Julian Assange given asylum in Ecuador

Negating a nation's diplomatic status sets a bad precedent. It encourages other nations to do the same, which ultimately might lead to closing embassy's. Whether you agree with Ecuador or support the Brits, its a bad idea. Ask website explains it well:

"Embassies are designed to increase communication between countries by having official representatives of foreign governments on hand to consult or negotiate with the host government. Embassies also assist travelers from their home country., and provide visa and other consular services for people seeking to travel abroad"

think this is wrong he should be in Sweden clearing his name or in jail for what he did.

Ecuador is a good place to live if you wan't to get shot or mugged.

1) By both international and the individual countries' involved (US, UK, Sweden, Ecuador) laws, embassies *are NOT* subject to the laws of the territories they reside in; they are small bits of another sovereign nation.

2) Julian Assange *has NOT* actually been charged with any crime. Furthermore, one of his accusers has retracted her initial statment, saying she was pressured into it by the other woman "out of spite".

3) The US damn well wants Assange's ass, for exposing all sorts of underhanded chicanery on our part. It's been conveniently ignored by all of the official parties, that many of the documents exposed by WikiLeaks show malfeasance on a rather large scale, that violates both US and international law.

So, it's OK to extradite someone for "questioning", eh? How come they refused to "question" Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy..? Well? What question couldn't be answered there, as well as it could be answered in Sweden?!

This is all a rather transparent ploy to smear Assange, nothing more, and get him into US clutches, so he can be effectively silenced.

Assange is obviously trying to portray himself as some sort of martyr here. I agree that sovereign issues are at stake as far as revoking diplomatic status but this is completely the wrong path for him to be taking IMO.

If there is some grand conspiracy for the US to try him for treason then maybe, just maybe he has a point. The way he has responded today however just smacks of a propaganda attempt to ridicule the UK and US governments and will win him even less support from the rest of the world. He is accused of a crime in Sweden and as Brokie just said, why isn't he keen to clear his name there instead of risking another country's diplomatic relations by being at the embassy in the first place?

Originally posted by brockie:

---

think this is wrong he should be in Sweden clearing his name or in jail for what he did.

---

If he was in Sweden, he would either be getting a show trial or having an "Accident". Should he be in jail for exposing the crimes of the most powerful men in the world? I guess that is a matter of opinion...personally, I think the people doing the crimes should be in jail.

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

1) By both international and the individual countries' involved (US, UK, Sweden, Ecuador) laws, embassies *are NOT* subject to the laws of the territories they reside in; they are small bits of another sovereign nation.

2) Julian Assange *has NOT* actually been charged with any crime. Furthermore, one of his accusers has retracted her initial statment, saying she was pressured into it by the other woman "out of spite".

3) The US damn well wants Assange's ass, for exposing all sorts of underhanded chicanery on our part. It's been conveniently ignored by all of the official parties, that many of the documents exposed by WikiLeaks show malfeasance on a rather large scale, that violates both US and international law.

So, it's OK to extradite someone for "questioning", eh? How come they refused to "question" Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy..? Well? What question couldn't be answered there, as well as it could be answered in Sweden?!

This is all a rather transparent ploy to smear Assange, nothing more, and get him into US clutches, so he can be effectively silenced.

---

They can't "question" him inside the embassy because the carpet is really nice and they don't want to ruin it while waterboarding him.

Originally posted by simpsim:

---

Assange is obviously trying to portray himself as some sort of martyr here. I agree that sovereign issues are at stake as far as revoking diplomatic status but this is completely the wrong path for him to be taking IMO.

If there is some grand conspiracy for the US to try him for treason then maybe, just maybe he has a point. The way he has responded today however just smacks of a propaganda attempt to ridicule the UK and US governments and will win him even less support from the rest of the world. He is accused of a crime in Sweden and as Brokie just said, why isn't he keen to clear his name there instead of risking another country's diplomatic relations by being at the embassy in the first place?

---

He is a martyr, and he can never clear his name in Sweden. If he was anyone else, the charges would have been dropped long ago due to the unreliable witnesses (one of whom admits to her lies). Even if he somehow survived long enough to get to trial, and even if he wasn't tortured into a confession, and even if the trial was fair, they would just trump up some other charge...or hold him in "Protective Custody" for the rest of his life. He is at the embassy because that is one of the only places he could go to, and even that was a risk. As it is, Ecuador has agreed to give him diplomatic immunity because their leaders didn't happen to be among the criminals he exposed. "He" is not risking their embassy for himself; "they" are risking their embassy for him...big difference. If they are willing to risk that much to protect him, there is very strong reason.

REMEMBER: Assange Real "Crime" > He Exposed the Workings of the U.S. Terror Machine.

"This Generation is Burning the Mass Media to the Ground." ~ Julian Assange

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

Originally posted by brockie:

---

think this is wrong he should be in Sweden clearing his name or in jail for what he did.

---

If he was in Sweden, he would either be getting a show trial or having an "Accident". Should he be in jail for exposing the crimes of the most powerful men in the world? I guess that is a matter of opinion...personally, I think the people doing the crimes should be in jail.

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

1) By both international and the individual countries' involved (US, UK, Sweden, Ecuador) laws, embassies *are NOT* subject to the laws of the territories they reside in; they are small bits of another sovereign nation.

2) Julian Assange *has NOT* actually been charged with any crime. Furthermore, one of his accusers has retracted her initial statment, saying she was pressured into it by the other woman "out of spite".

3) The US damn well wants Assange's ass, for exposing all sorts of underhanded chicanery on our part. It's been conveniently ignored by all of the official parties, that many of the documents exposed by WikiLeaks show malfeasance on a rather large scale, that violates both US and international law.

So, it's OK to extradite someone for "questioning", eh? How come they refused to "question" Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy..? Well? What question couldn't be answered there, as well as it could be answered in Sweden?!

This is all a rather transparent ploy to smear Assange, nothing more, and get him into US clutches, so he can be effectively silenced.

---

They can't "question" him inside the embassy because the carpet is really nice and they don't want to ruin it while waterboarding him.

Originally posted by simpsim:

---

Assange is obviously trying to portray himself as some sort of martyr here. I agree that sovereign issues are at stake as far as revoking diplomatic status but this is completely the wrong path for him to be taking IMO.

If there is some grand conspiracy for the US to try him for treason then maybe, just maybe he has a point. The way he has responded today however just smacks of a propaganda attempt to ridicule the UK and US governments and will win him even less support from the rest of the world. He is accused of a crime in Sweden and as Brokie just said, why isn't he keen to clear his name there instead of risking another country's diplomatic relations by being at the embassy in the first place?

---

He is a martyr, and he can never clear his name in Sweden. If he was anyone else, the charges would have been dropped long ago due to the unreliable witnesses (one of whom admits to her lies). Even if he somehow survived long enough to get to trial, and even if he wasn't tortured into a confession, and even if the trial was fair, they would just trump up some other charge...or hold him in "Protective Custody" for the rest of his life. He is at the embassy because that is one of the only places he could go to, and even that was a risk. As it is, Ecuador has agreed to give him diplomatic immunity because their leaders didn't happen to be among the criminals he exposed. "He" is not risking their embassy for himself; "they" are risking their embassy for him...big difference. If they are willing to risk that much to protect him, there is very strong reason.

---

bullshit.its like anyone else.if it was you or i we would be standing trial.this asshole should face up to the charges against him.i dont have diplomatic immunity,do you?

Quote:

---

Assange was set to be extradited to Sweden, where he faces charges of rape. Assange denies the claims, saying the sexual 'assault' was consensual and the charges are politically motivated.

---

The charges are probably politically motivated.The problem is if he did face the charges and beat them they would find other reasons to charge him or shut him up or keep him locked up.
Depending on where you are if you exposed government information you'd be likely to have an accident possibly a fatal one.

