Beat me by 15 seconds.

As always, check out FDL's Kevin Gosztola for more details on this.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 11:13pm PDT - promote requested by dag.

Live stream outside the Ecuadorian embassy now: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/alburyj#utm_campaign=t.co&utm_source=11808532&utm_medium=social

[edit: Not live anymore.]

I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Just because the documents were classified by the US government - why is it binding on someone who is not a citizen of the US?

If Iran marks their nuclear enrichment plans as top secret - and they wind up on Wikileaks - do you also think Assange should be extradited to Iran to stand trial?


>> ^Hybrid:

I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Good coverage by The Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/16/julian-assange-ecuador-embassy-asylum-live

If only it were that simple. Did Assange wake up to all these leaked documents and go "You know what, I'm going to release all these documents belonging to the world's biggest superpower and it will be fine because I'm not a US citizen and therefore they'll just forget about it"?

People get extradited all the time, and not always to their birth countries. The US is currently trying to extradite a UK hacker from the UK. That's right, the UK is debating extraditing one of their own. It happens when you break laws that have international ramifications.

But even if you put all the law/jurisdiction mess aside. It doesn't help that I hugely dislike Assange. He's an egotistical, reckless bastard out to promote his own name. Secondly, I hate The Young Turks. Cenk says Assange is being extradited for "actually doing journalism". Oh fuck off Cenk, releasing a bunch of documents in their raw format, is NOT journalism. Anybody could do that.

>> ^dag:

Just because the documents were classified by the US government - why is it binding on someone who is not a citizen of the US?
If Iran marks their nuclear enrichment plans as top secret - and they wind up on Wikileaks - do you also think Assange should be extradited to Iran to stand trial?

>> ^Hybrid:
I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

What would the charges be? - or does that even matter. Seriously - would you charge him with copyright infringement? People get extradited for breaking internationally recognised laws.>> ^Hybrid:

If only it were that simple. Did Assange wake up to all these leaked documents and go "You know what, I'm going to release all these documents belonging to the world's biggest superpower and it will be fine because I'm not a US citizen and therefore they'll just forget about it"?
People get extradited all the time, and not always to their birth countries. The US is currently trying to extradite a UK hacker from the UK. That's right, the UK is debating extraditing one of their own. It happens when you break laws that have international ramifications.
But even if you put all the law/jurisdiction mess aside. It doesn't help that I hugely dislike Assange. He's an egotistical, reckless bastard out to promote his own name. Secondly, I hate The Young Turks. Cenk says Assange is being extradited for "actually doing journalism". Oh fuck off Cenk, releasing a bunch of documents in their raw format, is NOT journalism. Anybody could do that.
>> ^dag:
Just because the documents were classified by the US government - why is it binding on someone who is not a citizen of the US?
If Iran marks their nuclear enrichment plans as top secret - and they wind up on Wikileaks - do you also think Assange should be extradited to Iran to stand trial?
>> ^Hybrid:
I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

Well I think the charges are likely to be espionage related, and I think they can easily be applied. Some documents leaked named key people in hot spots around the world, and put them and their families in immediate danger. This is the reckless part of Assange that I hugely dislike. He doesn't care what's the documents, he just feeds off the controversy. He's not an activist or journalist, he's a walking, talking egotistical, god complex.

>> ^dag:

What would the charges be? - or does that even matter. Seriously - would you charge him with copyright infringement? >> ^Hybrid:
If only it were that simple. Did Assange wake up to all these leaked documents and go "You know what, I'm going to release all these documents belonging to the world's biggest superpower and it will be fine because I'm not a US citizen and therefore they'll just forget about it"?
People get extradited all the time, and not always to their birth countries. The US is currently trying to extradite a UK hacker from the UK. That's right, the UK is debating extraditing one of their own. It happens when you break laws that have international ramifications.
But even if you put all the law/jurisdiction mess aside. It doesn't help that I hugely dislike Assange. He's an egotistical, reckless bastard out to promote his own name. Secondly, I hate The Young Turks. Cenk says Assange is being extradited for "actually doing journalism". Oh fuck off Cenk, releasing a bunch of documents in their raw format, is NOT journalism. Anybody could do that.
>> ^dag:
Just because the documents were classified by the US government - why is it binding on someone who is not a citizen of the US?
If Iran marks their nuclear enrichment plans as top secret - and they wind up on Wikileaks - do you also think Assange should be extradited to Iran to stand trial?
>> ^Hybrid:
I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

You might want to read this. No state wants its secrets revealed - especially when they are violating international law, but sunshine is the best disinfectant. >> ^Hybrid:

Well I think the charges are likely to be espionage related, and I think they can easily be applied. Some documents leaked named key people in hot spots around the world, and put them and their families in immediate danger. This is the reckless part of Assange that I hugely dislike. He doesn't care what's the documents, he just feeds off the controversy. He's not an activist or journalist, he's a walking, talking egotistical, god complex.
>> ^dag:
What would the charges be? - or does that even matter. Seriously - would you charge him with copyright infringement? >> ^Hybrid:
If only it were that simple. Did Assange wake up to all these leaked documents and go "You know what, I'm going to release all these documents belonging to the world's biggest superpower and it will be fine because I'm not a US citizen and therefore they'll just forget about it"?
People get extradited all the time, and not always to their birth countries. The US is currently trying to extradite a UK hacker from the UK. That's right, the UK is debating extraditing one of their own. It happens when you break laws that have international ramifications.
But even if you put all the law/jurisdiction mess aside. It doesn't help that I hugely dislike Assange. He's an egotistical, reckless bastard out to promote his own name. Secondly, I hate The Young Turks. Cenk says Assange is being extradited for "actually doing journalism". Oh fuck off Cenk, releasing a bunch of documents in their raw format, is NOT journalism. Anybody could do that.
>> ^dag:
Just because the documents were classified by the US government - why is it binding on someone who is not a citizen of the US?
If Iran marks their nuclear enrichment plans as top secret - and they wind up on Wikileaks - do you also think Assange should be extradited to Iran to stand trial?
>> ^Hybrid:
I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

From the article: "But despite similar warnings ahead of the previous two massive releases of classified U.S. intelligence reports by the website, U.S. officials concede that they have no evidence to date that the documents led to anyone's death."
Oh, so someone has to die first before it's branded reckless. I get it now.

