Ecuador would like Julian Assange out of their embassy by the sounds of it.

[Dogsauce]

I thought he’d admitted conduct which under Swedish law is classified as rape anyway? Kind of pointless people denying this happened. Let him face trial and his guilt or innocence established in an open process. This can be supported without accepting the right of the US to extradite, two separate things. He doesn’t get a free pass for ‘poor sexual etiquette’ just because he once exposed wrongdoing.

 

[butchersapron]

I thought he’d admitted conduct which under Swedish law is classified as rape anyway? Kind of pointless people denying this happened. Let him face trial and his guilt or innocence established in an open process. This can be supported without accepting the right of the US to extradite, two separate things. He doesn’t get a free pass for ‘poor sexual etiquette’ just because he once exposed wrongdoing.

Bingo. This is what i find interesting/worrying about this. Over many years and many posts people like me and danny have argued that assange should face the accusations laid against him in sweden. Not that he is guilty but that the claims should be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly. Whilst those who take an opposing view often do so on the grounds that he's manifestly innocent - either nothing happened (which is where this don troomp relic seems to be at) or when they actually read more than few far-right conspiracy sites and realise assange has admitted that it all happened that what happened isn't rape at all.

 

[butchersapron]

Of course, there's a third set who accept his guilt but think that because of wikileaks he shouldn't have to face trial or punishment for the wider good. That he, in fact, gets a good boy rape pass. That is what's actually behind a lot of the thinking of the 2nd group above - not many actually are prepared to openly state it.

 

[rekil]

He originally went to Sweden because he thought their extradition practise was more favourable to him.

2014 article on this. Would Sweden Ever Extradite Assange to the United States?

Sweden’s extradition agreement with the United States, signed in 1961 and updated in 1983, prohibits extradition on the basis of "a political offense" or "an offense connected with a political offense." The agreement does not specify what constitutes a "political offense." Whether the Swedish supreme court would rule to extradite Assange largely depends on what charges the secret U.S. grand jury brings against him.

If Assange is accused of espionage, Sweden most certainly would not comply, as its courts have consistently determined that espionage constitutes a political offense.

The U.S. Justice Department is surely aware of these restrictions and precedents and may instead slap Assange with a more creative set of charges — cyber crime or theft, perhaps.

He would still have some recourse under the Swedish legal system, however. When Assange first went into hiding, Foreign Policy discussed his case with UIf Wallentheim, the director of the division for criminal cases and international judicial cooperation at the Swedish Ministry of Justice. He said that Swedish courts tend to see through such ploys to circumvent Swedish extradition agreements’ exceptions. Swedish judges often examine a case’s underlying factors when making their determinations, he said.

Between dotage and having thrown their lot in with round-the-clock antisemites and assorted conspiraloons some time ago, the opinions of Pilger and Chomsky are quite worthless.

 

[Pickman's model]

I thought he’d admitted conduct which under Swedish law is classified as rape anyway? Kind of pointless people denying this happened. Let him face trial and his guilt or innocence established in an open process. This can be supported without accepting the right of the US to extradite, two separate things. He doesn’t get a free pass for ‘poor sexual etiquette’ just because he once exposed wrongdoing.

perhaps his acolytes should insist he's held to account to prove him worthy of their support

 

[danny la rouge]

2014 article on this. Would Sweden Ever Extradite Assange to the United States?



Between dotage and having thrown their lot in with round-the-clock antisemites and assorted conspiraloons some time ago, the opinions of Pilger and Chomsky are quite worthless.

Pilger lost his way earlier than Chomsky, but it’s been sad to see how thoroughly Chomsky took a wrong turn over Syria. I still have a high regard for a lot of his work, but it’s still clear looking at his foreign affairs work that he relied too much on geopolitical oppositionary explanations and too little on class analysis. That said, Manufacturing Consent remains an important and useful analysis of the media. It still stands up.

 

[Dogsauce]

Bingo. This is what i find interesting/worrying about this. Over many years and many posts people like me and danny have argued that assange should face the accusations laid against him in sweden. Not that he is guilty but that the claims should be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly. Whilst those who take an opposing view often do so on the grounds that he's manifestly innocent - either nothing happened (which is where this don troomp relic seems to be at) or when they actually read more than few far-right conspiracy sites and realise assange has admitted that it all happened that what happened isn't rape at all.

I think the ‘Assange is innocent’ crowd aren’t that far down the ladder from those obsessive Michael Jackson fans who insist, without evidence, he’s wholly innocent. It’s not a good look.

 

[sihhi]

2014 article on this. Would Sweden Ever Extradite Assange to the United States?

Between dotage and having thrown their lot in with round-the-clock antisemites and assorted conspiraloons some time ago, the opinions of Pilger and Chomsky are quite worthless.

Here's a deeper summary than Pilger's:

The Threat to the Media Posed by the Trump Administraion’s Prosecution of Julian Assange

The extradition and prosecution of Julian Assange would post an invitation to other states to follow suit, severely threatening the ability of journalists, publishers and human rights organizations to safely reveal information about serious international issues. If the Trump Administration can prosecute an Australian journalist in Europe for publishing material on the US, why can’t Russia prosecute an American journalist in Washington revealing secrets about Moscow? Why can’t Saudi Arabia prosecute a Turkish journalist for revealing secrets about the Khashoggi murder?

It also has a full reference here:

Judges Hear Warning on Prosecution of WikiLeaks


“I think the prosecution of him would be a very, very bad precedent for publishers,” McCraw said. “From that incident, from everything I know, he’s sort of in a classic publisher’s position and I think the law would have a very hard time drawing a distinction between The New York Times and WikiLeaks.”

McCraw went on to clarify that while Assange employs certain methods that he finds discomfiting and irresponsible, such as dumping unredacted documents revealing the personal information of ordinary people, Assange should be afforded the same protections as a traditional journalist.

“Do I wish journalism was practiced in a certain way, like it is with The New York Times, The Washington Post, or The Wall Street Journal? Of course. But I also think new ways of publishing have their value. Our colleagues who are not only challenging us financially but journalistically have raised an awareness that there are different ways to report,” McCraw said.

“But if someone is in the business of publishing information, I think that whatever privilege happens to apply – whatever extension of the law that would apply – should be there. Because the question isn’t whether he’s a journalist. It’s in that instance was he committing an act of journalism.”

 

[Don Troooomp]

Don Troooomp what happens now is that instead of addressing your queries, you'll be tarred as supporting rape and have shit thrown at you by the same handful of posters that have been doing this for a decade to shut down any opposition and/or discussion.

That does seem to be happening - None discussing or arguing against points as such, more just trolling on in an attempt to derail any thoughts that don't match their own.
None of the above have posted any links to disprove my assertions, and none have managed anything more valid than, "Ya boo, you're wrong".

 

[Pickman's model]

That does seem to be happening - None discussing or arguing against points as such, more just trolling on in an attempt to derail any thoughts that don't match their own.
None of the above have posted any links to disprove my assertions, and none have managed anything more valid than, "Ya boo, you're wrong".

you don't half post some utter shit

 

[Don Troooomp]

He originally went to Sweden because he thought their extradition practise was more favourable to him.

Finding out that was an error so he left

You need to separate out the two things here. The usefulness of the Wikileaks revelations is something that does not have any bearing on his guilt or innocence of rape. It is neither evidence for or against the sexual offence charges.

It does if the rape charges are fabricated, as the tweets suggest they might well be.

That is quite the most crass and clueless remark about rape victims I have ever seen on these boards.

I agree -I was clear I have no clue about the feeling of rape victims - Well spotted - Drrrrr

 

[teqniq]

That does seem to be happening - None discussing or arguing against points as such, more just trolling on in an attempt to derail any thoughts that don't match their own.
None of the above have posted any links to disprove my assertions, and none have managed anything more valid than, "Ya boo, you're wrong".

It's really very simple. If he's a suspect in an alleged rape in Sweden he should stand trial there to prove his innocence or guilt. As for the possibility of extradition to the US, for my part I think this should not happen.

 

[redsquirrel]

It does if the rape charges are fabricated, as the tweets suggest they might well be

Urgh.

--
Crossover here with the crap anti-Trump stuff, politics is twitter threads.

 

[Don Troooomp]

There's no need to say more than ya boo you're wrong to assertions which are themselves simply you going ya boo I'm right

So prove it rather than trolling. Explain exactly why the tweets are useless as evidence, backing that up with useful links to show rape victims commonly (or often) praise their rapist publicly immediately after they've been attacked.
A few examples would be very helpful.

 

[Don Troooomp]

This btw is how it keeps happening.

So explain the tweets she later deleted

 

[Don Troooomp]

Urgh.

--
Crossover here with the crap anti-Trump stuff, politics is twitter threads.

Anti Trump I am, but this lot started long before that fucker got near the white house.
There appears to be a reasonable amount of evidence to suggest the rape allegation was false, but perhaps you can provide evidence to suggest it's real, then explain why the charges were dropped.

 

[Pickman's model]

So prove it rather than trolling. Explain exactly why the tweets are useless as evidence, backing that up with useful links to show rape victims commonly (or often) praise their rapist publicly immediately after they've been attacked.
A few examples would be very helpful.

with every post you make the case for assange proceeding directly to sweden to clear his name better than anyone else. If the case against him is as flimsy as you say I cannot conceive why he locked himself away for seven years.

 

[Spymaster]

Anti Trump I am, but this lot started long before that fucker got near the white house.
There appears to be a reasonable amount of evidence to suggest the rape allegation was false, but perhaps you can provide evidence to suggest it's real, then explain why the charges were dropped.

There is no evidence (at least not posted by you) that suggests the allegations are false. People have explained to you how the tweets may have transpired. The charges were not proceeded with because he hid himself away for 7 years. If he's innocent he should be keen to go and clear his name in a Swedish court. They are probably less likely to extradite him to the US than the UK are.

