Assange to face extradition

[phildwyer]

especially if they know - as they would after years of surveillance - that their target was a horny old goat who would fuck anything that offered itself to him.

I thınk you may have your honeytraps confused.

 

[belboid]

no I'm repeating the claims as claims - from two alleged victims of several serious alleged sexual assaults that you think should be ignored,

nowhere have i said they should be ignored, so go fuck yourself

arent you SWP, it might explain your attitude to these kinds of offences if you are

again, no, and go fuck yourself

there are sexual assault charges less serious than these prosecuted everyday in the UK courts, have a look in your local paper

it is not a question of 'seriousness' it is a question of actionable evidence, which these cases dont have. So, find me an equivalent case.

 

[smokedout]

And the honeytrap ıs the easıest, oldest and most commonly used method ın the book.

in which case you'll be able to give several credible exmaples of a similar honeytrap operation that has been as complex ie not vanunu where all that was required was to get him over a border

and, as ive pointed out, for all this ingenious spookery, it didnt work, assange is not in a US prison, or even sweden, he is in the bolivian embassy

 

[phildwyer]

Jazzz like post hoc ergo propter hoc there Phil. Water cooler gossip as fact.

Water cooler gossıp from professıonal spıes.

Who have no motıve to lıe to or mıslead each other ın such gossıp.

Who say ın such gossıp that ıt ıs completely fuckıng obvıous to anyone of more than Truxtaesque ıntellıgence that Assange ıs beıng set up.

And who are experıenced and clever enough to know what they are talkıng about, unlıke the varıous fools and knaves here assembled.

 

[smokedout]

it is not a question of 'seriousness' it is a question of actionable evidence, which these cases dont have. So, find me an equivalent case.

two credible victims, corroborating statements from several people around the nature of events and no denial from assange when interviewed under caution, as these kind of cases go, the evidence is pretty strong

 

[phildwyer]

in which case you'll be able to give several credible exmaples of a similar honeytrap operation that has been as complex ie not vanunu where all that was required was to get him over a border

Dude, wıth all the respect ın the world, I'm not goıng to sıt here and prove to you that the honeytrap ıs a commonly-used espıonage technıque.

That ıs an extremely well-known fact.

Just Google ''Mata Harı'' and work backwards from there.

 

[Balbi]

"Yeah, stands to reason he's being setup - s'exactly what would happen if you fucked with the US enough. Stands to reason."

Professional spooks in 'seeing intelligence plots in everything' shocker!

 

[belboid]

in which case you'll be able to give several credible exmaples of a similar honeytrap operation that has been as complex ie not vanunu where all that was required was to get him over a border

lol, and all this required was to get Assange into bed. Nothing particularly complex. Especially as they have probably spied on him for years and know what he's like.

and, as ive pointed out, for all this ingenious spookery, it didnt work, assange is not in a US prison, or even sweden, he is in the bolivian embassy

so, it cant be a plot, because it didnt work??!! Wow, what a daft comment.

 

[belboid]

two credible victims, corroborating statements from several people around the nature of events and no denial from assange when interviewed under caution, as these kind of cases go, the evidence is pretty strong

there was a denial, that is why he wasn't immediately arrested and charged! If he hadn't denied it, he wouldn't have been let go.

(and, all this omits the point that there is still absolutely no need for either of the two women to be a plant anyway. It is simply pointing out that it is plausible and that such events do happen)

 

[TruXta]

What hard evidence exists of a CIA plot? Is there anything at all that isn't hearsay or speculation? Honest question.

 

[JimW]

especially if they know - as they would after years of surveillance - that their target was a horny old goat who would fuck anything that offered itself to him.



See what you bastards have done now?! You've got me agreeing with bloody dwyer. That's twice in a week, I need a lie down.

But haven't you just said "it's not complex, lean on the odd official" but are now back to having the women being complicit to the conspiracy AFAICS.