>> ^dag:

You might want to read this. No state wants its secrets revealed - especially when they are violating international law, but sunshine is the best disinfectant. >> ^Hybrid:
Well I think the charges are likely to be espionage related, and I think they can easily be applied. Some documents leaked named key people in hot spots around the world, and put them and their families in immediate danger. This is the reckless part of Assange that I hugely dislike. He doesn't care what's the documents, he just feeds off the controversy. He's not an activist or journalist, he's a walking, talking egotistical, god complex.
>> ^dag:
What would the charges be? - or does that even matter. Seriously - would you charge him with copyright infringement? >> ^Hybrid:
If only it were that simple. Did Assange wake up to all these leaked documents and go "You know what, I'm going to release all these documents belonging to the world's biggest superpower and it will be fine because I'm not a US citizen and therefore they'll just forget about it"?
People get extradited all the time, and not always to their birth countries. The US is currently trying to extradite a UK hacker from the UK. That's right, the UK is debating extraditing one of their own. It happens when you break laws that have international ramifications.
But even if you put all the law/jurisdiction mess aside. It doesn't help that I hugely dislike Assange. He's an egotistical, reckless bastard out to promote his own name. Secondly, I hate The Young Turks. Cenk says Assange is being extradited for "actually doing journalism". Oh fuck off Cenk, releasing a bunch of documents in their raw format, is NOT journalism. Anybody could do that.
>> ^dag:
Just because the documents were classified by the US government - why is it binding on someone who is not a citizen of the US?
If Iran marks their nuclear enrichment plans as top secret - and they wind up on Wikileaks - do you also think Assange should be extradited to Iran to stand trial?
>> ^Hybrid:
I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

Riiiight... because regular news media would never do anything like that!
>> ^Hybrid:

...Some documents leaked named key people in hot spots around the world, and put them and their families in immediate danger...

...He doesn't care what's the documents, he just feeds off the controversy. He's not an activist or journalist...

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Talk about wreckless, how about state-sanctioned murder by helicopter of journalists? Isn't Wikileaks doing a service to humanity by getting this information out? Doesn't this trump "putting our operatives in danger"? >> ^Hybrid:

From the article: "But despite similar warnings ahead of the previous two massive releases of classified U.S. intelligence reports by the website, U.S. officials concede that they have no evidence to date that the documents led to anyone's death."
Oh, so someone has to die first before it's branded reckless. I get it now.
>> ^dag:
You might want to read this. No state wants its secrets revealed - especially when they are violating international law, but sunshine is the best disinfectant. >> ^Hybrid:
Well I think the charges are likely to be espionage related, and I think they can easily be applied. Some documents leaked named key people in hot spots around the world, and put them and their families in immediate danger. This is the reckless part of Assange that I hugely dislike. He doesn't care what's the documents, he just feeds off the controversy. He's not an activist or journalist, he's a walking, talking egotistical, god complex.
>> ^dag:
What would the charges be? - or does that even matter. Seriously - would you charge him with copyright infringement? >> ^Hybrid:
If only it were that simple. Did Assange wake up to all these leaked documents and go "You know what, I'm going to release all these documents belonging to the world's biggest superpower and it will be fine because I'm not a US citizen and therefore they'll just forget about it"?
People get extradited all the time, and not always to their birth countries. The US is currently trying to extradite a UK hacker from the UK. That's right, the UK is debating extraditing one of their own. It happens when you break laws that have international ramifications.
But even if you put all the law/jurisdiction mess aside. It doesn't help that I hugely dislike Assange. He's an egotistical, reckless bastard out to promote his own name. Secondly, I hate The Young Turks. Cenk says Assange is being extradited for "actually doing journalism". Oh fuck off Cenk, releasing a bunch of documents in their raw format, is NOT journalism. Anybody could do that.
>> ^dag:
Just because the documents were classified by the US government - why is it binding on someone who is not a citizen of the US?
If Iran marks their nuclear enrichment plans as top secret - and they wind up on Wikileaks - do you also think Assange should be extradited to Iran to stand trial?
>> ^Hybrid:
I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

Small country, big cojones -- asylum granted.

He still has to physically get out of the UK >> ^radx:

Small country, big cojones -- asylum granted.

It would be interesting to see if the authorities dared to arrest Assange if he was declared a diplomatic courier under Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Of if they dared to search a vehicle with diplomatic plates under the assumption that Assange is transported within.

We haven't had any decent cloak and dagger entertainment since the Iron Curtain went down. Better get some popcorn. >> ^Hybrid:

He still has to physically get out of the UK >> ^radx:
Small country, big cojones -- asylum granted.

@dag & @Hybrid, I'm sure you're enjoying the debate, but what is happening in the UK is not directly about Wikileaks but extradition to Sweden to answer sexual assault charges.

I don't think anybody is in any doubt that that is just a way to get him extradited to the US easily. Once he's in Sweden, it's pretty much a done deal. It has always been assumed that the sexual assualt charges are fabricated, to simply get him on Swedish soil.

So basically, this is absolutely about the Wikileaks side of things.>> ^Fantomas:

@dag & @Hybrid, I'm sure you're enjoying the debate, but what is happening in the UK is not directly about Wikileaks but extradition to Sweden to answer sexual assault charges.

Assange is facing the music. He knew that the US government would understand what a threat he poses, and use any means necessary to screw him over, which they are already doing, whether they succeed in extraditing him at all. The functioning of Wikileaks is effectively stopped, and he hasn't been a de facto free man for years now. He knowingly made that choice.

As for the justice of the thing, Assange didn't break any American laws. He isn't even being extradited for a crime, at the moment. He hasn't been charged with anything by anyone in any country. Officially, the extradition is because the Swedish police want to question him about whether he used a condom during consensual sex. If someone wants to extradite him for Wikileaks activity, then the US should come up with a criminal charge and follow the normal process. We all know that once they've got him on US soil, they'll just pull a Bradley Manning on him and torture him indefinitely without laying real charges for years. His trial will make OJ look like a sideshow. For that reason alone, even if he had committed a crime, claiming asylum would be legitimate based on the US's own record of criminal behaviour in dealing with people this case.

