Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Showing Original Post only (View all)

CHIMO

(9,223 posts)
Wed Sep 26, 2012, 08:26 PM Sep 2012

Assange to UN: 'It is time for the US to cease its persecution of WikiLeaks' [View all]

Source: RT

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has called on the United States to move from words to actions, and put an end to its persecution of WikiLeaks, its people and its sources. He made the statement during an address to a panel of UN delegates.
Addressing the representatives of the United Nations' member countries, the WikiLeaks founder spoke of the difference between words and actions, praising US President Barack Obama for his words.
"We commend and agree with the words that peace can be achieved… But the time for words has run out. It is time for the US to cease its persecution of WikiLeaks, our people and our sources."
Assange was highly critical of US involvement in the Arab Spring, denouncing Obama as audacious for exploiting it. He added that it is "disrespectful of the dead" to claim that the US has supported forces of change.


Read more: http://rt.com/news/assange-addresses-un-human-rights-069/

178 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
He should fly to Washington and make his case in person. 24601 Sep 2012 #1
And your point is??? nm rhett o rick Sep 2012 #2
??? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #6
Why do you think the world agrees with him? hack89 Sep 2012 #13
The actual people of the world as opposed to their governments, ronnie624 Sep 2012 #19
And you know this how? hack89 Sep 2012 #20
The information I linked to is how I know. ronnie624 Sep 2012 #22
Yet Pew released a report saying the opposite hack89 Sep 2012 #27
So "the world" is actually "American public opinion"? JackRiddler Sep 2012 #157
Just pointing out that the only Pew report on Wikileaks hack89 Sep 2012 #159
Translation: "I really really need to distract everybody from those Swedish allegations!" struggle4progress Sep 2012 #3
The Swedish BS is the distraction wtmusic Sep 2012 #5
Lol, you mean the allegations that have fallen apart, as we all predicted they would. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #7
You know they have to interview Assange before they can indict him. hack89 Sep 2012 #14
I thought this point had been made clear here multiple times already. In fact I believe sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #35
Lets look at real facts and not opinions hack89 Sep 2012 #36
Now maybe you can back and read my post which is filled with facts. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #40
That step she needs to take is to interview Assange hack89 Sep 2012 #41
Wrong! Because he already HAS BEEN ARRESTED. That was a lie. It is still a lie. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #43
He was not arrested by Swedish authorities hack89 Sep 2012 #45
Still refusing to accept facts. He took advantage of the law, and rightly so, especially sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #53
Not making much sense here hack89 Sep 2012 #46
Sigh! Because he appealed the request for extradition sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #51
The Swedish courts said that there was valid cause to arrest Assange without an interview. hack89 Sep 2012 #54
??? What has that got to with anything. They did and he was arrested. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #56
Not by SWEDISH authorities. hack89 Sep 2012 #58
Why has the Swedish Prosecutor refused to interview Assange when there never was sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #63
Because he refused to recognize her authority to take him into physical custody. hack89 Sep 2012 #64
Why did the prosecutor refuse to speak to Assange who has been available both in sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #67
Because she doesn't need to. She has all she needs to arrest him. hack89 Sep 2012 #68
Why has she not filed a case against Assange? You are now contradicting yourself sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #71
She has what she needs to arrest him. Once in Swedish custody he will be interviewed and indicted. hack89 Sep 2012 #74
You have avoided this question several times - lets try again hack89 Sep 2012 #55
No, it is YOU have avoided the real question here. The Swedish Prosecutor, as you now sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #57
So Assange would have voluntarily gone to Sweden? You really believe that? nt hack89 Sep 2012 #59
Why did the Swedish Prosecutor fail to take the necessary step to sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #60
I'll take that as a no. You just answered your own question. nt hack89 Sep 2012 #62
Why has the Swedish Prosecutor refused to take the necessary step to file sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #65
Because she doesn't have to. She has all she needs to take him into custody. hack89 Sep 2012 #66
Wait!! You have just contradicted yourself and have blown away the major sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #69
No - she wants to file charges. But on her terms. hack89 Sep 2012 #72
Um, that is not how the law works. On the whims of a prosecutor. You are now completly sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #75
The entire Swedish legal system appears to disagree with you. hack89 Sep 2012 #76
The entire Swedish legal system has not been in charge of this case, because NO sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #84
Except for the Swedish appeals court that issued the domestic arrest warrant for rape you mean? hack89 Sep 2012 #88
But since you said that Assange would have never surrendered to Swedish authorities hack89 Sep 2012 #89
'If' 'if', the law is not based on 'what ifs'. The Swedish Prosecutor failed to file charges sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #92
Is it her fault that he jumped bail in the UK and is now a fugitive from justice? hack89 Sep 2012 #94
Again, the Swedish Prosecutor refused to do her job when this case was handed to her. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #96