Originally posted by aldan:

---

bullshit.its like anyone else.if it was you or i we would be standing trial.this asshole should face up to the charges against him.i dont have diplomatic immunity,do you?

---

Complete fail.

Point of fact, you *would not* legally be extraditable, as a US citizen (or a citizen of most Western nations, including the UK and Sweden), merely for "questioning"; there MUST be an actual criminal charge involved. That is simply not the case here; why not? In other words, you cannot stand trial without being charged with a crime; mere accusation is nowhere near enough, except (magically) for Julian Assange. THAT is the bullshit here. If they are so-o-o-o certain of his guilt, WTF is stopping them from charging him with a crime, eh? You do *not* have to be physically present to be charged with a crime, after all. That's what courts are for, are they not?

I'll tell you why: If they charge him with a crime, then he will have to have his day in court; that would put a large crimp on any plans to rapidly remit him to the US, and keep this shoddy business in the eyes of the public for much longer. The last damn thing CIA cockroaches want is more light on the matter (watch 'em scatter)! That's also the exact reason that Sweden is oh-so-pissy about questioning Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy, of course; they wouldn't be able to keep their malfeasance out of the spotlight.

Furthermore, of the 2 women, one has already publicly recanted her testimony and stated she was pressured to accuse Assange by the other. According to her the whole thing was "out of spite" by the other woman. Yeah, real solid evidence, there, mmhm, yeah, yeah, that's the ticket. =p

Yes, I agree, Assange should be treated like anyone else. That means not being extradited for transparently false accusations, instead of an actual crime, just like the rest of us should be treated. The UK's silly, overheated threats vs. Ecuador only reinforce the complete lack of any basis for his extradition. I'm actually rather glad they've exposed their true motives in such a ham-fisted manner, that is illegal both by their own laws and EVERY international treaty they have ever signed re: embassies.

Surely Assange WILL go to Sweden voluntarily to be tried, (for he had sex with consent and nothing to fear if honesty is applied), PROVIDED UK, Sweden and USA grant him a Non-Extradition Order. The order to cover him leaving UK, entering Sweden and being allowed to migrate to Ecuador freely, (if and when and after, he had his possible punishment in Sweden...)

But,
Hey he is not charged yet - not in Sweden, nor in the USA.

It seems Sweden, the UK and the USA do indeed have ulterior motives.....
FOR:
If they do NOT intend to follow what is feared by Assange (that he will be extradited to the US), then WHATis there against granting him a Non-Extradition agreement?

So far Assange is right and Bravo to Ecuador!

Originally posted by aldan:

---

Originally posted by KillerBug:

---

Originally posted by brockie:

---

think this is wrong he should be in Sweden clearing his name or in jail for what he did.

---

If he was in Sweden, he would either be getting a show trial or having an "Accident". Should he be in jail for exposing the crimes of the most powerful men in the world? I guess that is a matter of opinion...personally, I think the people doing the crimes should be in jail.

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

1) By both international and the individual countries' involved (US, UK, Sweden, Ecuador) laws, embassies *are NOT* subject to the laws of the territories they reside in; they are small bits of another sovereign nation.

2) Julian Assange *has NOT* actually been charged with any crime. Furthermore, one of his accusers has retracted her initial statment, saying she was pressured into it by the other woman "out of spite".

3) The US damn well wants Assange's ass, for exposing all sorts of underhanded chicanery on our part. It's been conveniently ignored by all of the official parties, that many of the documents exposed by WikiLeaks show malfeasance on a rather large scale, that violates both US and international law.

So, it's OK to extradite someone for "questioning", eh? How come they refused to "question" Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy..? Well? What question couldn't be answered there, as well as it could be answered in Sweden?!

This is all a rather transparent ploy to smear Assange, nothing more, and get him into US clutches, so he can be effectively silenced.

---

They can't "question" him inside the embassy because the carpet is really nice and they don't want to ruin it while waterboarding him.

Originally posted by simpsim:

---

Assange is obviously trying to portray himself as some sort of martyr here. I agree that sovereign issues are at stake as far as revoking diplomatic status but this is completely the wrong path for him to be taking IMO.

If there is some grand conspiracy for the US to try him for treason then maybe, just maybe he has a point. The way he has responded today however just smacks of a propaganda attempt to ridicule the UK and US governments and will win him even less support from the rest of the world. He is accused of a crime in Sweden and as Brokie just said, why isn't he keen to clear his name there instead of risking another country's diplomatic relations by being at the embassy in the first place?

---

He is a martyr, and he can never clear his name in Sweden. If he was anyone else, the charges would have been dropped long ago due to the unreliable witnesses (one of whom admits to her lies). Even if he somehow survived long enough to get to trial, and even if he wasn't tortured into a confession, and even if the trial was fair, they would just trump up some other charge...or hold him in "Protective Custody" for the rest of his life. He is at the embassy because that is one of the only places he could go to, and even that was a risk. As it is, Ecuador has agreed to give him diplomatic immunity because their leaders didn't happen to be among the criminals he exposed. "He" is not risking their embassy for himself; "they" are risking their embassy for him...big difference. If they are willing to risk that much to protect him, there is very strong reason.

---

bullshit.its like anyone else.if it was you or i we would be standing trial.this asshole should face up to the charges against him.i dont have diplomatic immunity,do you?

---

Are you part of America's terror organization or just another idiot sheep Aidan?

So Sweden has a grand conspiracy to steal
Assange away, torture him & send him off to the US for more torture but are not going the small step of actually charging him prior to questioning him. Kind of puts a hole in the accusation that Sweden
is corrupt & that poor Assange is being spirited away on a made up rape accusation. Maybe, just maybe Assange did in fact violate a woman against her will & the Swedes would like to determine his guilt or innocence without any underlying grand conspiracy.

Originally posted by JST1946:

---

Ecuador is a good place to live if you wan't to get shot or mugged.

---

BS I have been to Ecuador and it not worse that New York or Detroit

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

Complete fail.

Point of fact, you *would not* legally be extraditable, as a US citizen (or a citizen of most Western nations, including the UK and Sweden), merely for "questioning"; there MUST be an actual criminal charge involved. That is simply not the case here; why not? In other words, you cannot stand trial without being charged with a crime; mere accusation is nowhere near enough, except (magically) for Julian Assange. THAT is the bullshit here. If they are so-o-o-o certain of his guilt, WTF is stopping them from charging him with a crime, eh? You do *not* have to be physically present to be charged with a crime, after all. That's what courts are for, are they not?

---

You might be dancing a fine line there. Here's why, espionage. Operational Security & the lengths at which the good ol US of f*kin A will go to keep it would surprise Satan himself including selling out & trading a known source of information (i.e., person) in order to keep leaks or further hemorrhaging from happening. That includes dirty laundry.

I'm not taking a stand one way or another for Assange. One side says that the women involved were playing their damned 'catty games' & might have also been looking for that legal lottery dollar & another side of this story says this guy REALLY needs to shut his hole because some business really does need to be tended to without the general public's knowledge (a debate to be carried on later).

Either way, if what the US (& other participating governments) wants silenced can't be done 'legally' will then most likely be done covertly. The general public will hear of it as the ever present 'accident'.

So yes, theoretically, he probably is in violation of several laws of multiple countries Operational Procedures. Procedures that would have a soldier executed for having disclosed to the enemy unless under duress of torture themselves.

Assange is pretty much nothing more than an attention grabbing glory whore who has managed to somehow rise to semi-martyr (more like cry baby) because he "thinks" he's doing the right thing: But by "who's" definition?

Rape keeps being mentioned in this case and yet rape is not part of the Swedish allegations, why is that?

Politically motivated?

Certainly seems like it & in that case who can blame him for using all means at his disposal to avoid it.