I'm sure this is also about his threat to blow the doors wide open about fraud at Bank of America. If that kind of behaviour continued, it would certainly mean the demise of significant campaign contributors to both major parties.

I have a feeling I would hate Assange if I ever met him, but that shouldn't affect his right to freedom when he hasn't committed any crime. Anyone who risks his own life and freedom to expose horrible acts in order to force governments and corporations to behave more honestly is a hero.>> ^Hybrid:

I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involvement in an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.

Also, messenger: No the questioning is in regards to sexual assault. I don't care if what he's accused of would be called consensual sex in the US, or Saudi Arabia - if committed in Sweden it can be classified as sexual assault.

You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:

Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.

Just in: "Foreign Secretary William Hague says UK government will not allow Julian Assange safe passage out of the UK" - BBC News.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'tyt, young turks, cenk uygur, wikileaks' to 'tyt, young turks, cenk uygur, wikileaks, ecuador' - edited by RhesusMonk

Yes, and...

You really think this whole affair is about questioning someone in a sexual assault case in Sweden? Really? And it's a coincidence that the target just happens to be arguably the most dangerous man in the world to the corporate-government establishment? Nobody is that naive.>> ^Babymech:

Also, messenger: No the questioning is in regards to sexual assault. I don't care if what he's accused of would be called consensual sex in the US, or Saudi Arabia - if committed in Sweden it can be classified as sexual assault.

- While Assange was under house arrest, the Swedish authorities were offered to conduct the interview on site in England. They were not interested.

- During his time at the Ecuadorean embassy, Assange offered to go to Sweden for the interviews if they guaranteed that he would not be extradicted to the US. No guarantees were given.

- The Ecuadoreans offered the Swedish prosecutors to conduct the interview at the embessy or to transfer Assange to Sweden, depending on assurances that he would not later be sent to the US. They were not interested.

Given these facts, Assange would be a fool to not assume that Swedish authorities were bound to send him straight across the Atlantic.>> ^Babymech:

Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involvement in an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.

Assange is a self obsessed rapist (believe it or not that what they call people who have sex where the other party refuses or withdraws consent) whose lust for publicity has led to lots of death. The 1300 in Kenya by his own admission and the Taleban thanking wikileaks for helping them identify those who cooperated with the americans and what about an Iranian spy to name but a few we know about. Chinese dissidents, middle eastern journalists, people fighting for democracy in dangerous places have suffered because of this self serving turd.

How many people have suffered and died so Assange could lap up the publicity, shouting about the freedom of speech whilst gagging his own staff and of course planning to stiff the morons who looked after him whilst he was fighting extradition and especially those who posted bail. Everything out of his mouth is designed to keep Assange safe, by playing on the Great Satan angle and finding those fools idiotic enough to lap it up and throw money at the cause, especially those who posted bail for him, then left looking like right twats when he did a runner to the Ecuadorians. What a bunch of muppets.

Quite frankly, after all this nonsense the US wont bother to try and extradite him. I just hope the UK grabs him when he steps outside the one place the fucker can hide, preferably using a dum dum round to the nuts, before dragging his pathetic self off and slamming him into jail where he will face trial for being self obsessed, even during sex.

>> ^Hybrid:

You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:
Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.

There is such a thing as taking a stand. Sometimes, when humans are pushed beyond what they think is acceptable, they are willing to risk terrible consequences.

Rosa Parks did it with racism. How many poor 'negros' got slaughtered, beaten ...god knows what the trickle down effect would be... in the aftermath of ANY bold defiance by their brethren at the time? So then should we prefer the status quo? Should Rosa Parks also take a dum dum to the nuts because of she didn't tow the government line?

I think Assange is/was doing the world a great service, though we may not know it yet and we may never if we don't come out of this dark age. At some point, someone had to make a stand against this all-pervading government corruption. If he is a rapist, then he should be brought to justice - but how can you trust law/court justice when the law/court is effectively an involved party?>> ^thumpa28:

Assange is a self obsessed rapist (believe it or not that what they call people who have sex where the other party refuses or withdraws consent) whose lust for publicity has led to lots of death. The 1300 in Kenya by his own admission and the Taleban thanking wikileaks for helping them identify those who cooperated with the americans and what about an Iranian spy to name but a few we know about. Chinese dissidents, middle eastern journalists, people fighting for democracy in dangerous places have suffered because of this self serving turd.
How many people have suffered and died so Assange could lap up the publicity, shouting about the freedom of speech whilst gagging his own staff and of course planning to stiff the morons who looked after him whilst he was fighting extradition and especially those who posted bail. Everything out of his mouth is designed to keep Assange safe, by playing on the Great Satan angle and finding those fools idiotic enough to lap it up and throw money at the cause, especially those who posted bail for him, then left looking like right twats when he did a runner to the Ecuadorians. What a bunch of muppets.
Quite frankly, after all this nonsense the US wont bother to try and extradite him. I just hope the UK grabs him when he steps outside the one place the fucker can hide, preferably using a dum dum round to the nuts, before dragging his pathetic self off and slamming him into jail where he will face trial for being self obsessed, even during sex.
>> ^Hybrid:
You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:
Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.

>> ^thumpa28:

Assange is a self obsessed rapist (believe it or not that what they call people who have sex where the other party refuses or withdraws consent) whose lust for publicity has led to lots of death. The 1300 in Kenya by his own admission and the Taleban thanking wikileaks for helping them identify those who cooperated with the americans and what about an Iranian spy to name but a few we know about. Chinese dissidents, middle eastern journalists, people fighting for democracy in dangerous places have suffered because of this self serving turd.
How many people have suffered and died so Assange could lap up the publicity, shouting about the freedom of speech whilst gagging his own staff and of course planning to stiff the morons who looked after him whilst he was fighting extradition and especially those who posted bail. Everything out of his mouth is designed to keep Assange safe, by playing on the Great Satan angle and finding those fools idiotic enough to lap it up and throw money at the cause, especially those who posted bail for him, then left looking like right twats when he did a runner to the Ecuadorians. What a bunch of muppets.
Quite frankly, after all this nonsense the US wont bother to try and extradite him. I just hope the UK grabs him when he steps outside the one place the fucker can hide, preferably using a dum dum round to the nuts, before dragging his pathetic self off and slamming him into jail where he will face trial for being self obsessed, even during sex.
>> ^Hybrid:
You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:
Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.