 

[belboid]

But haven't you just said "it's not complex, lean on the odd official" but are now back to having the women being complicit to the conspiracy AFAICS.

see 1659

 

[Balbi]

also the IM's of GCHQ employees - doesn't automatically mean super spies. Could be the tech guys or anyone

 

[phildwyer]

and, as ive pointed out, for all this ingenious spookery, it didnt work, assange is not in a US prison, or even sweden, he is in the bolivian embassy

No he ıs not.

Agaın wıth all due respect, I don't thınk we should contınue thıs conversatıon untıl you've read up a bıt on espıonage ın general and thıs case ın partıcular.

At the moment ıt's almost lıke talkıng to TruXta, quıte frankly.

 

[cesare]

they did that too.

.

 

[Greebo]

Dude, wıth all the respect ın the world, I'm not goıng to sıt here and prove to you that the honeytrap ıs a commonly-used espıonage technıque.
<snip>
Just Google ''Mata Harı'' and work backwards from there.

They'd do better googling "swallows" (or ravens for the male equivalent) and "cold war".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor.../Russian-spy-a-swallow-came-to-spy-on-us.html
http://sabotagetimes.com/people/katia-zatuliveter-and-the-art-of-the-spy-honey-trap/

 

[JimW]

see 1659

But if they're not a plant/involved then they're making these accusations in good faith, where's the fit up in that? Leaning on prosecutors after the fact when it might not have been pursued would be a separate matter and not what you seemed to be claiming before.

 

[belboid]

But if they're not a plant/involved then they're making these accusations in good faith, where's the fit up in that? Leaning on prosecutors after the fact when it might not have been pursued would be a separate matter and not what you seemed to be claiming before.

uhh, it is what I've claimed before. It is, imo, the more likely explanation. And that would be fitting someone up - what else would you call prosecuting someone when there is insufficient evidence? It is, at the very least, deliberate tarnishing of their name.

But it is also possible that it is wholly and completely a set up, it wouldn't be an especially complex operation, no matter what smokedout says.

 

[phildwyer]

Except the UK and ECHR courts have repeatedly found that the US legal system does not practice torture, nor is to be tried in it persecution.

Phew, that's alrıght then.

You may disagree with them.

Thanks!

But an argument in accordance with the facts has a certain aesthetic appeal which yours lacks.

So I see.

Is Truxtaısm ınfectıous or somethıng?

 

[JimW]

uhh, it is what I've claimed before. It is, imo, the more likely explanation. And that would be fitting someone up - what else would you call prosecuting someone when there is insufficient evidence? ...

Fitting up means made up whole cloth to me. You're essentially saying at worst they pounced on a situation presented ready made, and with sufficient substance that there's not been some massive legal outcry outside Assange camp that it's preposterously thin case. How that's more likely than it being a more straightforward case of accusations made, bit of official shilly-shallying then going ahead with the prosecution I don't see.

 

[belboid]

Fitting up means made up whole cloth to me. You're essentially saying at worst they pounced on a situation presented ready made, and with sufficient substance that there's not been some massive legal outcry outside Assange camp that it's preposterously thin case. How that's more likely than it being a more straightforward case of accusations made, bit of official shilly-shallying then going ahead with the prosecution I don't see.

uhh, there has been a legal outcry from many, but, by definition, the people making it are within the Assange camp, so they can, apparently, be dismissed.

 

[JimW]

uhh, there has been a legal outcry from many, but, by definition, the people making it are within the Assange camp, so they can, apparently, be dismissed.

I won't dismiss them if they can show that it's unprecedented for the Swedish state to prosecute on similar allegations, and AFAIK it isn't.

