I'm all for everyone being treated the same. That's why it wears my patience thin when somene wanted for questioning regarding sexual assault gets to hide in an embassy and foul up the justice system because he thinks he's special.

If the tinfoil hats are really needed, and the black helicopters descend upon Assange once he sets foot in Stockholm, and the allegations against have been shown to be constructed and false - then I'll be happy to say that he's been the victim of a coordinated effort. But I've seen nothing to suggest that this is the case.

The fact that he's ticked off the US and others merely means that any proceedings against him will have great media scrutiny, which doesn't in itself prove anything.

That's a rather absolutist point of view for a situation wherein nothing has been proven one way or the other, and the evidence for what you call an intrigue is scant or contrived at best.

I guess distinctions between rape and "rape" are not just left to US Senate candidates these days.

Nevermind that the allegations don't translate to rape, more to sexual assault. Or possibly "sexual assault", depending on your point of view I guess.


And these "certain states and actors" have certainly been efficient, swift, and organised in this effort. I mean, it's only taken a couple of years to get him into a nasty diplomatic messs with multiple countries, legal systems, defendants and plaintiffs, interlocking jurisdictions and levels upon levels of appeals process. Whatever plan they've got going on, it's certainly elegant.

Those of you who blindly believe that laws mus always considered as the only valid standard just because they are what they< are, might want to consider this this:

http://justice4assange.com/Sexual-Offences.html

The problem is most present in Sweden, but not just there. Massive lobbying against man in general - from minimising fathers rights to prosecution of alleged rape by males - have led to sometimes dramatic and very suspicous changes in statistics numbers throughout many countries of the EU where the gender engineering lobby runs strong. Interestingly, vilence commited by women, and rape attack committed by women get almost zero attention, although they run in parts almost as high as that committed by males! Feminism , gender engineering, educational collectivism, criminalizing criticism of migration, migration policies and religion, relativising of the family institution - you cannot seperate these things and consider them to be isolated parallel tendencies, you just cannot, they are all symptoms and pojects of one greater trend. They get pushed and brought forward by one and the same political camp/lineage/thinking school, call it what you want. Needless to say, it's the camp I am totally and completely at war with. I would feel ashamed if I were not.

We have had another story in germany that just illustrates this. Before the case of Strauss-Kahn in New York took place - mind you, over claims of rape which were later shown to be lied, he was taken out of political action at a time when he was about to head decison making processes that by the likely outcome were strictly opposed by a certain strong political player on the Wetsern end of the Atlantic, well, before that Germany had the case of Jörg Kachelmann. That was a widely known TV weather moderator, and a meterologist who ran his own weather service company and was often to be seen on TV in one of the two major daily news programs over here. He got accused of having raped his ex lover, and got accused by his ex-lover. He went into prison for some months when the investoigatiosn were running, and later the claims were found by a court to be unfounded, the charges were dismissed and he was declared innocent and got released. But his career is in ruins, his company is gone, his reputation destroyed, his future uncertain, the shadow of the doubt always floats above his head wherever he goes. It all went according to the law, and although he was found innocent, his life is in ruins - destroyed by a jealous ex-lover wanting revenge.

She sued him again when he mentioned her real name in public and media. For short time, a court forbid him to do that and stopped the selling of a book where her name was mentioned, this early sentence has meanwhile been reverted, and the book again is on sale.

Our legal systems are so complcuatred and allow so much, that you already can damage and almost destroy othery by justa ccusing them of something. You must not prove anything to be successful in your task.

Now the scandal, that was not taken note of. We have a famous feminist activist over here, Alice Schwarzer. No pleasant person, not at all, and I seem to not be alone with this assessment, I dispise her very much. Still the media and politicians fall on their knees in her presence. She observed the process against Kachelmann and from day one reported in a highly suggestive, highly biased manner until the court ordered her to be banned, she was still declaring his guilty on the grounds of that he was accused of a crime. For her, and she defended that view on sev eral media occasions, a male accused of rape should be sentenced for rape no matter whether it can be proven or not, just because he gets accused of rape. The accusation itself becomes evidence that should be sufficient to prove the guilt. That is a terrible distortion. The scandal is: there was almost zero criticism by the media and by people, and no stiff opposition and determined comment from politicians. It was reported several times, and everybody was aware that this was taking place - and almost nobody objected to it. It became accepted silently. there were voices attacking her, but they remained to be few, and to be silent.

In the allegations against Assange, one of the claimed victims already has been shown to have lied about her former relations to him. The accusations remain dubious, and foggy, the circumstances unclear, and this for the standards of the very questionable - imo - Swedish laws. I am not the first nor is that report I linked above the first targetting the Swedish legal understanding of "rape".

But for somebody wanting to take Assange out of action by linking him to a sex scandal, the Swedish laws may have been God-sent .

I always said that the US will not forget nor forgive the humbling defeat it suffered from this man, and yes, I say the Us seeks revenge, plain and simple revenge, and where that cannot be had, it at least wants him being taken out of action, so that he is too busy with survival as that he could invest much energy into raising another Wikileaks project. Never again something like this! That is the objective. It does not matter whether or not Assange sits in prison in Britain, Sweden, or America - that one has gotten him in one's fangs and can checkmate him in a prison, no matter where, over just any allegation serving the purpose - this is what it is about. After having maintained Guantanamo since 11 ysears on basis of legal claims that are under heavy fire since as long, one cannot automatically assume that America will handle the case of Assange in a morally and legally unquestionable manner and without signing dirty deals to just checkmate him, this moral superiority argument is not available to the US anymore. And having a sex plot is no practice that would be new to the world of both secret services, or political plots and intrigues.

It stuns me until today that many people not hiding their hostility for Assange, mistake the messenger with the message. Somebody just had launched a thread calling people to vote in the US elections. Assange has ripped some masks off a system of lies and manipulations and scandals and political acts of treachery and betrayal of a whole nation, its people and its armed services, that should make any citizen of the effected nations ashamed of the leaders they have, and should make them demanding politicians and governments and presidents sent on trial. Instead, one calls for electing the very same elite and the very same system again, but one is full of hate and disdain for Assange, although he did these people a service by showing them black on white what those elites supported by people actually did in crimes and misdeeds in the past. that is something I don't get. The crimes were not committed by Assange. He just reported them. The crimes and scandals were done by politicians and governments. Any anger - should be directed at them in the first. Why is it that this is not done?

I do not like Assange as a person. I feel alarmed when seeing his cold eyes, and by descriptions of people who worked for him, he seems to be an extremely unscrupulous, cold-hearted, selfish individual. But I think what he did and what Wikileaks does, is important, and is the right thing to do. And we need more of such revelations and transparency.

I also do not say he is not guilty regarding the sexual claims. I do not know. What I say is that the timing is extremely perfect, and the whole situation and international arrangement of players also is perfect, and that there is plenty of interest of getting him taken out in a plot like this, and all this opportunism and perfection and wonderful timing together is highly suspicious and demands to not just play by the bureaucrats rulebook, a rulebook that if the plot theory is correct has been written by actors pulling the strings in the background. This story stinks so much that I simply refuse to inhale the smoke blindly.

The US already has made huge gains in this match. Assange is running, and is not given the rest to plan a new offensive. His economic basis is very weak, and he likely sooner or later is taken out of action by having him in a Swedish jail , maybe for many years. I do not know if he would get brought to the US, it would be a wiser move by the US to not draw unwanted attention to itself, and instead just leave him rotting in Sweden, and having him plotted again once he is released. If this all is a plot indeed, like I tend to think by an estimated 3:2 chance.

But a plot would be a plot, then. A plot in which the Brits allowed to get abused, and allow British laws getting abused, maybe because the British government thinks it has some bills to settle with Assange, too. Anyhow, the argument that all this just has to be handled according to the law, is to be seen critical, because if I would be right, then that law already has been hijacked and gets abused to turn legal law into illegal abuse of law for conspirator purposes.

And that is also something I do not like: blind trust in laws. Maybe because of history. Because by the laws in germany, what happned here long time ago was all perfectly legal, you now, and many people accused of crimes against humanity and warcrimes, argued they were following oders only, or were just following this precious thing called "law". Such bureaucratic mindset easily can turn into a very inhumane, murderous thing.

So, be a bit more critical of the events around Assange, and the way Sweden and Britain handles them. The Swedes could have had their questioning already, arranged in a diplomatically safeguarded setting, if that would really have been what they wanted. Such arrangements have been done before, why not here? The Swedes are not satisfied with getting their questioning, they want Assange under their control at all cost. Why? This is what in the light of the forestory of all this Wikileaks stuff is a highly valid question, and due to the stakes and interests of all possibly involved actors I do not accept a simply "Because it is the law" as an answer. There is strong reason to take into account that there is more than just what the Swedes and Brits officially make the story appear as. And this is what I want to be included as a consideration.

Or because he thinks it is a plot to catch him off the street, a plot that has nothing to do with the claimed allegations. Just to catch him.

I do not say whether he is guilty or not on the claimed rape charges. What I say is what I have just written in my posting above. That there is plenty of fog, dubious aspects to be taken into account, and a highly suspicious general constellation. As I said, I give the plot theory a probability of 60%, and the aergument he indeed is wanted for sexual charges only wiothout any background interested, 40%.

Even if the probabilities i would see the other way around, they would be such that it is legitimate to take more possibilities into account than just the bureaucrat's extremely limited perspective. For the law, all and evertyhing is just about formalities and bureaucratic rules. And that is a two-edged sword.

So what do Americans have to do with him allegedly raping a Swede, that he refuses to answer to???


Oh I suppose I am daft for asking, since he is some kind of international hero to all the American haters.

Pay for your own UN, without our 75% money and troops we provide.

Eff you foreign unappreciative crapheads. Got awesome social programs because the evil USA pays for your protection. Crap we dont' even got.

*spit*

I know I proxied the eff word, ban me, I do not care anymore, I am sick of being exploited by self entitled euros, who do not know where their bread is buttered, go team up with saudi arabia, or iran you fruits.

Tough, why should you and I pay jim.

Can't pay well get a witch doctor in..Hubbah hubbah yubba yubba woo woo woo.

Probably wont help but there is entertainment value for the embassy staff.

Yubba is in the NHS now? :doh:

But was not your original argument. Your argument was:


There is a difference between someone accused of a crime and someone violating extradition.

I was responding to your original post. In refuting my response you can't just change the premise of your argument.

Get help.

I will get back to you on that one. :har:

@Sky There are no conspiracy theories in this, and I say that having a good understanding of the police and judicial process,in the work of Assange "case" let justice take its course, and it will have an early resolution.

LOL :)

I have.

It hasn't helped.

Pardons and apologies for my harshness. I could have stated it a bit more diplomatic. I am capible of it. The red haze just took me man!

Assange will get what is coming to him soon enough....depending on the outcome said judicial system of course.