You sound like the Putin suporters in moscow who want those 'Pussy Riot Whores' hung for daring to challenge the Man..

In most of the world state power does what it likes; murder, torture, indefinite imprisonment without trial.
England is supposed to be one of the few places that shit don't fly.

There is no way that any Swedish politician or authority would support Assange's extradition to the US. Nothing you ridiculous conspiracy theorists have come up with so far has indicated that they would. Maybe the US would kidnap him (?) but that could happen in London or Ecuador or wherever. Meanwhile, you delightful people think that alleged rapists should not have to collaborate with authorities investigating the charges as long as they're famous enough, and that the women making these claims should not have the basic rights that any other Swedish citizens normally would. Tasteful.

Yeah, one of our strange quirks causes us to frown on sex offenders and want to see them behind bars. It dates back to the Roman conquests probably, mad I know.

>> ^cosmovitelli:

>> ^thumpa28:
Assange is a self obsessed rapist (believe it or not that what they call people who have sex where the other party refuses or withdraws consent) whose lust for publicity has led to lots of death. The 1300 in Kenya by his own admission and the Taleban thanking wikileaks for helping them identify those who cooperated with the americans and what about an Iranian spy to name but a few we know about. Chinese dissidents, middle eastern journalists, people fighting for democracy in dangerous places have suffered because of this self serving turd.
How many people have suffered and died so Assange could lap up the publicity, shouting about the freedom of speech whilst gagging his own staff and of course planning to stiff the morons who looked after him whilst he was fighting extradition and especially those who posted bail. Everything out of his mouth is designed to keep Assange safe, by playing on the Great Satan angle and finding those fools idiotic enough to lap it up and throw money at the cause, especially those who posted bail for him, then left looking like right twats when he did a runner to the Ecuadorians. What a bunch of muppets.
Quite frankly, after all this nonsense the US wont bother to try and extradite him. I just hope the UK grabs him when he steps outside the one place the fucker can hide, preferably using a dum dum round to the nuts, before dragging his pathetic self off and slamming him into jail where he will face trial for being self obsessed, even during sex.
>> ^Hybrid:
You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:
Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.



You sound like the Putin suporters in moscow who want those 'Pussy Riot Whores' hung for daring to challenge the Man..
In most of the world state power does what it likes; murder, torture, indefinite imprisonment without trial.
England is supposed to be one of the few places that shit don't fly.

Seriously, I cant believe youre comparing Rosa Parks to a scumbag like Assange. Rosa Parks took a stand at the risk of her liberty and even her life. She represented freedom against tyranny and fought for what she believed in.

Assange believes in nothing else but self promotion and when that landed him in deep water, self preservation at the cost of everyone who sheltered him and even paid for his freedom. Assange has never taken a stand in his life, if he had been on that bus he would not have supported Rosa Parks, he would have fled at the first sign of trouble or got coerced into the lynch mob. How many chinese dissident informants, fighting much the same fight for freedom against overwhelming odds, are now in jail or worse because Assange released the unredacted cables out of nothing but another attempt to keep himself in the limelight?

Assange should face the sexual assault charges, we in the UK have a long and lengthy tradition of separation of the judiciary and the organs of state, which includes our intelligence services. As much as it pains me to say so, Assange would receive a fair extradition hearing (whose decision he fled) and a fair trial in Sweden. Hes done the damage now, whilst I wouldnt complain if he had a sudden CIA inspired cardiac arrest, thats the realm of Bond and Bourne.

Dont confuse Assange with Wikileaks. Wikileaks was started up with a reason in mind, Assange took it over as his one man puppet show.

>> ^dannym3141:

There is such a thing as taking a stand. Sometimes, when humans are pushed beyond what they think is acceptable, they are willing to risk terrible consequences.
Rosa Parks did it with racism. How many poor 'negros' got slaughtered, beaten ...god knows what the trickle down effect would be... in the aftermath of ANY bold defiance by their brethren at the time? So then should we prefer the status quo? Should Rosa Parks also take a dum dum to the nuts because of she didn't tow the government line?
I think Assange is/was doing the world a great service, though we may not know it yet and we may never if we don't come out of this dark age. At some point, someone had to make a stand against this all-pervading government corruption. If he is a rapist, then he should be brought to justice - but how can you trust law/court justice when the law/court is effectively an involved party?>> ^thumpa28:
Assange is a self obsessed rapist (believe it or not that what they call people who have sex where the other party refuses or withdraws consent) whose lust for publicity has led to lots of death. The 1300 in Kenya by his own admission and the Taleban thanking wikileaks for helping them identify those who cooperated with the americans and what about an Iranian spy to name but a few we know about. Chinese dissidents, middle eastern journalists, people fighting for democracy in dangerous places have suffered because of this self serving turd.
How many people have suffered and died so Assange could lap up the publicity, shouting about the freedom of speech whilst gagging his own staff and of course planning to stiff the morons who looked after him whilst he was fighting extradition and especially those who posted bail. Everything out of his mouth is designed to keep Assange safe, by playing on the Great Satan angle and finding those fools idiotic enough to lap it up and throw money at the cause, especially those who posted bail for him, then left looking like right twats when he did a runner to the Ecuadorians. What a bunch of muppets.
Quite frankly, after all this nonsense the US wont bother to try and extradite him. I just hope the UK grabs him when he steps outside the one place the fucker can hide, preferably using a dum dum round to the nuts, before dragging his pathetic self off and slamming him into jail where he will face trial for being self obsessed, even during sex.
>> ^Hybrid:
You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:
Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.

1. The Swedish government handed Mohammed al-Zari and Ahmed Agiza over to the Egyptians after they "obtained promises from the Egyptian authorities that the men would not be tortured or subjected to the death penalty, and would be given fair trials". Even Human Rights Watch conceded that this was done merely to "cover itself", knowing full well that these two would be tortured.

So yes, the Swedes are more than capable of sending Assange to the States.

