Julian Assange leaving?

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by TarJak

Interesting radio interview with one of Assange's Australia legal team: http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/triplej/..._2014_8_19.mp3

Ignore the bit about Team Australia. It's simple an embarrassment.

Listened to that and found it very interesting. All of it. Firstly it would appear that the charges from Sweden against Julian will be needed to be addressed first and then later the USA gets the bite.

But what really interested me was Abbot's take on "Australia First" with regards to immigrants. To quote him: "You don't migrate to our country unless you want to join our team"

Two questions here:

Is he correct in his statement?

And the second one is:

What is meant by "our team".

Both of Abbot's statements are those that are been questioned by political scientists.

What is the Nation State? Are we today, moving away from cultural, linguistic, ethnic foundations that gave rise to nation states?

In my country our national flag has changed, street names have been changed, cities too, anthem, icons on currency etc, etc. Yes, this has all been brought about by a majority now able to rule itself which no one can challenge - but coming back to Abbot's sentiments this is not about an indigenous populace wronged. This about people WANTING to move to another country and WANTING to change its character.

I hope Harold Wilson wherever he may be is turning in his grave.

[vanjast]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

I (and this is my personal humble opinion) think that the issue here is that while some countries that infringe on personal freedoms do not really deny it (ie it is accepted as normal within that society), USA (and West in general) appears to follow the ideology that forbids such actions.

And hence there is a conflict between the actions of the security services (however justified by valid and present threats they are) and the ideology held by the state (ie where personal freedoms are quaranteed).

That is how it looks like from where I am in any case.

Eggsaxctly.. you said it.

[TarJak]

Unfortunately Jamie, getting a bunch of monkeys to agree on anything is a very unlikely outcome.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by TarJak

Unfortunately Jamie, getting a bunch of monkeys to agree on anything is a very unlikely outcome.

True that.

[Skybird]

^... except when it comes to building spaceships.

[Catfish]

True that ..

However, there are some intelligent people on earth, and there are some who still behave (and have the IQ of) monkeys.
(Sorry monkeys, some of our military leaders, secret service officers or politicians are way below you, by any measure)

So the question is why are those sub-monkeys execptionally often to be met in Secret services, ISIS leaders, politically rightwings and generally in leading positions ?

Why is the rest of mankind, despite their so-called "intelligence", so dumb as to let them do what they want, let them get in those positions and then let them stay there ?

[Jimbuna]

Back OT....I see the figure for this fiasco now reaches £7 million...

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/polit...e-9675157.html

[Tchocky]

If I am accused of sexual assault I don't get to hide in an embassy.

He chose to. That tells me a LOT.

Face your accuser and make your case.

Your job, your "journalism" doesn't matter.

Be the man you tell people you are, or run away.

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

[Skybird]

It was a plot, staged to get hands on him. The question of guilt never played a role.


And you would have been naive enough to voluntarily step into that trap and trust in that the rigged game rules would give you a fair deal...?


Well, then you would have gotten what you asked for.


The way the American side has switche don and off and on accusaitons and pulled new ones out of the hat suddenly - THAT is what tellsa lot.

[STEED]

I hear from the news this rat needs to go to hospital or he will die in prison, bet some folk would like to put that to the test.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/julian-...y-2019-11-25/#

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/index.html

[Catfish]

^ maybe you should change your mind.

Assange made it clear that countries are no longer interested today in legitimate confidentiality, but in the suppression of important information about corruption and crimes.

"A made-up rape allegation and fabricated evidence in Sweden, pressure from the UK not to drop the case, a biased judge, detention in a maximum security prison, psychological torture; and soon extradition to the U.S., where he could face up to 175 years in prison for exposing war crimes."

1. The Swedish Police constructed a story of rape

2. Assange contacts the Swedish judiciary several times to make a statement; but he is turned down

3. When the highest Swedish court finally forced public prosecutors in Stockholm to either file charges or suspend the case, the British authorities demanded: «Dont get cold feet!!»

4. In the UK, violations of bail conditions are generally only punished with monetary fines or, at most, a couple of days behind bars. But Assange was given 50 weeks in a maximum-security prison without the ability to prepare his own defense

5. A prison sentence of 175 years for investigative journalism: The precedent the USA vs. Julian Assange case could set


The states are the real traitors: «A murderous system is being created before our very eyes»
The 'Five eyes' are not the good guys here.

edit: Or anywhere else it seems. The english-speaking race-patriots club of looking down on others

https://www.lawfareblog.com/newly-di...-eyes-alliance

https://www.newcoldwar.org/consortiu...sed-once-more/

[Catfish]

Assange's legal fight to avoid U.S. espionage trial resumes in London (Reuters)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKBN25X10D

Is Wikileaks legal? Obviously, yes. Interesting article:
https://political-economy.com/is-wikileaks-legal/

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Catfish

"A made-up rape allegation and fabricated evidence in Sweden, pressure from the UK not to drop the case, a biased judge, detention in a maximum security prison, psychological torture; and soon extradition to the U.S., where he could face up to 175 years in prison for exposing war crimes."

1. The Swedish Police constructed a story of rape

Not sure what you are basing yourself on, but the story is well known and has been extensively reported on, such as here in your favorite publication:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...assange-sweden

The allegations centre on a 10-day period after Assange flew into Stockholm on Wednesday 11 August. One of the women, named in court as Miss A, told police that she had arranged Assange's trip to Sweden, and let him stay in her flat because she was due to be away. She returned early, on Friday 13 August, after which the pair went for a meal and then returned to her flat.

Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her.


According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.

When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.

On the following morning, Saturday 14 August, Assange spoke at a seminar organised by Miss A. A second woman, Miss W, had contacted Miss A to ask if she could attend. Both women joined Assange, the co-ordinator of the Swedish WikiLeaks group, whom we will call "Harold", and a few others for lunch.

Assange left the lunch with Miss W. She told the police she and Assange had visited the place where she worked and had then gone to a cinema where they had moved to the back row. He had kissed her and put his hands inside her clothing, she said.

That evening, Miss A held a party at her flat. One of her friends, "Monica", later told police that during the party Miss A had told her about the ripped condom and unprotected sex. Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent."

Assange's supporters point out that, despite her complaints against him, Miss A held a party for him on that evening and continued to allow him to stay in her flat.

On Sunday 15 August, Monica told police, Miss A told her that she thought Assange had torn the condom on purpose. According to Monica, Miss A said Assange was still staying in her flat but they were not having sex because he had "exceeded the limits of what she felt she could accept" and she did not feel safe.

The following day, Miss W phoned Assange and arranged to meet him late in the evening, according to her statement. The pair went back to her flat in Enkoping, near Stockholm. Miss W told police that though they started to have sex, Assange had not wanted to wear a condom, and she had moved away because she had not wanted unprotected sex. Assange had then lost interest, she said, and fallen asleep. However, during the night, they had both woken up and had sex at least once when "he agreed unwillingly to use a condom".


Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before."

Assange has confirmed most of the stories, Both the women were somehow involved with Wikileaks. I am not familiar with Swedish law. The issue appears to be not whether the women consented to sex, but consented to sex without a condom.

Other than what Assange and his supporters are claiming, is there any evidence that he was setup or that the Swedish police was manufacturing evidence?

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Von Tonner

Yeeees!!!! Now this pompous self righteous individual will get his comeuppance. Wonder who will get the first bite at him. USA or Sweden?

Really? Assange is a hero.

[Catfish]

All freedom is defined by the cage.