Do we have 'diplomatic immunity'?

The correct term (as I'm sure you know) is 'the right to seek political asylum'.
And yes we do have the right to claim it if we wish, whether it is granted or not is another matter.

The use of the term 'diplomatic immunity' wasn't loaded at all now was it?

Originally posted by xboxdvl2:

---

Quote:

---

Assange was set to be extradited to Sweden, where he faces charges of rape. Assange denies the claims, saying the sexual 'assault' was consensual and the charges are politically motivated.

---

The charges are probably politically motivated.The problem is if he did face the charges and beat them they would find other reasons to charge him or shut him up or keep him locked up.
Depending on where you are if you exposed government information you'd be likely to have an accident possibly a fatal one.

---

Very true it is impossible to have justice when a power house is out to get you! They control the information and can twist it anyway they wish to suit their purpose. You can be a choir boy but if the government wants to smear you the nail will be in the coffin.

Not that being a royal a-hole should be illegal, but the fact he is one doesn't make me care much about anything bad happening to him.

well put.hes not a saint or a martyr and i care what happens to him why?

You should care what happens to him, if you care about the rule of law in civilized nations, or the repercussions if we allow silly crap like Britain's threats against the Ecuadorian embassy to continue. Both have potentially dire implications.

Originally posted by aldan:

---

....bullshit.its like anyone else.if it was you or i we would be standing trial.this asshole should face up to the charges against him.i dont have diplomatic immunity,do you?

---

You sound like Brain Washed by The Mass Media. PLEASE Turn Off your Fuc**** TV. THX.


TODAY NEWS (8-17-12 - Washington D.C.):
-OAS results: 23 in favor, 5 abstentions , 3 against [Canada, Trinidad-and-Tobago & U.S.]. Ecuador's proposal for a meeting of foreign ministers has been approved.

-Resolution to convene Foreign Ministers to address UK threats of in-violating the Ecuadorean embassy HAS BEEN APPROVED.

-Foreign Ministers of OAS member states will convene on the 24th of August 2012 at the OAS Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
http://www.oas.org/en/media_center/pres...Codigo=E-283/12

NOTE: OAS=Organization of American States - the UN of North + South America

live-tweet record of OAS Special Meeting on UK threats to storm Ecuadorian Embassy and arrest Julian Assange:
http://chirpstory.com/li/17510

My my. It's not often the OAS tweaks the US' nose so directly. This ought to be fascinating.

It ought to be interesting to see how he actually makes it to Ecuador. I would imagine that there will be many, many eyes watching this man and the embassy.

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

You should care what happens to him, if you care about the rule of law in civilized nations, or the repercussions if we allow silly crap like Britain's threats against the Ecuadorian embassy to continue. Both have potentially dire implications.

---

Again true! If it can happen to him it can happen to you!!

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

You should care what happens to him, if you care about the rule of law in civilized nations, or the repercussions if we allow silly crap like Britain's threats against the Ecuadorian embassy to continue. Both have potentially dire implications.

---

I wasn't aware the "rule of law" including avoiding the law and finding others to help you do so.

Looks like the UK might be backing down now.

http://news.yahoo.com/uk-threat-ecuador...-174628250.html

Surely Assange WILL go to Sweden voluntarily to be tried, (for he had sex with consent and nothing to fear if honesty is applied), PROVIDED UK, Sweden and USA grant him a Non-Extradition Order. The order to cover him leaving UK, entering Sweden and being allowed to migrate to Ecuador freely, (if and when and after, he had his possible punishment in Sweden...)

But,
Hey he is not charged yet - not in Sweden, nor in the USA.

It seems Sweden, the UK and the USA do indeed have ulterior motives.....
FOR:
If they do NOT intend to follow what is feared by Assange (that he will be extradited to the US), then WHAT is there against granting him a Non-Extradition agreement?

So far Assange is right and Bravo to Ecuador!

Originally posted by xnonsuchx:

---

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

You should care what happens to him, if you care about the rule of law in civilized nations, or the repercussions if we allow silly crap like Britain's threats against the Ecuadorian embassy to continue. Both have potentially dire implications.

---

I wasn't aware the "rule of law" including avoiding the law and finding others to help you do so.

---

Are you addressing those comments to the U.S. , Swedish and U.K. governments or to Julian Assange?

Good in this day and age the more leaks the better.

Originally posted by xnonsuchx:

---

I wasn't aware the "rule of law" including avoiding the law and finding others to help you do so.

---

It is interesting how money buys those particular rights in/out of that situation too. Guilt of innocence has yet to be proven due to the fact he is buying his own extradition away from even being questioned about the allegations.

An average schmoe can't even get away with that in an attempt to tell a cop to get off of him/herself from a cop with a power trip over a J-walking altercation. Here this asshole is dabbling in international incidents. I'd really like to know just who the F*K he thinks he thinks he is?

Despite, it's like Owled stated, if it were simply a he/she said case of "Buggering Gone Wrong" this whole affair would probably been paid off & gone away months ago. It's because Assange stuck his dick in the wrong glory hole & now the guillotine is about to fall.

It's like Chet said, "You're Stewed, Butt Wad!"

He hasn't been charged probably because Swedish law needs him to be in the country to be questioned.

Laws are different in every country.

The odd thing is, he fled to the UK from Sweden and now that he's attempted 10 to 20 times in UK courts not to be sent to Sweden for the questioning about raping the women but failed to get that approved.

He's now trying to flee to another country that doesn't have Interpol connections and thus doesn't have to be sent to Sweden all seems a bit strange to me.

This is someone who's saying information has to be free and everything has to be known about everything but just not about him raping a couple of girls because that'd be bad or not wanted to be known.

For someone who's saying it was all consented to is pretty damn scared of being sent to jail for rape.

Forget about all the US BS, that's a side issue.

Oh as for the UK not being able to bust the doors down lol, they have already done it back in the 70's when some terrorists were holding a place to ransom.


Even if he did get into a bag the UK will just send up some fighters and force the plane or boat to land in the UK some where.

Just because he posted up leaked emails and stuff still doesn't make him above the law.

Originally posted by xtago:

---

He hasn't been charged probably because Swedish law needs him to be in the country to be questioned.

Laws are different in every country.

The odd thing is, he fled to the UK from Sweden and now that he's attempted 10 to 20 times in UK courts not to be sent to Sweden for the questioning about raping the women but failed to get that approved.

He's now trying to flee to another country that doesn't have Interpol connections and thus doesn't have to be sent to Sweden all seems a bit strange to me.

This is someone who's saying information has to be free and everything has to be known about everything but just not about him raping a couple of girls because that'd be bad or not wanted to be known.

For someone who's saying it was all consented to is pretty damn scared of being sent to jail for rape.

Forget about all the US BS, that's a side issue.

Oh as for the UK not being able to bust the doors down lol, they have already done it back in the 70's when some terrorists were holding a place to ransom.


Even if he did get into a bag the UK will just send up some fighters and force the plane or boat to land in the UK some where.

Just because he posted up leaked emails and stuff still doesn't make him above the law.

---

Mostly because the likely hood of it being true is rather low.

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Surely Assange WILL go to Sweden voluntarily to be tried, (for he had sex with consent and nothing to fear if honesty is applied), PROVIDED UK, Sweden and USA grant him a Non-Extradition Order. The order to cover him leaving UK, entering Sweden and being allowed to migrate to Ecuador freely, (if and when and after, he had his possible punishment in Sweden...)

But,
Hey he is not charged yet - not in Sweden, nor in the USA.

It seems Sweden, the UK and the USA do indeed have ulterior motives.....
FOR:
If they do NOT intend to follow what is feared by Assange (that he will be extradited to the US), then WHAT is there against granting him a Non-Extradition agreement?

So far Assange is right and Bravo to Ecuador!

---

Not charged but is a wanted person by the Swedish police for the questioning of raping 2 women.

For which he hasn't answered and has only ran away so far.

So far the US haven't charged him either and he's in the UK who could just send him to the US and could have done that many months ago he was in a house in London for a year so before spending 2 months with the Ecuador people, if the US wanted him to charge him they could have done it already.

Anyway the US already got the right person that was that bradley guy you know the one.... the person in the army who actually copied the emails and stuff and gave it to assange to post up.

So it's just Assange BS people so he doesn't end up in sweden, that's all it is.

Originally posted by xtago:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Surely Assange WILL go to Sweden voluntarily to be tried, (for he had sex with consent and nothing to fear if honesty is applied), PROVIDED UK, Sweden and USA grant him a Non-Extradition Order. The order to cover him leaving UK, entering Sweden and being allowed to migrate to Ecuador freely, (if and when and after, he had his possible punishment in Sweden...)

But,
Hey he is not charged yet - not in Sweden, nor in the USA.

It seems Sweden, the UK and the USA do indeed have ulterior motives.....
FOR:
If they do NOT intend to follow what is feared by Assange (that he will be extradited to the US), then WHAT is there against granting him a Non-Extradition agreement?

So far Assange is right and Bravo to Ecuador!

---

Not charged but is a wanted person by the Swedish police for the questioning of raping 2 women.

For which he hasn't answered and has only ran away so far.

So far the US haven't charged him either and he's in the UK who could just send him to the US and could have done that many months ago he was in a house in London for a year so before spending 2 months with the Ecuador people, if the US wanted him to charge him they could have done it already.

Anyway the US already got the right person that was that bradley guy you know the one.... the person in the army who actually copied the emails and stuff and gave it to assange to post up.

So it's just Assange BS people so he doesn't end up in sweden, that's all it is.

---

Or more likely it being true is rather low.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by xtago:

---

He hasn't been charged probably because Swedish law needs him to be in the country to be questioned.

Laws are different in every country.

The odd thing is, he fled to the UK from Sweden and now that he's attempted 10 to 20 times in UK courts not to be sent to Sweden for the questioning about raping the women but failed to get that approved.

He's now trying to flee to another country that doesn't have Interpol connections and thus doesn't have to be sent to Sweden all seems a bit strange to me.

This is someone who's saying information has to be free and everything has to be known about everything but just not about him raping a couple of girls because that'd be bad or not wanted to be known.

For someone who's saying it was all consented to is pretty damn scared of being sent to jail for rape.

Forget about all the US BS, that's a side issue.

Oh as for the UK not being able to bust the doors down lol, they have already done it back in the 70's when some terrorists were holding a place to ransom.


Even if he did get into a bag the UK will just send up some fighters and force the plane or boat to land in the UK some where.

Just because he posted up leaked emails and stuff still doesn't make him above the law.

---

Mostly because the likely hood of it being true is rather low.

---

How would you know, it's a bit like MJ is he a pedafile or not many people do think he is one, if you talk to the staff they don't want to talk about it or know that him and a kid are in a room for many hours together with no one allowed in or out, but that doesn't always mean something happened or not.

It's all hearsay.

but hey maybe the women didn't like it or didn't want to have sex with him and have decided to goto the cops anyway, they can do that, whether he likes it or not.

bu much like MJ so far he's left Sweden when the cops where chasing him, now that the London cops are after him he suddenly wants to leave the UK too.

So the chances of it really being rape mustn't be that low after all, because if he could prove it wasn't rape then why is he running from the cops all of a sudden.

Originally posted by xtago:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by xtago:

---

He hasn't been charged probably because Swedish law needs him to be in the country to be questioned.

Laws are different in every country.

The odd thing is, he fled to the UK from Sweden and now that he's attempted 10 to 20 times in UK courts not to be sent to Sweden for the questioning about raping the women but failed to get that approved.

He's now trying to flee to another country that doesn't have Interpol connections and thus doesn't have to be sent to Sweden all seems a bit strange to me.

This is someone who's saying information has to be free and everything has to be known about everything but just not about him raping a couple of girls because that'd be bad or not wanted to be known.

For someone who's saying it was all consented to is pretty damn scared of being sent to jail for rape.

Forget about all the US BS, that's a side issue.

Oh as for the UK not being able to bust the doors down lol, they have already done it back in the 70's when some terrorists were holding a place to ransom.


Even if he did get into a bag the UK will just send up some fighters and force the plane or boat to land in the UK some where.

Just because he posted up leaked emails and stuff still doesn't make him above the law.

---

Mostly because the likely hood of it being true is rather low.

---

How would you know, it's a bit like MJ is he a pedafile or not many people do think he is one, if you talk to the staff they don't want to talk about it or know that him and a kid are in a room for many hours together with no one allowed in or out, but that doesn't always mean something happened or not.

It's all hearsay.

but hey maybe the women didn't like it or didn't want to have sex with him and have decided to goto the cops anyway, they can do that, whether he likes it or not.

bu much like MJ so far he's left Sweden when the cops where chasing him, now that the London cops are after him he suddenly wants to leave the UK too.

So the chances of it really being rape mustn't be that low after all, because if he could prove it wasn't rape then why is he running from the cops all of a sudden.

---

Interpool, even most countries are not going to waste time exporting a possible raspiest.(unless there is a nice body count or raped over a few hundred women then hes not a possible raspiest). You are fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by xtago:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Surely Assange WILL go to Sweden voluntarily to be tried, (for he had sex with consent and nothing to fear if honesty is applied), PROVIDED UK, Sweden and USA grant him a Non-Extradition Order. The order to cover him leaving UK, entering Sweden and being allowed to migrate to Ecuador freely, (if and when and after, he had his possible punishment in Sweden...)

But,
Hey he is not charged yet - not in Sweden, nor in the USA.

It seems Sweden, the UK and the USA do indeed have ulterior motives.....
FOR:
If they do NOT intend to follow what is feared by Assange (that he will be extradited to the US), then WHAT is there against granting him a Non-Extradition agreement?

So far Assange is right and Bravo to Ecuador!

---

Not charged but is a wanted person by the Swedish police for the questioning of raping 2 women.

For which he hasn't answered and has only ran away so far.

So far the US haven't charged him either and he's in the UK who could just send him to the US and could have done that many months ago he was in a house in London for a year so before spending 2 months with the Ecuador people, if the US wanted him to charge him they could have done it already.

Anyway the US already got the right person that was that bradley guy you know the one.... the person in the army who actually copied the emails and stuff and gave it to assange to post up.

So it's just Assange BS people so he doesn't end up in sweden, that's all it is.

---

Or more likely it being true is rather low.

---

SORRY!

But you guys BOTH miss the issue!

IF Sweden now want him to return - after 1st) NOT charging him, 2nd) NOT stopping him from leaving the country and 3rd) only make an issue, by demanding his return, when he is in the UK - THEN what stops SWEDEN from giving him the GUARANTEE that he will not be extradited to the USA or ANYWHERE else against his wish?

Can't you guys read? Give an answer to my WHAT question, or are you both purposely trying to bury my remarks with CRAP?


The ONLY - TRUE- question that remains is WHAT withholds the Swedes from NOT granting him his guarantee? All the other issues you and others bring forward have NO bearing on this actual case. (You are NOT the judge and you do NOT have all the facts! It is all hearsay, or Newspaper news (or manipulation?) from one side or the other).

THE issue is WHY THEY (UK and SWEDEN, and even the USA) do not want to give the only thing that matters - A GUARANTEE of NON-EXTRADITION).

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by xtago:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Surely Assange WILL go to Sweden voluntarily to be tried, (for he had sex with consent and nothing to fear if honesty is applied), PROVIDED UK, Sweden and USA grant him a Non-Extradition Order. The order to cover him leaving UK, entering Sweden and being allowed to migrate to Ecuador freely, (if and when and after, he had his possible punishment in Sweden...)