2. According to Fair Trials International, Swedish law permits a level of secrecy for trials such as this that everyone should be concerned about. No public hearings and extended isolation, to name the key aspects.

3. As previously said, if Swedish authorities assured either Assange or the Ecuadorians that he wouldn't be handed over to the US, he'd be in Sweden already. It is entirely within their power to bring an end to this farce or to reveal Assange to be full of shit, should he still not comply even after acceptable guarantees were provided. But they chose not to make these assurances. And the stakes are too high for Assange to accept anything less, given the consequences he faces should he ever enter the US.

On a personal note: if it was me, I wouldn't believe any assurances by any country that took part in the CIA's extraordinary rendition program -- including my own country in the case of Khalid El-Masri.>> ^Babymech:

There is no way that any Swedish politician or authority would support Assange's extradition to the US. Nothing you ridiculous conspiracy theorists have come up with so far has indicated that they would. Maybe the US would kidnap him (?) but that could happen in London or Ecuador or wherever. Meanwhile, you delightful people think that alleged rapists should not have to collaborate with authorities investigating the charges as long as they're famous enough, and that the women making these claims should not have the basic rights that any other Swedish citizens normally would. Tasteful.

In any case, I'm looking forward to the movie about all this.

I woke up and read a BBC article about this...where they also talked about Bradley Manning and how he is being detained illegally during all of this, they had quotes from Assange talking about it, ya know like a real news organization would do.

The CNN article I read a few hours later was twice as long (and twice as boring), and it did not mention Manning at all, like he didn't exist.

Just food for thought if you're thinking that the big bad liberal media is doing everything to make the US look bad, they don't, they're not liberal, they're statist.

>> ^thumpa28:

Seriously, I cant believe youre comparing Rosa Parks to a scumbag like Assange. Rosa Parks took a stand at the risk of her liberty and even her life. She represented freedom against tyranny and fought for what she believed in.
Assange believes in nothing else but self promotion and when that landed him in deep water, self preservation at the cost of everyone who sheltered him and even paid for his freedom. Assange has never taken a stand in his life, if he had been on that bus he would not have supported Rosa Parks, he would have fled at the first sign of trouble or got coerced into the lynch mob. How many chinese dissident informants, fighting much the same fight for freedom against overwhelming odds, are now in jail or worse because Assange released the unredacted cables out of nothing but another attempt to keep himself in the limelight?
Assange should face the sexual assault charges, we in the UK have a long and lengthy tradition of separation of the judiciary and the organs of state, which includes our intelligence services. As much as it pains me to say so, Assange would receive a fair extradition hearing (whose decision he fled) and a fair trial in Sweden. Hes done the damage now, whilst I wouldnt complain if he had a sudden CIA inspired cardiac arrest, thats the realm of Bond and Bourne.
Dont confuse Assange with Wikileaks. Wikileaks was started up with a reason in mind, Assange took it over as his one man puppet show.
>> ^dannym3141:
There is such a thing as taking a stand. Sometimes, when humans are pushed beyond what they think is acceptable, they are willing to risk terrible consequences.
Rosa Parks did it with racism. How many poor 'negros' got slaughtered, beaten ...god knows what the trickle down effect would be... in the aftermath of ANY bold defiance by their brethren at the time? So then should we prefer the status quo? Should Rosa Parks also take a dum dum to the nuts because of she didn't tow the government line?
I think Assange is/was doing the world a great service, though we may not know it yet and we may never if we don't come out of this dark age. At some point, someone had to make a stand against this all-pervading government corruption. If he is a rapist, then he should be brought to justice - but how can you trust law/court justice when the law/court is effectively an involved party?>> ^thumpa28:
Assange is a self obsessed rapist (believe it or not that what they call people who have sex where the other party refuses or withdraws consent) whose lust for publicity has led to lots of death. The 1300 in Kenya by his own admission and the Taleban thanking wikileaks for helping them identify those who cooperated with the americans and what about an Iranian spy to name but a few we know about. Chinese dissidents, middle eastern journalists, people fighting for democracy in dangerous places have suffered because of this self serving turd.
How many people have suffered and died so Assange could lap up the publicity, shouting about the freedom of speech whilst gagging his own staff and of course planning to stiff the morons who looked after him whilst he was fighting extradition and especially those who posted bail. Everything out of his mouth is designed to keep Assange safe, by playing on the Great Satan angle and finding those fools idiotic enough to lap it up and throw money at the cause, especially those who posted bail for him, then left looking like right twats when he did a runner to the Ecuadorians. What a bunch of muppets.
Quite frankly, after all this nonsense the US wont bother to try and extradite him. I just hope the UK grabs him when he steps outside the one place the fucker can hide, preferably using a dum dum round to the nuts, before dragging his pathetic self off and slamming him into jail where he will face trial for being self obsessed, even during sex.
>> ^Hybrid:
You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:
Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.






Before i even read your comment, in what dimension did i compare Rosa Parks to julian assange? I read it a few times before posting to make sure i wasn't. Please read it again and adjust your comment accordingly, this must be a misunderstanding?

Furthermore (though this is beside the point), if this were 1955 and i used the same argument to support Rosa Parks, you would probably be outraged that i dare compare a scumbag like Rosa Parks to ....I dunno, the blokes who said "I'm Spartacus"? Choose any you like pre-1955.

Regardless, the two parties i use as examples are irrelevant. The underlying point is that when people are pushed to what they consider their limits (and our limits are all different) then they are prepared to risk hurting themselves and others in the interests of those who come after us, and the point you missed was that it is impossible to tell whether this is "a valiant stand" or not.

I should mention that i'm also british, and i'd insist that it's a bit naive to think that britain is immune to corruption, especially in the wake of the last few years. Our government is surely at least as corrupt as the US's. As a british man, i'm appalled to think that anyone (not necessarily you) is in favour of disrespecting another nation by marching into their embassy, compounded by the fact that THIS DOESN'T CONCERN US. Hell, if you're that much behind justice, why aren't you arguing in favour of britain granting him asylum and doing everything in our power to make sure he faces correct charges and doesn't disappear off the face of the earth? Are you after justice or baying for blood!?