Swedish legal experts testifying under oath disagree with you. hack89 Sep 2012 #98
Why did the Swedish Prosecutor not speak to Assange while he was in Sweden for sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #100
Read the High Court's transcript - the Swedish legal witnesses explain it better than me. nt hack89 Sep 2012 #102
I read it long ago. It means nothing wrt to the non case against Assange. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #107
You just demonstrated that if you read it you didn't understand it. hack89 Sep 2012 #109
Why did she fail so spectacularly to do her duty in this case? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #111
Assange will find out how credible she is when that cell door shuts behind him. nt hack89 Sep 2012 #103
Still can't answer the question. Why did she fail to lock that cell door when she sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #105
Why do think that matters now? hack89 Sep 2012 #108
He has been arrested. What is it that you do not get about this case, or rather, that you sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #110
Yet she will win - so perhaps she didn't botch it after all hack89 Sep 2012 #115
I don't ignore testimony from Swedish legal experts. I have read the opinions of this sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #120
Yet I predict that things will turn out exactly has I have said hack89 Sep 2012 #126
Mmmm .... sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #136
And yet in the end Sweden will arrest and indict him. hack89 Sep 2012 #78
My arguments have never been presented in court. Motions were presented, no case sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #80
All of those issues were addressed by the British High Court. It is time you read the transcript. nt hack89 Sep 2012 #83
The British High Court did NOT rule on this case. What are you talking about? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #85
All of those issues were part of the extradition hearing hack89 Sep 2012 #87
The British Court does not have jurisdiction to rule on a Swedish case. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #90
Every argument you have made about the interview and the prosecutor doing her job hack89 Sep 2012 #91
Lol, no, it was the anti-Wikileaks contingency who were fixated on the interview. Now sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #95
Except they were not debunked. What I said has been confirmed by Swedish legal experts hack89 Sep 2012 #97
Not only were they debunked, you are now running away from your previous sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #99
No - there is a reason Assange lost his extradition fight hack89 Sep 2012 #101
You still have not answered the question. Why was there even a need for an sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #104
It is all moot now. hack89 Sep 2012 #106
The obvious answer reorg Sep 2012 #114
So 'they' convinced Assange to fight extradition, and then, appeal for two years, all because 'they' msanthrope Sep 2012 #150
the prosecutor made a reassuring move first reorg Sep 2012 #153
Thank you for you posts. I think her failure to conduct this case in a professional manner sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #178
Fugitives don't get to dictate to prosecutors. That is how the world really works. hack89 Sep 2012 #61
He was never a fugitive, he was in Sweden asking to speak to her, then in London sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #77
He fled Sweden the night before his interview with the prosecutor. hack89 Sep 2012 #79
He did not flee Sweden, he was told by the Prosecutor on Sept 15 that he was free to sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #82
The lawyer's memory got much better under oath hack89 Sep 2012 #86
And none of that has anything to do with Assange who was told by the prosecutor, sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #112
You keep believing that if it gives you comfort. nt hack89 Sep 2012 #116
I'll leave 'belief' and crystal balls to you. I deal only with facts. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #117
Yet she is the one who will win. hack89 Sep 2012 #119
Well, now I know I won this debate. How? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #123
That "incompetent" prosecutor who "botched" the case will put his ass in jail hack89 Sep 2012 #127
As I said, signs someone has lost the debate, when they resort to non-facts, sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #133
If the prosecutor is breaking Swedish law then explain these facts hack89 Sep 2012 #42
Because the Court does not investigate a crime, they accept the documents presented sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #44
Except we are talking about a Swedish Appeal Court hack89 Sep 2012 #47
How long ago was that? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #50
Yet the Swedish Appeal Court disagrees with you hack89 Sep 2012 #52
They expected her to do her job, she did not. But you still have not explained sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #113
Saying it over and over again does not make you right. hack89 Sep 2012 #118
Resorting to 'Swedish Experts' some of whom were brought there by the Prosecution sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #122
It is time to move on - it's over hack89 Sep 2012 #125
Lol, have you run out of excuses? The prosecutor ran out of options two years ago. She was out sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #138
How can you say that? It is not like Assange is a free man. hack89 Sep 2012 #154
And you still refuse to even try to answer the question as to why a Prosecutor sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #163
And I fail to see the importance of this point. hack89 Sep 2012 #164
Assange must think there's a credible Swedish case against him, or he wouldn't have jumped bail struggle4progress Sep 2012 #15
How did you arrive at that conclusion? wtmusic Sep 2012 #17
Assange, of course, didn't argue that "US-conspiracy-against-me" in UK court, because struggle4progress Sep 2012 #23
Paranoid fantasies like the secret US indictment? wtmusic Sep 2012 #28