 

[xenon]

It's really very simple. If he's a suspect in an alleged rape in Sweden he should stand trial there to prove his innocence or guilt. As for the possibility of extradition to the US, for my part I think this should not happen.

^This. I've avoided this thread pretty much but I didn't think we still have people arguing the crap DT is.

So prove it rather than trolling. Explain exactly why the tweets are useless as evidence, backing that up with useful links to show rape victims commonly (or often) praise their rapist publicly immediately after they've been attacked.
A few examples would be very helpful.

Just shut up you odius fool.

 

[DexterTCN]

That does seem to be happening - None discussing or arguing against points as such, more just trolling on in an attempt to derail any thoughts that don't match their own.
None of the above have posted any links to disprove my assertions, and none have managed anything more valid than, "Ya boo, you're wrong".

You'll find no comment or discussion on the very relevant recent commentaries by Pilger or Chomsky or others, a couple which we've posted links to...they're no longer relevant apparently!

 

[teqniq]

It's not so much that they're not relevant, as has already been pointed out Pilger especially has completely lost his way and so has Chomsky to a degree.

 

[Spymaster]

You'll find no comment or discussion on the very relevant recent commentaries by Pilger or Chomsky or others, a couple which we've posted links to...they're no longer relevant apparently!

Do you agree with DT that Assange is not guilty of rape?

 

[Badgers]

Pamela will sort it

Pamela Anderson outraged over arrest of Julian Assange, a 'hero'

 

[butchersapron]

There is no evidence (at least not posted by you) that suggests the allegations are false. People have explained to you how the tweets may have transpired. The charges were not proceeded with because he hid himself away for 7 years. If he's innocent he should be keen to go and clear his name in a Swedish court. They are probably less likely to extradite him to the US than the UK are.

Two things that we need to make utterly clear here once more, as despite being posted over and over they don't seem to be registering with some people. Firstly, the proceedings reached the stage of what has been legally demonstrated to be the equivalent of formal charging in the UK - we are not at position of claims being made and investigations failing to be carried out due to assange running away - we are/were at the stage of him being formally charged after investigations with Unlawful coercion, Sexual molestation, Rape. This is exactly what assange lost repeatedly in court challenging. Secondly, the first two charges were dropped due to the inability to proceed without assange's physical presence in sweden (a legal necessity not necessarily an investigative one) in blocking any progress until the time limit on them was up - not due to anything else at all. They might have run out of time or been dropped either way, but we will never know now because of the actions of assange.

 

[danny la rouge]

None discussing or arguing against points as such, more just trolling on in an attempt to derail any thoughts that don't match their own.

This is just an inability to see viewpoints other than your own as having any validity. You are dismissing valid viewpoints as “trolling”.

This case has been argued about in much detail over the years on these boards. Feel free to read back on the various threads.

However, if you’re really interested in why your comments about alleged rape victims are seen as woefully ill-informed, you might try taking them out of this context and putting them instead into the context of any other high profile rape allegations case.

Take Harvey Weinstein, for example. Why would an intern or employee of Weinstein continue to try to arrange meetings as part of her job after an alleged rape or rape attempt? Why would she, in a PR capacity, publicly refer to company including Mr Weinstein as illustrious or in other glowing terms? Does that necessarily mean any subsequent claims of sexual abuse are false? If you think it does, then I suggest you urgently need to read further on rape and sexual abuse, distressing as that may be. I can suggest some readings I’ve found helpful. I’m sure others are much more well versed on the literature.

As to whether Assange is guilty or not, I’d like to see that tested in court. I don’t think his behaviour has helped either the course of justice or his own case. I have a very low opinion indeed of his behaviour after the charges were made. But that does not mean I know his guilt or innocence.

One more point: the mere fact that his being charged of sexual offences has been useful to the US authorities and disadvantageous to him does not in itself mean the charges are fabricated.

The same is true for example of Alex Salmond. The charges against him are potentially damaging to the cause of Scottish independence and potentially disastrous to his reputation. Both of those things no doubt suit the UK state establishment. But that alone is not evidence the charges are fabricated. That, too, has to be tested in court.

 

[butchersapron]

This is just an inability to see viewpoints other than your own as having any validity. You are dismissing valid viewpoints as “trolling”.

This case has been argued about in much detail over the years on these boards. Feel free to read back on the various threads.

1

2

But...but... she deleted her tweet!

 

[pesh]

Still a cunt then Don.

 

[gosub]

Embassy Cat, Julian Assange's furry friend, appears to be safe - CNN



thread over.

 

[petee]

Yep, but I've since checked and it's on proper sites as well

right, sorry about my tone btw, that came out harsher than i intended.

 

[Wilf]

When he knew the American government were after him - Would you?



I'm happy to say I have no clue as I've never committed that terrible crime, nor have I met any victims I'm aware of. I would imagine it's a very distressing time, and not something a victim would be so happy about in public.

In a single post you admit you haven't got a clue as to how rape victims might process events and then go on to leap in with both feet. FFS, have a word with yourself.