case

and constantly refer to misleading media characterizations of the matter instead.

To cite just one example of today:

"Two female ex-Wikileaks volunteers alleged in 2010 that Mr Assange had attacked them while he was in Stockholm to give a lecture."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18519380

Totally false, the women were neither Wikileaks volunteers nor did they allege that Mr Assange had attacked them.

So, instead of repeating such misleading and false characterizations, we should ask ourselves why anybody would create them in the first place. Perhaps those who do so have ulterior motives? Perhaps they don't like what Assange has achieved?

You seem to be claiming that the US government, and by extension those who staunchly defend it no matter what, don't want to see Assange in prison for putting those leaks out in the open. I find that adorable, but not very astute, sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reorg (Reply #298)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 11:24 PM

299. I'm sure the U.S. government WOULD like to see him prosecuted.

Again, why have they waited for nearly 2 years if there is a conspiracy to 'get' him? I'm not taking sides, I just don't get that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #299)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 11:53 PM

300. So, you seem to be wondering why the US government hasn't taken any measures

yet? Others, apparently, find it more likely they did and just prefer not to inform the public about it.

Assange has been under arrest for these 2 years, "they" already got him in many ways.

Interestingly, the Swedish judge cited in The Guardian fears for his life, even if he finds refuge in Ecuador:

"I can understand that Assange is afraid of being sent from Sweden to the US, but I am not sure it will turn out well for him," she said.

"I don't know what his situation would be if he really landed in Ecuador and whether he would be safe. If you think of the policy of the Obama administration to kill whoever the president considers a terrorist wherever they are in the world."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jun/20/julian-assange-asylum-tragedy-lawyer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #214)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:03 PM

223. Nope. There are no charges against him at this time. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #223)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:20 PM

229. There are no legal charges by authorities, but charges have been made by people...

two people. "Charges" as in "claims." Official claims where people signed affidavits. The authorities are trying to investigate. All a person has to do is answer some questions, like in any investigation. Guess he doesn't have the right answers to those questions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #229)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:32 PM

233. No allegations of rape have ever been made by the women in this case. In fact

in an early interview one of the women made that very clear. He answered questions while in Sweden and waited to talk to police after the first reports appeared in a rightwing rag, falsely claiming the women had accused him of rape, which they have NOT done, not even close. After the Prosecutor reviewed the allegations in the right wing rag she dismissed even any misdemeanor charges and he was free to leave. But he has always been available to answer questions.

Why have the Swedish government refused to supply those questions? Clearly there is no case for rape, the only question the women had was if, since there was a broken condom, a man could be compelled to submit testing for contagious deseases. It was a question, and it was against the law for those questions to be revealed, yet they were and distorted within a very short time after the women visited the police with the question. Someone was connected to the far rightwing rag that illegally published the initial story.

So what questions do they have at this point? There are no allegations of rape, and it's been two years, if they wanted a test, why did they not ask?

As everyone who has followed this case knows, the smears and misinformation are deliberate. Even here on DU although the case was followed here from the start, people still think he was accused and charged with rape. Rovian smear tactics work, sadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #229)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:38 PM

235. Assange stayed in Sweden for a month, iirc, after this flap arose to handle it.

Then, he made himself available to be deposed in London. He is not fleeing charges of sexual misconduct or of any other kind of misconduct.

Sweden has had every opportunity to investigate for two years. They do not want to investigate. They want to use an EU warrant unlawfully to get him in their custody where he can be held incommunicado per Swedish law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #229)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 10:43 PM

238. Yeah. It's too bad we don't have those fancy things like they had on Star Trek called

communicators.

He was in Sweden. When the allegations appeared, he extended his trip in Sweden to address questions. The attorney charged with deciding whether of not proceed, declined to levy charges. Assange was cleared to leave. He left for England. Rove crops up in Sweden (he was the Prime Minister's political adviser for 2 years prior to the election). Oops! New prosecutor who requests that Assange return to Sweden. He is under ZERO obligation to do so and given that officials in the U.S. have called him a terrorist and a traitor and our own AG publicly declared that he was exploring the possibilities of prosecution in the U.S., Assange preferred to stay in England where he felt he would have more legal protection from extradition to the U.S.

Assange and his attorneys did offer several times to meet in England with Swedish prosecutors to answer questions. Each offer was declined by Sweden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #223)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:27 PM

244. You may as well be arguing with agents in The Matrix

Assange attacked the system, the system will be defended at literally all costs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #244)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:33 PM

246. Or the M-5 "This unit must survive."

lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #244)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 11:56 AM

259. Damn sure

... got that right!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #244)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:41 PM

276. No kidding.

Some of the posts are astounding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Honeycombe8 (Reply #214)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 02:15 PM

272. guilt of what?..a broken condom?..do you even bother to inform yourself?..nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread