Area for all other political discussion
:sunglasses: 25 % :thumbsup: 8.3 % :grinning: 50 % 🧥 16.7 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By Safe_Timber_Man
Membership Days Posts
#250732
Ah okay, must just be the out and out nutcases that think that then. Either way, all it comes down to is a man is refusing to face allegations of sexual assault, in my opinion. The whole circus around it is bollocks and fuel by conspiracy theories with a topping of anti-US. The black and white of it is he would get a fair trial in Sweden, with the world watching, and he's running away from it.
 
By Malcolm Armsteen
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#251039
He's on the balcony at the moment, reading out a letter from La La Land.
He is constantly making this a political argument about Wikileaks, rather than him being a fugitive from a rape charge...
Dishonest in the extreme.

How must his accusers feel about this circus?

A big part of me thinks that if I volunteer to take on a huge nation in the way he has then I have to expect and deal with their retribution, not run and squeal like the dishonourable coward he has shown himself to be. He is now comparing himself to Bradley Manning, who has been treated badly, but at least has faced up to what he has done and not run away. Showed the courage of his convictions...

He's fucked off now, having said very little. Cynical exercise in attention-seeking.
By Big Rob
#251069
He mentioned Manning I see. Of course the difference between Wikileak's staff and Manning is that Manning signed on a dotted line, effectively promising not to do what he did.

Manning only has himself to blame.

Isn't it the case that it would be just as easy, if not easier, to extradite Assange to the USA from the UK as it would be from Sweden? Yes? No?
By Big Rob
#251071
Well I found this.

http://notesonwikileaks.tumblr.com/post ... fact-sheet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course this could hot air. If not of course....

This would change things if true.
The case against Julian Assange was initially dropped, and deemed so weak it could not warrant investigation. After the intervention of a Swedish politician close to American diplomats, it was revived by a different prosecutor.
Original source.

http://socialistworker.org/2010/12/08/w ... ge-in-jail" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Swedish prosecutors initially brought and then dropped charges against Assange in August. At the time, Chief Prosecutor Eva Finne said in a statement that Assange was "no longer wanted" and "is not suspected of rape." In September, however, the prosecutors revived the allegations. And the hunt for Assange began in earnest this month--not coincidentally timed with the latest release of diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks.

As Mark Stephens noted:

[W]hen you get a situation where the original charges were dropped by the senior-most prosecutor in Sweden, on the grounds that there was not one shred of evidence to even warrant an investigation, and then a politician intervenes a few weeks later and goes to another city and another prosecutor on the same facts, and she begins this kind of witch-hunt, then I think you really have got to worry about the impartiality of the system and the process.
Apparently his case was revived by a woman called Marianne Ny after the initial case was considered too weak.

Oh I don't know about the whole thing IMO. If he ends up in the US after being extradited to Sweden then at least this will show he is right.
 
By Malcolm Armsteen
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#251074
The case isn't down to an individual prosecutor - it went before the body which decides, and they decided there was a case to answer - as Assange's lawyers have admitted on more than one occasion. In fact given what they have said it's hard to see how he could do anything other than plead guilty.

I would trust the socialist worker's opinions on nothing, even the time of day.
By Big Rob
#251081
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:The case isn't down to an individual prosecutor - it went before the body which decides, and they decided there was a case to answer - as Assange's lawyers have admitted on more than one occasion. In fact given what they have said it's hard to see how he could do anything other than plead guilty.

I would trust the socialist worker's opinions on nothing, even the time of day.
As I said I don't know and all of that could be hot air. Socialist Worker wasn't the only place I read that. Admittedly all the places I did read that did seem to have a pro-Assange slant.

As it is I found.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_ ... _Authority" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
On 18 November 2010, prosecutor Marianne Ny asked the local district court for a warrant for the arrest of Assange in order for him to be interviewed by the prosecutor.[22] As he was now living in England, the court ordered him detained (häktad) in absentia.[23][24] On appeal, the Svea Court of Appeal upheld the warrant on suspicion of våldtäkt (rape), olaga tvång (duress/unlawful coercion), and two cases of sexuellt ofredande,[25][26][27][28] which has been variously translated as "sexual molestation",[29] "sexual assault",[30] "sexual misconduct", "sexual annoyance", "sexual unfreedom", "sexual misdemeanour", and "sexual harassment".[31][32][19][26][27] The Supreme Court of Sweden decided not to consider a further appeal as no principle was at stake.[citation needed][33] On 6 December 2010, Scotland Yard notified Assange that a valid European arrest warrant had been received.[34]
Assange has not yet been formally charged with any offence;[35] the prosecutor said that, in accordance with the Swedish legal system, formal charges will be laid only after extradition and a second round of questioning. The High Court found that the Swedish process has reached the stage of criminal proceedings, which would be equivalent to having been charged under English process
Which is missing from a lot of the stuff I have been seeing (pro-Assange stuff). They focus in on Marianne Ny and tend to ignore the Svea Court of Appeal.

As it is, if he did get extradited to Sweden and then the USA then he would have a point. We'll see......
By Big Rob
#251100
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:Read this:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2011/5.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
After a cursory view, it is clear that what actually occurred is somewhat different than what is being presented by the pro-Assange sites.

However one thing stood out.
His reading was that normally there could not be a further surrender to a country outside the European Union but there are exceptions. It would be “completely impossible to extradite Mr Assange to the USA without a media storm”. It is quite right to say that he would not be extradited to the USA.
Yes I agree with that too.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 17
Boris Johnson

Useful idiot Dan Wootton has been charged with tel[…]

The LibDems, generally

Perhaps not she (Wera Hobhouse) and her husband […]

Jeremy "Fucking off" Corbyn.

I wonder what Starmer will do about this? A Labo[…]

Roll Call

Enjoy, Kreuzie - but you know what's coming next[…]