But,
Hey he is not charged yet - not in Sweden, nor in the USA.

It seems Sweden, the UK and the USA do indeed have ulterior motives.....
FOR:
If they do NOT intend to follow what is feared by Assange (that he will be extradited to the US), then WHAT is there against granting him a Non-Extradition agreement?

So far Assange is right and Bravo to Ecuador!

---

Not charged but is a wanted person by the Swedish police for the questioning of raping 2 women.

For which he hasn't answered and has only ran away so far.

So far the US haven't charged him either and he's in the UK who could just send him to the US and could have done that many months ago he was in a house in London for a year so before spending 2 months with the Ecuador people, if the US wanted him to charge him they could have done it already.

Anyway the US already got the right person that was that bradley guy you know the one.... the person in the army who actually copied the emails and stuff and gave it to assange to post up.

So it's just Assange BS people so he doesn't end up in sweden, that's all it is.

---

Or more likely it being true is rather low.

---

SORRY!

But you guys BOTH miss the issue!

IF Sweden now want him to return - after 1st) NOT charging him, 2nd) NOT stopping him from leaving the country and 3rd) only make an issue, by demanding his return, when he is in the UK - THEN what stops SWEDEN from giving him the GUARANTEE that he will not be extradited to the USA or ANYWHERE else against his wish?

Can't you guys read? Give an answer to my WHAT question, or are you both purposely trying to bury my remarks with CRAP?


The ONLY - TRUE- question that remains is WHAT withholds the Swedes from NOT granting him his guarantee? All the other issues you and others bring forward have NO bearing on this actual case. (You are NOT the judge and you do NOT have all the facts! It is all hearsay, or Newspaper news (or manipulation?) from one side or the other).

THE issue is WHY THEY (UK and SWEDEN, and even the USA) do not want to give the only thing that matters - A GUARANTEE of NON-EXTRADITION).

---

Not really ignoring you, you are just taking a very long and winded path across a mountain instead of walking 10 feet over to where you what to go.

Without the rape charges the Swedes can not get him, yes or no? Then if the Swedes can not get him neither can the US.

Its all about who can get him for further prosecution.

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

chances are they wont follow through with the rape charges.they will keep him in custody and extradite him as soon as they can.

@xboxdvl2

Exactly!

But IFF (Mathematically speaking) "THEY" are honest and sincere and try Assange for Rape only, THAN the Guarantee MUST come!

So far the guarantee is not offered, hence Assange's ONLY solution is the Embassy of Ecuador.

Where the book closes....,

with TWO culprits and NO final - for YOU to decide who is the "little" culprit - and for THEM (or us) to decide WHO should really be on trial!

Originally posted by xboxdvl2:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

chances are they wont follow through with the rape charges.they will keep him in custody and extradite him as soon as they can.

---

Exactly!

But IFF (Mathematically speaking) "THEY" are honest and sincere and try Assange for Rape only, THAN the Guarantee MUST come!

So far the guarantee is not offered, hence Assange's ONLY solution is the Embassy of Ecuador.

Where the book closes....,

with TWO culprits and NO final - for YOU to decide who is the "little" culprit - and for THEM (or us) to decide WHO should really be on trial!

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

UUmmmm they have everything to hide and want to hand him over to the US...... how is this not very very very very obvious?

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

UUmmmm they have everything to hide and want to hand him over to the US...... how is this not very very very very obvious?

---

And thus as Paul already prophesied in 1972, he had to run...

As Rosie of London double crossed him and is the talebearer!

see: www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/theroyaltenenbaums/meandjuliodownbytheschoolyard.htm

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

UUmmmm they have everything to hide and want to hand him over to the US...... how is this not very very very very obvious?

---

And thus as Paul already prophesied in 1972, he had to run...

As Rosie of London double crossed him and is the talebearer!

see: www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/theroyaltenenbaums/meandjuliodownbytheschoolyard.htm

---

And here I thought I spoke all the jibberish here. ^_~!

Originally posted by xtago:

---

He hasn't been charged probably because Swedish law needs him to be in the country to be questioned.

---

Actually they don't and the Swedish Police and legal authorities have a long history of travelling to other countries to interview & question 'special case' suspects.....funny how, despite many offers they have flatly refused to do so in this case.

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

Excuse me but Why should Sweden make such a legal concoction? WhoTF is Asange to be entitled to such a thing?!? As far as Sweden is concerned Asange is simply a suspect in a rape investigation.
And don't give me that conspiracy crap about US out to get Asange. In Sweden of all places - we all know that ppl disappear every day in Sweden...

Originally posted by DancingWD:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

Excuse me but Why should Sweden make such a legal concoction? WhoTF is Asange to be entitled to such a thing?!? As far as Sweden is concerned Asange is simply a suspect in a rape investigation.
And don't give me that conspiracy crap about US out to get Asange. In Sweden of all places - we all know that ppl disappear every day in Sweden...

---

whoo hoo,they gonna be all over you on this one.well,at risk of being called an idiot sheep again,i totally agree here.if you all need a "cause celebe",you could have picked a better one than this.and to further fuel this idiot debate i will say that the moron should be handed over to the us.like was said in an earlier post,some things should be done in secrecy.just how would some of you bleeding hearts feel if someone serving in a foreign country lost their life as a result of his leaked info?again,he is not a freaking martyr.he is not a hero,and he sure isnt worth the time and arguement ive seen here.as for being an idiot sheep,i would rather be that than some loony conspiracy theorist.fire away folks,this is the last time i waste my time in this pointless,winnerless,debate.

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

1) By both international and the individual countries' involved (US, UK, Sweden, Ecuador) laws, embassies *are NOT* subject to the laws of the territories they reside in; they are small bits of another sovereign nation.

2) Julian Assange *has NOT* actually been charged with any crime. Furthermore, one of his accusers has retracted her initial statment, saying she was pressured into it by the other woman "out of spite".

3) The US damn well wants Assange's ass, for exposing all sorts of underhanded chicanery on our part. It's been conveniently ignored by all of the official parties, that many of the documents exposed by WikiLeaks show malfeasance on a rather large scale, that violates both US and international law.

So, it's OK to extradite someone for "questioning", eh? How come they refused to "question" Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy..? Well? What question couldn't be answered there, as well as it could be answered in Sweden?!

This is all a rather transparent ploy to smear Assange, nothing more, and get him into US clutches, so he can be effectively silenced.

---

Well said.

Originally posted by aldan:

---

Originally posted by DancingWD:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

Excuse me but Why should Sweden make such a legal concoction? WhoTF is Asange to be entitled to such a thing?!? As far as Sweden is concerned Asange is simply a suspect in a rape investigation.
And don't give me that conspiracy crap about US out to get Asange. In Sweden of all places - we all know that ppl disappear every day in Sweden...

---

whoo hoo,they gonna be all over you on this one.well,at risk of being called an idiot sheep again,i totally agree here.if you all need a "cause celebe",you could have picked a better one than this.and to further fuel this idiot debate i will say that the moron should be handed over to the us.like was said in an earlier post,some things should be done in secrecy.just how would some of you bleeding hearts feel if someone serving in a foreign country lost their life as a result of his leaked info?again,he is not a freaking martyr.he is not a hero,and he sure isnt worth the time and arguement ive seen here.as for being an idiot sheep,i would rather be that than some loony conspiracy theorist.fire away folks,this is the last time i waste my time in this pointless,winnerless,debate.

---

I am fine with that, as corruption will take more lives and cause more strife without risky leaks to balance the sausage making machine some.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

I am fine with that, as corruption will take more lives and cause more strife without risky leaks to balance the sausage making machine some.