Whatever. Disagree on what assange is or isn't; it's clear that you have strong feelings about assange and as i said before, this just shows how difficult an impartial trial would be for him. Please don't disagree that britain needs to concentrate on BRITAIN for a while, though.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I'm surprised this is as divisive as this on the Sift - I wonder if support falls along geographical lines?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

This statement from the Foreign Secretary I'm surprised at: "The UK does not accept the principle of diplomatic asylum. It is far from a universally accepted concept."

I would quote back to you the bit where you mention Rosa Parks, but i sense it would be pointless.

The point is, should someone be allowed to get away with rape because bringing them to justice 'would push them too far'? Should any criminal be forgiven their crime because they threaten others with more crime? That would be a charter for scum like Assange to get away with murder.


>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^thumpa28:
Seriously, I cant believe youre comparing Rosa Parks to a scumbag like Assange. Rosa Parks took a stand at the risk of her liberty and even her life. She represented freedom against tyranny and fought for what she believed in.
Assange believes in nothing else but self promotion and when that landed him in deep water, self preservation at the cost of everyone who sheltered him and even paid for his freedom. Assange has never taken a stand in his life, if he had been on that bus he would not have supported Rosa Parks, he would have fled at the first sign of trouble or got coerced into the lynch mob. How many chinese dissident informants, fighting much the same fight for freedom against overwhelming odds, are now in jail or worse because Assange released the unredacted cables out of nothing but another attempt to keep himself in the limelight?
Assange should face the sexual assault charges, we in the UK have a long and lengthy tradition of separation of the judiciary and the organs of state, which includes our intelligence services. As much as it pains me to say so, Assange would receive a fair extradition hearing (whose decision he fled) and a fair trial in Sweden. Hes done the damage now, whilst I wouldnt complain if he had a sudden CIA inspired cardiac arrest, thats the realm of Bond and Bourne.
Dont confuse Assange with Wikileaks. Wikileaks was started up with a reason in mind, Assange took it over as his one man puppet show.
>> ^dannym3141:
There is such a thing as taking a stand. Sometimes, when humans are pushed beyond what they think is acceptable, they are willing to risk terrible consequences.
Rosa Parks did it with racism. How many poor 'negros' got slaughtered, beaten ...god knows what the trickle down effect would be... in the aftermath of ANY bold defiance by their brethren at the time? So then should we prefer the status quo? Should Rosa Parks also take a dum dum to the nuts because of she didn't tow the government line?
I think Assange is/was doing the world a great service, though we may not know it yet and we may never if we don't come out of this dark age. At some point, someone had to make a stand against this all-pervading government corruption. If he is a rapist, then he should be brought to justice - but how can you trust law/court justice when the law/court is effectively an involved party?>> ^thumpa28:
Assange is a self obsessed rapist (believe it or not that what they call people who have sex where the other party refuses or withdraws consent) whose lust for publicity has led to lots of death. The 1300 in Kenya by his own admission and the Taleban thanking wikileaks for helping them identify those who cooperated with the americans and what about an Iranian spy to name but a few we know about. Chinese dissidents, middle eastern journalists, people fighting for democracy in dangerous places have suffered because of this self serving turd.
How many people have suffered and died so Assange could lap up the publicity, shouting about the freedom of speech whilst gagging his own staff and of course planning to stiff the morons who looked after him whilst he was fighting extradition and especially those who posted bail. Everything out of his mouth is designed to keep Assange safe, by playing on the Great Satan angle and finding those fools idiotic enough to lap it up and throw money at the cause, especially those who posted bail for him, then left looking like right twats when he did a runner to the Ecuadorians. What a bunch of muppets.
Quite frankly, after all this nonsense the US wont bother to try and extradite him. I just hope the UK grabs him when he steps outside the one place the fucker can hide, preferably using a dum dum round to the nuts, before dragging his pathetic self off and slamming him into jail where he will face trial for being self obsessed, even during sex.
>> ^Hybrid:
You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:
Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.





Before i even read your comment, in what dimension did i compare Rosa Parks to julian assange? I read it a few times before posting to make sure i wasn't. Please read it again and adjust your comment accordingly, this must be a misunderstanding?
Furthermore (though this is beside the point), if this were 1955 and i used the same argument to support Rosa Parks, you would probably be outraged that i dare compare a scumbag like Rosa Parks to ....I dunno, the blokes who said "I'm Spartacus"? Choose any you like pre-1955.
Regardless, the two parties are irrelevant. The underlying point is that when people are pushed to what they consider their limits (and our limits are all different) then they are prepared to risk hurting themselves and others in the interests of those who come after us.

Again, please tell me where i said that he should be let off rape? I explicitly said "rapists should be brought to justice"!

And please do take the time to quote the exact point where i compared (that is to say likened, discussed the similarities between) rosa parks and julian assange. I guarantee you will not find it.

I mean honestly, are you reading my posts before you argue with me about what's in them?

>> ^thumpa28:

I would quote back to you the bit where you mention Rosa Parks, but i sense it would be pointless.
The point is, should someone be allowed to get away with rape because bringing them to justice 'would push them too far'? Should any criminal be forgiven their crime because they threaten others with more crime? That would be a charter for scum like Assange to get away with murder.

>> ^dag:

I'm surprised this is as divisive as this on the Sift - I wonder if support falls along geographical lines?


In the US here and 100% backer of Assange. Our govt. doesn't belong to us anymore and it's time someone did some real reporting. (Sorry Hybrid )

My opinions:

1. Assange should have to face police questioning in the sexual assault case.

2. Assange is right to avoid Sweden so long (and only so long) as there's the chance Sweden will deport him to the US as it's clear he cannot anticipate a fair hearing and trial.

Is any of this still controversial?

If the US wants him, he won't end up on our soil. If anything it'll be Cuban soil.

>> ^Hybrid:

You think this isn't about getting him extradited to the US via Sweden? That's one thing I and nearly everyone else in this thread do agree on. Be in no doubt, if Assange ends up on Swedish soil, he will end up on US soil soon after.>> ^Babymech:
Hybrid, don't be ridiculous. It would be illegal for Sweden to extradite him to the US. It would be political suicide for any Swedish politician or authority to be anywhere near involved an extradition to a country that practices the death penalty. Barbarians.