 

[belboid]

I won't dismiss them if they can show that it's unprecedented for the Swedish state to prosecute on similar allegations, and AFAIK it isn't.

show the precedent then

 

[smokedout]

there was a denial, that is why he wasn't immediately arrested and charged! If he hadn't denied it, he wouldn't have been let go.

all he's ever denied is breaking the condom as far as i know, not the other charges. and dont forget, as well as two very credible statements alleging similar behaviour from the victims and statements from friends and colleagues corroborating what happened before, and after the events, the police could have a whole heap of evidence (and probably do) that we dont know about, all thats been linked is the transcripts from one series of interviews

what evidence do you want in this kind of case? what we know theyve got is as good as it often gets

(and, all this omits the point that there is still absolutely no need for either of the two women to be a plant anyway. It is simply pointing out that it is plausible and that such events do happen)

it's about as plausible as the cia rigging the world trade centre with explosives, the honeytrap examples given are about gathering intelligence, not elaborate conspiracies to frame someone for rape

no intelligence operation in the world would be stupid enough to leave two assets, who in at least one's case only experience of espionage is organising conferences and writing a feminist blog, open to cross examination in a friendly country on a rape charge, particularly where whether they are foreign intelligence agents is likely to form a large chunk of the defence

 

[JimW]

show the precedent then

Can't be arsed, and am sure any absence would have been highlighted when they've bothered with the quibbling over far more minor procedures. But if you show the absence I'll set to Googling.

 

[belboid]

all he's ever denied is breaking the condom as far as i know, not the other charges. and dont forget, as well as two very credible statements alleging similar behaviour from the victims and statements from friends and colleagues corroborating what happened before, and after the events, the police could have a whole heap of evidence (and probably do) that we dont know about, all thats been linked is the transcripts from one series of interviews

what evidence do you want in this kind of case? what we know theyve got is as good as it often gets

drivel which shows you know nothing. There is precious little evidence of rape. And, yes, you can get far far better evidence of abuse than just one persons word. That Assange slept with both of them is not denied, so the 'corroborating evidence' isnt actually corroborating anything. Assange has denied all the serious claims - the condom, using his body weight as a weapon - you know, the things that actually amount to rape. So, the above is just nonsense.

it's about as plausible as the cia rigging the world trade centre with explosives, the honeytrap examples given are about gathering intelligence, not elaborate conspiracies to frame someone for rape

as pointed out earlier, they are not particularly elaborate. Even if it was an elaborate story (which it isnt) that doesnt require an elaborate set up.

'Seduce the horny old goat, get him into bed, then make some shit up - the more complex the better, cos then some eejits will think 'this is so elaborate it cant possibly be a set up!'

no intelligence operation in the world would be stupid enough to leave two assets, who in at least one's case only experience of espionage is organising conferences and writing a feminist blog, open to cross examination in a friendly country on a rape charge, particularly where whether they are foreign intelligence agents is likely to form a large chunk of the defence

yes they would

 

[belboid]

Can't be arsed, and am sure any absence would have been highlighted when they've bothered with the quibbling over far more minor procedures. But if you show the absence I'll set to Googling.

I am sure you know full well that it is impossible to prove an 'absence', so the onus is on you. Or, it is on those who say Assange is guilty already, of whom there are many. But none of whom seem to have found a similar case.

 

[JimW]

I am sure you know full well that it is impossible to prove an 'absence', so the onus is on you. Or, it is on those who say Assange is guilty already, of whom there are many. But none of whom seem to have found a similar case.

No, onus on you making the "extraordinary claim" that the Swedish state wouldn't prosecute on basis of such allegations, when here it is doing just that.

 

[belboid]

No, onus on you making the "extraordinary claim" that the Swedish state wouldn't prosecute on basis of such allegations, when here it is doing just that.

I have looked at every case ever tried in Sweden, they have never prosecuted a case on the same evidential basis.


That is, of course, bollocks, but it is what would be required to fulfill your request. As it is all but impossible to do so, it is a wholly unreasonable request. YOU claim that similar cases have been tried - show me.

 

[cesare]

belboid How is Assange's personal freedom etc more directly beneficial to the working class than holding him accountal for rape/consent issues?