---

Don't be "too" harsh on the lad. We all know there is going to be corruption. As was said somewhere by someone wiser than I, "it is just a matter of being & there just ain't no changing it...", but good men turning a blind eye & doing nothing; now that's when it becomes worse than criminal.

Let's hypothetically ask the question, "say" (a bit out of context, but keeping with the Assange business) Assange leaked one of the missions I went on (or was supposedly going on).

I personally don't give a shit whether you believe me or not, but one of those "government infringements" brought a few war criminals to justice (2 more years, 20 year silence clause). If that information got out & crippled the mission 1, I'd be dead. 2, atrocities might still be going on or possibly worse, but I don't see how.

AFTER THE FACT!!! Sure, most times let folks in on the story. But I'm not an idiot either... I'm sure your wife/sister/girlfriend/grandmother/aunt would like advanced warning that there is a rapist waiting around the corner so she could avoid the situation. Same can be said of the bulk of government secrets.

The corruption clause starts to rear its ugly head when jerk waters want to micromanage the release of important information that could lead o public safety like it were a sword of control. Obviously those pricks have got to go. But that's NOT what Assange was doing.

Is Assange being treated unfairly? Probably, for equally good reason & for nothing more than he brought upon himself. Like every other idiot money greed attention whore, he bullshat himself into thinking he was doing all this for the good of the public. Facts are, No, he wasn't.

It became a point of vindictiveness & spite. He's poked the Rottweiler with the stick one too many times & now the thing is going for his throat; on a global scale. There are other 'whistle blower' groups out there making waves, but Assange is the one with the biggest bullseye on his forehead; wonder why?

No government is Snow White, so I'm not defending them, not like that. But this little snot isn't the New York Times or Washington Post either. What's his credentials? He's lied with swine & now he wants to complain of pig shit?

I suppose what I'm trying to say is, if he was trying to be Bob Woodward & Carl Bernstein, he's failed miserably. All he's succeeded in doing is wrapping his pathetic ass into a retarded version of Roman Polanski's life. Except Assange isn't a famous director & he's the one who's going to end up being sodomized.

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

I am fine with that, as corruption will take more lives and cause more strife without risky leaks to balance the sausage making machine some.

---

Don't be "too" harsh on the lad. We all know there is going to be corruption. As was said somewhere by someone wiser than I, "it is just a matter of being & there just ain't no changing it...", but good men turning a blind eye & doing nothing; now that's when it becomes worse than criminal.

Let's hypothetically ask the question, "say" (a bit out of context, but keeping with the Assange business) Assange leaked one of the missions I went on (or was supposedly going on).

I personally don't give a shit whether you believe me or not, but one of those "government infringements" brought a few war criminals to justice (2 more years, 20 year silence clause). If that information got out & crippled the mission 1, I'd be dead. 2, atrocities might still be going on or possibly worse, but I don't see how.

AFTER THE FACT!!! Sure, most times let folks in on the story. But I'm not an idiot either... I'm sure your wife/sister/girlfriend/grandmother/aunt would like advanced warning that there is a rapist waiting around the corner so she could avoid the situation. Same can be said of the bulk of government secrets.

The corruption clause starts to rear its ugly head when jerk waters want to micromanage the release of important information that could lead o public safety like it were a sword of control. Obviously those pricks have got to go. But that's NOT what Assange was doing.

Is Assange being treated unfairly? Probably, for equally good reason & for nothing more than he brought upon himself. Like every other idiot money greed attention whore, he bullshat himself into thinking he was doing all this for the good of the public. Facts are, No, he wasn't.

It became a point of vindictiveness & spite. He's poked the Rottweiler with the stick one too many times & now the thing is going for his throat; on a global scale. There are other 'whistle blower' groups out there making waves, but Assange is the one with the biggest bullseye on his forehead; wonder why?

No government is Snow White, so I'm not defending them, not like that. But this little snot isn't the New York Times or Washington Post either. What's his credentials? He's lied with swine & now he wants to complain of pig shit?

I suppose what I'm trying to say is, if he was trying to be Bob Woodward & Carl Bernstein, he's failed miserably. All he's succeeded in doing is wrapping his pathetic ass into a retarded version of Roman Polanski's life. Except Assange isn't a famous director & he's the one who's going to end up being sodomized.

---

Short answer yes, Long answer no.

Sometimes abuse of the system can bring justice but more often than not it brings harm.

The problem with Assange is that even the corrupted system of law can not get him, because he's more innocent IE done less damage to humanity than the countries that want him.

Are his hands clean? No, is he doing it out of the kindness of his heart, hell no. But you know what? At least his hands are still human looking, I can't say that about most governments as they do what they will with all the force and might they can muster just like any for profit organization would.

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Short answer yes, Long answer no.

Sometimes abuse of the system can bring justice but more often than not it brings harm.

The problem with Assange is that even the corrupted system of law can not get him, because he's more innocent IE done less damage to humanity than the countries that want him.

Are his hands clean? No, is he doing it out of the kindness of his heart, hell no. But you know what? At least his hands are still human looking, I can't say that about most governments as they do what they will with all the force and might they can muster just like any for profit organization would.

---

And you're right... My comment's weren't to remove the humanity from the situation despite the fact that my involvement in 'government activities' were with people of less than human qualities. That will be my cross to bear until death.

It's a tough tight wire act to do and it's really funny how they (governments in general) want it all gray when things are to be "hush-hush", but when it comes to filleting someone's ass - yeah, you're right - all of the sudden it starts to become a black & white issue.

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Short answer yes, Long answer no.

Sometimes abuse of the system can bring justice but more often than not it brings harm.

The problem with Assange is that even the corrupted system of law can not get him, because he's more innocent IE done less damage to humanity than the countries that want him.

Are his hands clean? No, is he doing it out of the kindness of his heart, hell no. But you know what? At least his hands are still human looking, I can't say that about most governments as they do what they will with all the force and might they can muster just like any for profit organization would.

---

And you're right... My comment's weren't to remove the humanity from the situation despite the fact that my involvement in 'government activities' were with people of less than human qualities. That will be my cross to bear until death.

It's a tough tight wire act to do and it's really funny how they (governments in general) want it all gray when things are to be "hush-hush", but when it comes to filleting someone's ass - yeah, you're right - all of the sudden it starts to become a black & white issue.

---

Sadly something has to give as governments are not giving an inch when it comes to reporting the truth(not the winners side of it), personal rights and freedoms of expression, even if wiki leaks is an extreme case that's more than likely breaking the rule of law, is it really breaking the spirit?

Its a sad thing when one discovers that 2 wrongs can make a right as the real world always changes the rules of the game as its being played out.

Not much can be done(for much of anything, killing a few humans(good or bad) is point less there are plenty to take their place. You can kill thousands and upset the mindset and regional flow of life but at most we(humanity) only get bad laws from it in the long run see the patriot act and other means to remove or reduce our rights for the sake of false security. You can kill millions and all it creates is infinite sorrow and sadness until the lost ones are forgotten, we say we remember but when it happens time and time again we do little to bring light into the darkness. However one(a focused group with a strict moral goal of bettering humanity, or a super anti hero type luls) can kill the people in charge and shape world by doing so either openly or within the shadows the powers that be will bow to their new master) still those that do will those that live try and survive the impeding cluster fuck.

Humans are such immature and childish things and in another 5 thousand years will shall be no better unless our own nature of greed and self worth be sated.(cheap matter><energy conversion would be a start :P )

Sorry is I am rambling off I know damn well I is a fool LOL

Oh if you enjoy ripping politicians check out my semi new photoshop series no politician left undead.
http://zippydsmlee.deviantart.com/gallery/38588852

I will even take outside the US requests, just give me a name to make a meat puppet out of!! LOL

The thing is every whistle-blower gets told their actions not only are potentially harmful but that they catagorically have, alone & entirely because of what they have done, caused deaths and harm.