Stratfor Is a Joke and So Is Wikileaks for Taking It Seriously struggle4progress Sep 2012 #32
Stratfor email hackers were tricked into using Feds' server struggle4progress Sep 2012 #33
So, why should we take any Wikileaks-related remarks in the Stratfor emails seriously? struggle4progress Sep 2012 #34
I seem to have touched a nerve. wtmusic Sep 2012 #37
I provided several links and cogent argument: you retort with personal remarks struggle4progress Sep 2012 #129
It ultimately becomes a case of judgement wtmusic Sep 2012 #134
Why does the US Government take Stratfor emails seriously? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #139
Driving the CIA crazy???? Did Jason Bourne fail? nt msanthrope Sep 2012 #30
I think you should read or watch or something so that your posts come from an informed place xiamiam Sep 2012 #25
More paranoia wtmusic Sep 2012 #31
Your author, "Israel Shamir", is a known anti-Semite and holocaust denier, who is a close friend struggle4progress Sep 2012 #131
How does Assange's boinking of a Swedish woman and her dubious accusation of rape wtmusic Sep 2012 #135
Lol, you are funny. Speaking of 'jumping'. Maybe you can explain what someone else sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #141
Agreed statements of facts and issues struggle4progress Sep 2012 #146
And once again you jumped right over the question. Not surprising, it was what I expected. sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #147
US officially considers Assange an "enemy of the state" JackRiddler Sep 2012 #4
This cannot be emphasized enough cprise Sep 2012 #9
It would be nice to see the actual declassified documents, rather than Dorling's interpretation struggle4progress Sep 2012 #16
Scoop has a link to pdf of the actual FOIA release: it doesn't seem to show what Dorling claims: struggle4progress Sep 2012 #18
Of course it shows exactly what Dorling claims. JackRiddler Sep 2012 #49
The military will, no doubt, exercise some diligence to ensure that no personnel repeat the stunt struggle4progress Sep 2012 #124
Really? reorg Sep 2012 #130
... In a statement the Guardian rejected the accusations from Wikileaks, explaining struggle4progress Sep 2012 #137
Yes, they even admit it openly reorg Sep 2012 #140
Thank you, it's hard work here on DU lately refuting the misinformation sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #143
The Der Spiegel article is worth a read, but you clearly didn't bother to read it struggle4progress Sep 2012 #144
Thank you, this truly is Orwellian and very scary. But it proves Assange was correct sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #148
Excellent speech! JDPriestly Sep 2012 #8
bull shit speach by a 1st class con artist krawhitham Sep 2012 #10
Can tell your well informed... Katashi_itto Sep 2012 #11
His complaint of "having been detained for 659 days without charge" brought tears to my eyes! struggle4progress Sep 2012 #24
Yep, that proves it. ronnie624 Sep 2012 #29
It's evidence, at least, that the dude is a self-absorbed blowhard and careless with his words struggle4progress Sep 2012 #128
The mention of 659 days was about Bradley Manning's detention. GliderGuider Sep 2012 #38
Except Manning was charged before he even left Iraq hack89 Sep 2012 #48
No cigar for you: "I speak to you today as a free man, because despite having been detained struggle4progress Sep 2012 #121
Oh well, carry on then. nt GliderGuider Sep 2012 #132
But once again, you attempt to distract from the facts. Was his claim correct or not? sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #149
Nobody else ever counts time spent out on bail as time in detention, nor does anyone else struggle4progress Sep 2012 #151
Wrong, he has been detained under house arrest for two years, required to report sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #152
Guardian link here dipsydoodle Sep 2012 #12
excellent speech. freedom of speech and press are the foundations of a democracy xiamiam Sep 2012 #21
Assange speaks for me.... mike_c Sep 2012 #26
if sunlight is the best disinfectant then he should stop hiding from it neh? nt Bodhi BloodWave Sep 2012 #93
if that's the extent of your understanding of events surrounding Assange's persecution... mike_c Sep 2012 #145
How come you know his exact location? JackRiddler Sep 2012 #156
Might want to look at the post i replied to neh? Bodhi BloodWave Sep 2012 #162
Assange should've focused on corporate leaks more than US government leaks. nt Comrade_McKenzie Sep 2012 #39
So it wasn't a good idea for TuniLeaks ( works in partnership with Wikileaks) to Luminous Animal Sep 2012 #73
Why don't you send him some? JackRiddler Sep 2012 #165
He sure did manage to get the oar in during that speech. dipsydoodle Sep 2012 #70
I am unfamiliar with this figure of speech. JackRiddler Sep 2012 #158
Here ya go dipsydoodle Sep 2012 #161
Where are the Moscow files Assange? joshcryer Sep 2012 #81
Hand them to him. JackRiddler Sep 2012 #155
RT is one of the best news outlets available here in the US. Their coverage of foreign sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #160
Wikileaks has them, they announced they were going to release them. joshcryer Sep 2012 #166
What you're saying is certainly a possibility. JackRiddler Sep 2012 #167
I have no requirement for redaction or a thorough "read through." joshcryer Sep 2012 #169
Wikileaks's achievements are world-historical. JackRiddler Sep 2012 #171
too many falling for the demonization of Assange fascisthunter Sep 2012 #175
I don't dispute that. joshcryer Sep 2012 #176
What persecution? treestar Sep 2012 #142
Wasn't this guy a rapist? smileydcheese Sep 2012 #168
Yes, one woman has accused him of raping her and is going through with the prosecution. joshcryer Sep 2012 #170
No charges have been filed. JackRiddler Sep 2012 #172
Because Assange has to be interviewed before charges can be file. hack89 Sep 2012 #173
Still trying I see. No matter how many facts you are presented with, you still insist sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #174
Yep, he skipped town the day before his interview. joshcryer Sep 2012 #177
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Assange to UN: 'It is tim...