>> ^messenger:

My opinions:
1. Assange should have to face police questioning in the sexual assault case.
2. Assange is right to avoid Sweden so long (and only so long) as there's the chance Sweden will deport him to the US as it's clear he cannot anticipate a fair hearing and trial.
Is any of this still controversial?


As far as I know they only want to question him...he offered to talk to them on neutral soil. The fact that they won't accept that worries me.

Why should the swedish government do anything more than stick to the extradition process? When has it become a part of the extradition process that the person being extradited sets out the terms of his extradition?

'but Assange is special!'

No, no he isnt, hes just another criminal in hiding. The fact he says he is and that you seriously think that it should affect whether or not he is brought to justice, makes me glad that we have in this country an independent judiciary who rely on more than the latest daily mail opinion for their decision making process.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

That you've already judged him a criminal explains your POV completely.>> ^thumpa28:

Why should the swedish government do anything more than stick to the extradition process? When has it become a part of the extradition process that the person being extradited sets out the terms of his extradition?
'but Assange is special!'
No, no he isnt, hes just another criminal in hiding. The fact he says he is and that you seriously think that it should affect whether or not he is brought to justice, makes me glad that we have in this country an independent judiciary who rely on more than the latest daily mail opinion for their decision making process.

I wouldnt be so presumptious as to suggest what you completely missing the point suggests about you - something to think about? I believe hes a self-centred scumbag whose profile fits the criminal charges laid against him. What isnt my personal opinion is the completely impartial legal process which found him liable for extradition to answer the charges against him.

I wonder if his love of human rights extends to tackling the Ecuadorian extra judicial killings, 'disappearances' of reporters and the law which locks you up for 2 years if you insult el presidente? Somehow, I dont think Assange willl lose a nights sleep over a troubled conscience when it comes to keeping Assange out of jail. Hes just that kind of guy...>> ^dag:

That you've already judged him a criminal explains your POV completely.>> ^thumpa28:
Why should the swedish government do anything more than stick to the extradition process? When has it become a part of the extradition process that the person being extradited sets out the terms of his extradition?
'but Assange is special!'
No, no he isnt, hes just another criminal in hiding. The fact he says he is and that you seriously think that it should affect whether or not he is brought to justice, makes me glad that we have in this country an independent judiciary who rely on more than the latest daily mail opinion for their decision making process.

"Last night WikiLeaks said he would give a "live" statement "in front of" the embassy on Sunday, two months since he entered it. He could be seized if it is deemed he has stepped outside the building's diplomatically protected zone.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, said the maverick Australian would not be allowed to fly to his newly adopted country and must instead answer rape allegations in Sweden."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/9480944/Julian-Assange-to-issue-statement-in-front-of-embassy-haven.html

UK's gonna start a war if they do.

With Ecuador? In the UK? That'd be even shorter than the Anglo-Zanzibar War, and we'd have streaming footage of the whole thing. That'd be cool.>> ^gwiz665:

UK's gonna start a war if they do.

>> ^messenger:

With Ecuador? In the UK? That'd be even shorter than the Anglo-Zanzibar War, and we'd have streaming footage of the whole thing. That'd be cool.>> ^gwiz665:
UK's gonna start a war if they do.



Sure. Then the south american nations decide that the falklands is no longer british territory either.

Or how about ANY of our embassies ANYWHERE in the world? It'd be extremely uncool and we'd be lucky not to have to suffer consequences for it.

Last time we made an international gesture when opinion was split, we ended up with the fucking iraq war. The fact that we're on the verge of doing someone else's dirty work again so soon makes me feel fucking sick. Just what type of fucking clowns are in charge here?

We won't enter the embassy. But we will stop a diplomatic car on the way to an airport.

Russia has already been swinging their dicks in the UK direction over this, because they have harbored "enemies of the state" from them. If not an outright war, the UK will fuck up their diplomatic powers significantly.
>> ^messenger:

With Ecuador? In the UK? That'd be even shorter than the Anglo-Zanzibar War, and we'd have streaming footage of the whole thing. That'd be cool.>> ^gwiz665:
UK's gonna start a war if they do.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Thursday, August 16th, 2012 3:43am PDT - promote requested by lavoll.

"we"?

not to degrade the seriousness of what Assange may have done in Sweden to those poor gals, but can you imagine for a second what would happen if you switch the type of crime and the country it was done in? Lets say, as a food for thought, that Assange was involved in some selling of chewing gum in Singapore and they want to extradite him for that offence. Would you then consider this crime as insignificant enough? After all, being in jail for selling some chewing gum is silly!

>> ^thumpa28:

Why should the swedish government do anything more than stick to the extradition process? When has it become a part of the extradition process that the person being extradited sets out the terms of his extradition?
'but Assange is special!'
No, no he isnt, hes just another criminal in hiding. The fact he says he is and that you seriously think that it should affect whether or not he is brought to justice, makes me glad that we have in this country an independent judiciary who rely on more than the latest daily mail opinion for their decision making process.


You're absolutely right. They should stick to the process.

And when Ecuador decides that julian assange's application for asylum is valid and they want to honour it, we should respect that process too. To do anything else would be hypocritical, correct?

If sweden want assange so much, or if america want him so much; let them break diplomatic tradition. Why us? We probably invented half of the traditions for christ sake (i assume diplomacy was established in or before colonial times), if we can't stick to them then who will?

To me it sounds like you simply want assange's blood. Nothing you've said on this topic has made me think you're genuinely after justice. You sound like he's stolen money off you.

Sometimes, I catch myself thinking it would be a good thing if Assange faced a US court. The entire shabam would go up in smoke, a healthy prime-time debate about medial responsibilities, transparency and the judicial process of/with political prisoners in/around the united states would spawn...
...which far outweighs the personal freedom of one person...
-that's ususally the part where I wake up and shake the confetti out of frontal lobe.

BTW: Hey let's go invade an embassy so we can get some dude convicted of not using a condom in another country.

And you sound like his mother. You want him to get away with his crimes because what? He happened to run a company that released something someone else stole? That make sexual assault ok in your book?