They did it with the Pentagon Papers' too.
Almost word for word.

It's the 1st resort every time.
But it doesn't make it true.

Oh.....and one last thing, Assange has said he is more than happy to go to Sweden to answer these allegations.

On condition there will not be any subsequent extradition to the USA.

That assurance has never been given and it is that which lies at the heart of all of this fuss.

Throw in the Swedish authorities refusal to interview abroad (when they have done so several times in the past) and it is pretty clear why people think this is all one big political game.

Political justice might not matter to some (but only when it suits them, naturally) but for many of us it is anathema we ought not tollerate, even when we don't necessarily like the outcomes.
The alternative is to be less free.....and what sort of nut chooses that?

The problem with the trip to Ecuador will be getting his massively swollen head through the embassy door.

Originally posted by attar:

---

The problem with the trip to Ecuador will be getting his massively swollen head through the embassy door.

---

Will it even fit in the country?

I suppose that's why he chose Ecua-dor.

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

The simple answer is....

Since when has the US said they even want to charge Assange?

As I said before the US could have had him arrested via Interpol when he was in Sweden, that didn't happen.

Again the US could have had him arrested in the UK via Interpol again.

Has that happened?

Yet people are worried about him being sent to the US even though the UK is going to send him to Sweden no matter what he wants to think or say.

If the US wanted him arrested it would have happened years ago.

he's just doing the usual crim thing oh it wasn't me yet I'll flee every country that wants to arrest me.

The US story is just that a story, he thinks he is important to the US government but the US government just couldn't care about him, so he lives in a dreamland where the US is some how only allowed to arrest him in Sweden if he re-enters Sweden and only Sweden can arrest him and send him to the US.

give me a break.


Apparently he F**ked a chick or while she/they were sleeping.

That's why Sweden want him.

Plus he was in Sweden yet wouldn't let the police question him, then sneaked out of Sweden 1 1/2 years ago and suddenly ended up in the UK.

Which the Sweden police wanted him arrested the UK police did that.

He got bail but doesn't have a passport as the UK courts held it because he's a flight risk, for sneaking out of Sweden, and spent the last year trying not to be sent off to Sweden for questioning by Sweden police.

Once he got the hint that the UK really where going to send him to Sweden, he suddenly goes into the Ecuador embassy and claims the US government really truly are after him and only Sweden can arrest him and send him to the US government for wikileaks trial.

Even though all the countries he's been in since the whole wikileaks thing he could have been arrested and sent to the US.

People really are sheep if they do believe his story.

Read up in the news of the whole history will show up all the utter BS in his story, it's just so he doesn't end up in prison in Sweden for really raping chicks while they where sleeping.

Originally posted by xtago:

---

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Now if these Rape Charges ARE fabricated?

THEN the ONLY question remaining is my Long and UNWINDING road!

The SOLE question is: Where is the Non-Extradition Guarantee? if "THEY" have nothing to hide!

Give me a well founded answer to THAT!

---

The simple answer is....

Since when has the US said they even want to charge Assange?

As I said before the US could have had him arrested via Interpol when he was in Sweden, that didn't happen.

Again the US could have had him arrested in the UK via Interpol again.

Has that happened?

Yet people are worried about him being sent to the US even though the UK is going to send him to Sweden no matter what he wants to think or say.

If the US wanted him arrested it would have happened years ago.

he's just doing the usual crim thing oh it wasn't me yet I'll flee every country that wants to arrest me.

The US story is just that a story, he thinks he is important to the US government but the US government just couldn't care about him, so he lives in a dreamland where the US is some how only allowed to arrest him in Sweden if he re-enters Sweden and only Sweden can arrest him and send him to the US.

give me a break.


Apparently he F**ked a chick or while she/they were sleeping.

That's why Sweden want him.

Plus he was in Sweden yet wouldn't let the police question him, then sneaked out of Sweden 1 1/2 years ago and suddenly ended up in the UK.

Which the Sweden police wanted him arrested the UK police did that.

He got bail but doesn't have a passport as the UK courts held it because he's a flight risk, for sneaking out of Sweden, and spent the last year trying not to be sent off to Sweden for questioning by Sweden police.

Once he got the hint that the UK really where going to send him to Sweden, he suddenly goes into the Ecuador embassy and claims the US government really truly are after him and only Sweden can arrest him and send him to the US government for wikileaks trial.

Even though all the countries he's been in since the whole wikileaks thing he could have been arrested and sent to the US.

People really are sheep if they do believe his story.

Read up in the news of the whole history will show up all the utter BS in his story, it's just so he doesn't end up in prison in Sweden for really raping chicks while they where sleeping.

---

Then why was Augusto Pinochet not extradited from the UK, when the WHOLE g*d*med world was screaming for him to be returned to Chile and face justice?
UK's Iron Ladyship and her entourage protected him, just like it is now protecting the behind the back activities of our well known brethren! There are still 300 charges outstanding for him to be tried on, if only he he hadn't kicked the bucket in 2006. And all that in the name of the NWO.

@ xtago: I find it very hard to believe the account of a "sex worker" (translation: "hooker") who has had her story completely compromised by her co-accuser. I notice you keep avoiding addressing this issue.

YOU, on the other hand, have already convicted Julian Assange in your mind. Of the two of us, I believe my position holds more water.

why doesnt he just hide in her thighs link

I just very happy that Julian Assange always been 2 or 3 steps ahead front the "Gang Club" (U.S. Sweden & UK); that never wanted this to became an international issue.

Now, I just LMAO:
UK, USA & Sweden end up like "El Perro de las 2 tortas"

Originally posted by Mrguss:

---

I just very happy that Julian Assange always been 2 or 3 steps ahead front the "Gang Club" (U.S. Sweden & UK); that never wanted this to became an international issue.

---

I don't necessarily give him that much credit & yes he IS creating an international incident. As a matter of fact I believe it is his megalomania that actually thrives on it.

My interests morbidly lie on the follow up issue of 'what he will do once this escapade is over'? Nothing will top it.

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

Originally posted by Mrguss:

---

I just very happy that Julian Assange always been 2 or 3 steps ahead front the "Gang Club" (U.S. Sweden & UK); that never wanted this to became an international issue.

---

I don't necessarily give him that much credit & yes he IS creating an international incident. As a matter of fact I believe it is his megalomania that actually thrives on it.

My interests morbidly lie on the follow up issue of 'what he will do once this escapade is over'? Nothing will top it.

---

I dunno there's no telling what will end him.

@ZippyDSM & @LordRuss

He will be another "Pirate-Bay"
He will keep going with wherever he believe, until he get kill [Hope Not] by a Too-Patriotic Govt. Official or Corp. Greedy U.S. Elite-Contractor baster.

Why the Western Media Hate Julian Assange:
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/...ssange_20120823

Originally posted by Mrguss:

---

@ZippyDSM & @LordRuss

He will be another "Pirate-Bay"
He will keep going with wherever he believe, until he get kill [Hope Not] by a Too-Patriotic Govt. Official or Corp. Greedy U.S. Elite-Contractor baster.

---

Originally posted by Mrguss:

---

@ZippyDSM & @LordRuss

He will be another "Pirate-Bay"
He will keep going with wherever he believe, until he get kill [Hope Not] by a Too-Patriotic Govt. Official or Corp. Greedy U.S. Elite-Contractor baster.

---

Originally posted by Mrguss:

---

@ZippyDSM & @LordRuss

He will be another "Pirate-Bay"
He will keep going with wherever he believe, until he get kill [Hope Not] by a Too-Patriotic Govt. Official or Corp. Greedy U.S. Elite-Contractor baster.

