flag of convenience Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Trying to tug on the heartstrings by waxing on about how his children have been "deprived of their father" when he put himself into his current situation is the measure of the man I reckon. Odious little turd He can end this "arbitrary detention" at any time by walking out of the front door Odious little turd. Just got to love it LOL.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden This lays out the evidence regarding the rape complaint. I would say it's not really trumped up, but it's not a clear cut case against him either. For example, he was staying at the flat of the first complainant and she let him stay another 6 days after he allegedly raped her. Also the other complainant was having consensual sex but then alleged he had sex with her without a condom which was nonconsensual. I would be surprised if he was convicted, but if he was cleared then he would be shipped off to the US and treated worse than Bradley Manning. In fairness, if we walked out the door of the embassy he wouldn't spend another minute free for the rest of his life and I would be hugely surprised if the US allowed him to talk to his kids. Regardless of the rape case, if he sets foot in a country willing to extradite him to the US then he will be locked up in solitary forever. Hence, it's not really his decision to stay in the embassy. It's the only viable alternative. Exactly this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Can you confirm that they're "trumped up" or is that statement akin to that put out by "conspiracy theorists" I've yet to see any evidence, other than mere suspicion, that can convince me that they're false, so I'd welcome something concrete in order to form an opinion. All pretty clear to me. Rather than repeat more or less what has been stated robfromdublin has more or less nailed it. Hardly difficult to find the reasons why he shouldn't go to Sweden and the risk's he faces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinkla Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Would you feel differently if he stood accused of, say, killing a child instead of rape? I would feel differently if Sweden gave a guarantee that it would not extradite Assange onward to another country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 I would feel differently if Sweden gave a guarantee that it would not extradite Assange onward to another country. I haven't really followed this story but I must admit I agree. If the Swedish authorities are serious that they want him solely to investigate these allegations then they should provide such an undertaking. I assume from this that the US has a different extradition treaty with Sweden than it does with UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith and Linda Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 OK like Ggs I have only payed passing attention to news items about Asange however since he holed himself up in the embassy all I have heard is that the Swedish police want to question him about the allegations, and I have always thought that surely they could still question him at the Embassy? However last week was the first time I have heard say they want to arrest him, not sure if an arrest warrant has being about since the start? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul1Perth Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 I'm not sure the British public give a s*** about him at all!! Or 99.9% of the Aussie public either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melbpom Posted February 8, 2016 Author Share Posted February 8, 2016 Why can't he just face the music in both Sweden and America and be as transparent as he holds every one else. I'm sure there'd be a flurry of high profile lawyers willing to represent him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Why can't he just face the music in both Sweden and America and be as transparent as he holds every one else. I'm sure there'd be a flurry of high profile lawyers willing to represent him. Because that assumes that there would be a fair trial, and that he would be allowed to have some form of representation. Once he enters US custody it is game over for him. There is not a chance in hell that the US will release him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johndoe Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Because that assumes that there would be a fair trial, and that he would be allowed to have some form of representation. Once he enters US custody it is game over for him. There is not a chance in hell that the US will release him. Shouldn't he have considered that in the first place? According to some sources, it has been stated by "Washington" that his release of classified information (in itself acquired illegally) has cost lives. It appears that he published or intended to publish, everything that he could lay his hands on without thought for the consequences to others, let alone himself. If he did have thought for the consequences and yet still published, then his arrogance, and disregard for the harm it could cause, irrespective of the good, is amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 I'm sure he did consider it. He certainly didn't release the material for his own benefit. The 'illegal' release of documents was certainly a lesser 'crime' than those crimes we found out about following release of the information. Quotes added because the US supports freedom of the press so in theory these releases should be legal. Remember, The Guardian and The New York Times were involved in the release of these documents. This is part of what a free press should do. Governments going after investigative journalists is not a good place to be in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 The deaths that most likely arose from release of the material came from Arab outrage at the Iraq and Afghan wars and the US behaviour during them. You could say that the release of the documents caused this outrage, or you could say that it was the events depicted in the documents that caused it. It's all down to perspective. An article on the leaked documents in Science magazine commented on these sources, "Taking the WikiLeaks data into account, IBC now estimates that at least 150,000 have died violently during the war, 80% of them civilians. That falls within the range produced by an Iraq household survey conducted by the World Health Organization—and further erodes the credibility of a 2006 study published in The Lancet that estimated over 600,000 violent deaths for the first 3 years of the war."[57] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Governments and their Agencies will certainly move 'hell and high water' to severely punish those who shine a light in the dark corners of government. The more I read of this the more I doubt the credibility of the respective governments in this matter unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Typical lefty thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robfromdublin Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Just thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Typical lefty thinking. Probably true. Right-wingers more inclined to blindly accept what the authorities say I am sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speakeasy Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 So if Assange leaves the Embassy he will be arrested and detained by UK police and handed over to the Swedes or the Yanks? He hasn't been convicted of anything. If he ends up in Sweden can he be held in custody over an allegation of rape? Is there enough evidence to support an arrest? Or could he for all intents and purposes flee from Sweden to say Russia and seek asylum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.