So you support Assange and what he did? :hmm2:

I support the cause. And not for sympathy with the man, I do not like him, not personally, and not by the way he dealt with people working for him in his organisation. He is no pleasant personality, it seems. But our governments are so rotten, corrupt and criminal, how could I not support revealing their dirty laundry? I am so serious over this that I cancelled my Paypal and Visacard accounts when both companies bent to US pressure to isolate Wikipedia back then. Blind loyalty to a group of gangsters, or loyalty to a country that goes wrong just because it is that country, has never been my thing. If things stink, then things stink.

Excellent done, quick-witted.

Fair enough...we are all entitled to our opinion but I'm not about to leave my country for one as 'clean' as Ecuador...no thanks.

Better to be an eedjit within a tribe than one looking for one.

Well, that was Assange's decision and must not be of any concern to me. He just tries to escape life-long imprisonment in a US jail. and I think these are not as pleasant as German ones as well.

Online life can be a bitch without Visa or Paypal btw. Have to ask others now, when there is no trustworthy alternative to these two options, but some transfer needs to be done. But it is rare.

Yes, there is a life possible without credit cards. :)

Sooner or later .... or if I should be straight, then are a change in the Assange case, and all this stops to focus, so .... and Sky, will be able to have their cards in peace

Yeah like picking up a shovel or serving burgers, like the rest of us have to do.

A real job, but something tells me an agitator like him only thrives as long as he is seen as a victim/hero, and given a free ride. A man of his personality is most likely unable to hold a real job anyways.

Send me your Paypal and card details and I'll look after them for you :)

Pardon ?

What he did? Who committed the crimes uncovered ?
He did what all free journalists of the world would have done, who stand up for free press, journalism and freedom of speech.
Not that anyone in the Fox- and CNN-brainwashed USA knows what that is or so it seems.
Maybe they should have shot the journalists during the Watergate scandal ?

A government with its secret services committing such crimes in cold blood, does such callous cover-ups while misleading and fooling their own people, is the real traitor and unpatriotic :stare:

Ah, right...we're all entitled to an opinion and a viewpoint I believe.

Now it is a fact that it is about several things, including material that circulated, and that there was a focus on accusations that he was well aware, and it should be said that he got cold feet where they are allegations came to light after the UK and Sweden, which has a co-operation ... the decision to extradite him to Sweden, after the Supreme Court had told he, hence the decision as he was to go to some other "neutral" place.

Nor should he be, that's how it works in Sweden. The questioning first, the charge comes later, much later than in the UK or US system. Regardless of the allegations at hand, Assange is not at the stage of being charged yet. The fact that he hasn't been charged doesn't have nearly the same argumentative relevance as it would in the UK.

How about addressing the actual allegations and not what the law might possibly allow for in theory?

http://www.swedishwire.com/politics/...julian-assange

Those silly Swedes :-?



Again, this has precisely nothing to do with the alleged conduct.

This comes up against the issue of "charging" as before. He's not wanted for something so innocent as "only" questioning; the questioning is part of a process, the end result of which may or may not result in a charge. It's not just a chat and I don't see why it should be held over Skype or any other of Wikileaks's silly suggestions. Neither you nor I could play the same games that he is playing if faced with the same kind of allegations.

I don't see why they should go out of their way to accommodate him, to be honest. His defence team have already misled the UK courts over the extradition matter, Assange has tried to put himself out of the reach of both UK and Swedish law. I don't see the point of extending any particular privilege in this case.

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resource...e-judgment.pdf

It would be a lot more difficult to extradite Assange from Sweden to the US than it would be from the UK, and now any such extradition would still require the consent of the UK government.

Assange has voluntarily reduced his freedom to act by jumping bail and seeking refuge in a political mess that ensures he cannot leave a single building. This is of his own making.

Back then, identity of the claimed victims and manner in which it appeared was put in doubt, and the story told also showed contradictions. I do not get the details together again out of the blue, but back then I only thought: this stinks to heaven, all of it. The whole story is in doubt, as a matter of fact. You may be so kind to believe that a justice system indeed is neutral and untouchable by politics and political manipulation - I am not so naive. Assange fled bail, because it is extremely likely that any questioning according to the rules would have also meant him loosing his freedom. I take it for granted that the decision of any court hearing was pre-written by political lobbying in the background, no matter what he would say and others say. The whole thing is very likely a plot to arrest Assange by the Swedish, NO MATTER WHAT. And if it was like that, then Assange hardly decided to strip himself of any freedom when he jumped bail and fled to the embassy.

You know what a plot is,m do you? And you demand him to play by the rules of the plotters. You expect him, in other words, to act stupid.

This all reminds of what also was tried against Strauss-Khan. Now, Strauss-Khan is a bastard by character, no doubt, and he has surely approached and bullied women in unacceptable ways and manners, on many opportunities. But not on that opportunity over which he was charged, and by wrong allegations of a claimed rape in a Hotel in New York.

The Assange issue stinks. It has "made in the US" written all over it.

And why Britain does not hand him over, when it is easier for them than for the Swedes as you claimed. Well, the Swedish plot was earlier, and it would draw bit too much attention to the dubious backgrounds if the Brits would opportunistically also construct a case to arrest him forever, or send him to the US. That's why they stick with the Swedish railtrack for Assange: via Sweden to the US.

Demanding the target of a plot to play by the rules of the plotters. I don't believe it. That is like expecting an enemy in battle to cooperate with one's own battle plan of how to wipe him out with as little own losses as possible. That would be a very foolish enemy indeed.

Hello Jim,

Well, thanks you for your calm answer, i could almost read the *sigh* after it :) . I guess i went over the top with my post, however .. if a nation or its government conducts a crime, in the best intention or not (ahem), do you think it should rather cover that up than say sorry ?

"A democracy has to defend itself", but if it gets again its own and international law ?
"Right or wrong my country" is also an often-heard proverb, but ...

The Pentagon Papers: "When The New York Times began publishing its series, President Richard Nixon became incensed. His words to National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger included "People have gotta be put to the torch for this sort of thing..." and "Let's get the son-of-a-bitch in jail.""

So you think this would be the right thing to do ? The New York times was too big it seems, but maybe Assange with his now worldwide support is not.

Thanks and greetings,
Catfish