---

Originally posted by Mrguss:

---

@ZippyDSM & @LordRuss

He will be another "Pirate-Bay"
He will keep going with wherever he believe, until he get kill [Hope Not] by a Too-Patriotic Govt. Official or Corp. Greedy U.S. Elite-Contractor baster.

---

I bet he will screw up and be jailed or killed for it more than for wikileak stuff. LOL

Originally posted by Mrguss:

---

@ZippyDSM & @LordRuss

He will be another "Pirate-Bay"
He will keep going with wherever he believe, until he get kill [Hope Not] by a Too-Patriotic Govt. Official or Corp. Greedy U.S. Elite-Contractor baster.

Why the Western Media Hate Julian Assange:
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/...ssange_20120823

---

MrGuss

EXCELLENT article! with plenty links to cement the arguments raised by Greenwald. This finalizes all stupid comments used here (above and below).
Am also flabbergasted how many commentators of Greenwald's article are misinformed (possibly brainwashed) and unable to make a clear judgement of their own.
Already here I found people can't read comprehensively and keep drumming their false arguments ad infinitum.

Originally posted by Owled:

---

Originally posted by Mrguss:

---

@ZippyDSM & @LordRuss

He will be another "Pirate-Bay"
He will keep going with wherever he believe, until he get kill [Hope Not] by a Too-Patriotic Govt. Official or Corp. Greedy U.S. Elite-Contractor baster.

Why the Western Media Hate Julian Assange:
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/...ssange_20120823

---

MrGuss

EXCELLENT article! with plenty links to cement the arguments raised by Greenwald. This finalizes all stupid comments used here (above and below).
Am also flabbergasted how many commentators of Greenwald's article are misinformed (possibly brainwashed) and unable to make a clear judgement of their own.
Already here I found people can't read comprehensively and keep drumming their false arguments ad infinitum.

---

And yet they breed & drive cars, most of them...

http://news.yahoo.com/ecuador-says-brit...-234954701.html

This political version of Snookie needs to be shelved. Journalism is one thing, illegal wiretapping (which is what he is/was doing) is what they're really going after after him for.

It's not like he 'just happened' upon some classified government documents & reported them to the public here as the earlier link seems to want to glamorize. He is justifiably allowed due process, but hero to the public? Mmmm, I don't think so.

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

This political version of Snookie needs to be shelved. Journalism is one thing, illegal wiretapping (which is what he is/was doing) is what they're really going after after him for.

It's not like he 'just happened' upon some classified government documents & reported them to the public here as the earlier link seems to want to glamorize. He is justifiably allowed due process, but hero to the public? Mmmm, I don't think so.

---

I still say at the end of the day it all balances out.

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

I am fine with that, as corruption will take more lives and cause more strife without risky leaks to balance the sausage making machine some.

---

Don't be "too" harsh on the lad. We all know there is going to be corruption. As was said somewhere by someone wiser than I, "it is just a matter of being & there just ain't no changing it...", but good men turning a blind eye & doing nothing; now that's when it becomes worse than criminal.

Let's hypothetically ask the question, "say" (a bit out of context, but keeping with the Assange business) Assange leaked one of the missions I went on (or was supposedly going on).

I personally don't give a shit whether you believe me or not, but one of those "government infringements" brought a few war criminals to justice (2 more years, 20 year silence clause). If that information got out & crippled the mission 1, I'd be dead. 2, atrocities might still be going on or possibly worse, but I don't see how.

AFTER THE FACT!!! Sure, most times let folks in on the story. But I'm not an idiot either... I'm sure your wife/sister/girlfriend/grandmother/aunt would like advanced warning that there is a rapist waiting around the corner so she could avoid the situation. Same can be said of the bulk of government secrets.

The corruption clause starts to rear its ugly head when jerk waters want to micromanage the release of important information that could lead o public safety like it were a sword of control. Obviously those pricks have got to go. But that's NOT what Assange was doing.

Is Assange being treated unfairly? Probably, for equally good reason & for nothing more than he brought upon himself. Like every other idiot money greed attention whore, he bullshat himself into thinking he was doing all this for the good of the public. Facts are, No, he wasn't.

It became a point of vindictiveness & spite. He's poked the Rottweiler with the stick one too many times & now the thing is going for his throat; on a global scale. There are other 'whistle blower' groups out there making waves, but Assange is the one with the biggest bullseye on his forehead; wonder why?

No government is Snow White, so I'm not defending them, not like that. But this little snot isn't the New York Times or Washington Post either. What's his credentials? He's lied with swine & now he wants to complain of pig shit?

I suppose what I'm trying to say is, if he was trying to be Bob Woodward & Carl Bernstein, he's failed miserably. All he's succeeded in doing is wrapping his pathetic ass into a retarded version of Roman Polanski's life. Except Assange isn't a famous director & he's the one who's going to end up being sodomized.

---

That was pretty well said, could not have done better myself.

Originally posted by FredBun:

---

That was pretty well said, could not have done better myself.

---

I probably could have been a little less wordy. I have a feeling the regulars in hear start to run when they see one of my longer rants or explanations.

I on the other hand, revel in a well thought out piss-a-thon rather a juvenile spat of a 1-2 sentence cryptic smartass ism.

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

Originally posted by FredBun:

---

That was pretty well said, could not have done better myself.

---

I probably could have been a little less wordy. I have a feeling the regulars in hear start to run when they see one of my longer rants or explanations.

I on the other hand, revel in a well thought out piss-a-thon rather a juvenile spat of a 1-2 sentence cryptic smartass ism.

---

Bah look at what happens when I start drooling for long periods of time? Everyone leaves the forum :P

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:

---

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

Originally posted by FredBun:

---

That was pretty well said, could not have done better myself.

---

I probably could have been a little less wordy. I have a feeling the regulars in hear start to run when they see one of my longer rants or explanations.

I on the other hand, revel in a well thought out piss-a-thon rather a juvenile spat of a 1-2 sentence cryptic smartass ism.

---

Bah look at what happens when I start drooling for long periods of time? Everyone leaves the forum :P

---

I still read! Sometimes you're so thorough I simply have nothing to reply... yeah I know, Russ with no comment? Say it isn't so...

And how the hell did I get away with using the wrong "here"!?!

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

And how the hell did I get away with using the wrong "here"!?!

---

Not everyone is a spelling/grammar Nazi. If I can understand you without straining my eyes or brain, that's sufficient.

Originally posted by Interestx:

---

Rape keeps being mentioned in this case and yet rape is not part of the Swedish allegations, why is that?

Politically motivated?

---

Really? Hard to take you seriously if you are willingly ignorance of the facts.


link

Go read the actual Swedish accusation. It's listed as a "potential sexual assault", not rape.

Originally posted by Bozobub:

---

Go read the actual Swedish accusation. It's listed as a "potential sexual assault", not rape.

---

Well then you're simply trying to be divisive and argumentative to get the focus off Assange it seems, why? Not sure but clear you don't want to pay attention to the facts at hand. Show me credible legally accepted definition where "Sexual Assault" does not include rape. Given the link i provided earlier where a women is saying she was raped in my other post it is clear the intent of the charges are concerning rape. 6 or half dozen rape is considered sexual assault. Common people might way say rape, but the legal terminology in court would be sexual assault, rape is only one thing of many things that might be considered sexual assault. Or if you wish, he is being sought for sexual assault because he raped some women. Same difference.

Might want to consider this:

Quote:

"But the emotional trauma can be worse than any physical injury. The lives of women who are raped are forever changed. Victims say they will never be the same, that it feels like dying. Even if they have not been physically harmed, women who have been sexually assaulted often suffer from long-term psychological and physical health problems."


Seems cruel to take something which should be pleasurable for a person away to make it traumatizing, hell i know enough women if i want to get laid i can call and they would willingly do it.