Theres been no acting outside the law, except by Assange with the assault, breaking bail, fleeing justice etc. so i really dont see what breaking tradition youre complaining about.

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^thumpa28:
Why should the swedish government do anything more than stick to the extradition process? When has it become a part of the extradition process that the person being extradited sets out the terms of his extradition?
'but Assange is special!'
No, no he isnt, hes just another criminal in hiding. The fact he says he is and that you seriously think that it should affect whether or not he is brought to justice, makes me glad that we have in this country an independent judiciary who rely on more than the latest daily mail opinion for their decision making process.

You're absolutely right. They should stick to the process.
And when Ecuador decides that julian assange's application for asylum is valid and they want to honour it, we should respect that process too. To do anything else would be hypocritical, correct?
If sweden want assange so much, or if america want him so much; let them break diplomatic tradition. Why us? We probably invented half of the traditions for christ sake (i assume diplomacy was established in or before colonial times), if we can't stick to them then who will?
To me it sounds like you simply want assange's blood. Nothing you've said on this topic has made me think you're genuinely after justice. You sound like he's stolen money off you.

That was one of the charges, the consent one was a bit more serious. But yeah why not? It would be a very visble soapbox for him to shout his beliefs. The only problem of course is that it doesnt outweigh the freedom of Assange in his mind.

And of course theyre not going to invade an embassy. Thats what happens when you leave someone trying to grandstand in charge of the country when you go on holiday.

>> ^Mauru:

Sometimes, I catch myself thinking it would be a good thing if Assange faced a US court. The entire shabam would go up in smoke, a healthy prime-time debate about medial responsibilities, transparency and the judicial process of/with political prisoners in/around the united states would spawn...
...which far outweighs the personal freedom of one person...
-that's ususally the part where I wake up and shake the confetti out of frontal lobe.
BTW: Hey let's go invade an embassy so we can get some dude convicted of not using a condom in another country.

Perhaps if you keep repeating this then it will become true and i will be happy for him to get away with rape. You never know. Keep repeating it and see if it works out for you.

Yes he's been accused of something (not charged), but he thinks that the government (or several governments) is (are) conspiring against him. So he applied for asylum to another country who granted it.

Now unless ecuador has an extradition treaty with the US, why are we still discussing this? In fact, even if they do - why are we discussing this? I keep telling you that i want britain to keep out, yet you keep accusing me of being a rape supporter. You haven't read a single post i've written so far. Every reply has been either a lie or about something i didn't say.

You're not convincing anyone that either a) i'm a supporter of rapists, or b) that you're not simply a julian assange hater for whatever reason.

However i do agree with your last post - some fucking idiot tory silver spoon rich boy opened his stupid mouth to flex nuts that no one wanted flexing by saying "Actually, we can take him if we want." I bet the diplomatic guys are furious at the shit-storm that created.

>> ^thumpa28:

And you sound like his mother. You want him to get away with his crimes because what? He happened to run a company that released something someone else stole? That make sexual assault ok in your book?>> ^dannym3141:

If he is a rapist, then he should be brought to justice - but how can you trust law/court justice when the law/court is effectively an involved party?

Its not up to me to convince you rape is wrong, its not even part of this discussion.

The only reason Britain is involved is the small point that Assange is here? Im sure there are many people like me who wish he was far far away. As to what he thinks, that's irrelevant. You cant seriously argue that perpetrators of crimes should be able to think their way out of responsibility? Anyway, I have no idea what point you are making, so this is just going round in circles.I cant stand the fucker, you seem to admire him, lets leave it at that.

As to the foreign office cocking things up spectacularly, yes they did. Took all the focus off Ecuadors human rights record and slathered it with neo colonialist bull. Thats what happens when Hague gets left in charge, we can only thank god he never got to be PM.

>> ^dannym3141:

Perhaps if you keep repeating this then it will become true and i will be happy for him to get away with rape. You never know. Keep repeating it and see if it works out for you.
Yes he's been charged with something, but he thinks that the government (or several governments) is (are) conspiring against him. So he applied for asylum to another country who granted it.
Now unless ecuador has an extradition treaty with the US, why are we still discussing this? In fact, even if they do - why are we discussing this? I keep telling you that i want britain to keep out, yet you keep accusing me of being a rape supporter. You haven't read a single post i've written so far. Every reply has been either a lie or about something i didn't say.
You're not convincing anyone that either a) i'm a supporter of rapists, or b) that you're not simply a julian assange hater for whatever reason.
However i do agree with your last post - some fucking idiot tory silver spoon rich boy opened his stupid mouth to flex nuts that no one wanted flexing by saying "Actually, we can take him if we want." I bet the diplomatic guys are furious at the shit-storm that created.
>> ^thumpa28:
And you sound like his mother. You want him to get away with his crimes because what? He happened to run a company that released something someone else stole? That make sexual assault ok in your book?>> ^dannym3141:
If he is a rapist, then he should be brought to justice - but how can you trust law/court justice when the law/court is effectively an involved party?

@thumpa28:

As i said, you're not convincing anyone. It's a shame you're clearly against back tracking on your accusations (which even you know by this point are wrong; hell you quoted the evidence of it) because i'm sure we agree on a lot of things.

He would probably just disappear.
>> ^Mauru:

Sometimes, I catch myself thinking it would be a good thing if Assange faced a US court. The entire shabam would go up in smoke, a healthy prime-time debate about medial responsibilities, transparency and the judicial process of/with political prisoners in/around the united states would spawn...
...which far outweighs the personal freedom of one person...
-that's ususally the part where I wake up and shake the confetti out of frontal lobe.
BTW: Hey let's go invade an embassy so we can get some dude convicted of not using a condom in another country.

No, he's been charged with nothing.>> ^dannym3141:

Yes he's been charged with something...

The White Knight doth hereby declare:

@dannym3141, the accused, believes the evil Assange is justified in avoiding (pending) rape charges, therefore dannym3141 is a proven rape supporter, therefore all his opinions about everything are shown to be invalid, therefore he loses this argument, therefore Assange is a bad guy, uncontested, therefore the UK should raid the Ecuadorian embassy forthwith.

(This comment will surely get me laid!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvrLTBvWpd8&feature=player_embedded