241–250 of 377 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Generally speaking, regardless of what your local laws are, "don't have sex with unconcious people, ever" is a good policy to have as a human being.
Absolutely! But much like protocols (strict in what you emit, liberal in what you accept), reality is complicated and not conforming to a desired standard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's put it this way: If I tell you to take a fiver from my wallet and you do it, that's consensual. If you then later take another fiver out of my wallet without my permission, it's not consensual. If I catch you doing it, I might still be okay with it but that doesn't mean it wasn't non-consensual when you did it.
What if, instead of your wallet, it's a box by the door labeled "cab fare" and it's been previously discussed that this box is there for people in the house, me included, to use when catching a cab to the train?
Come on people. We don't have a lot of information to judge on. But if we are having a debate about the meaning of rape, then we are all side stepping the incredible high chance this is politically motivated nonsense. Nobody had ever been extradited for this sort of thing. Sweden is special in that it enabled it based on a testimony, even after the testimony has been revoked and without the victims pressing charges o…
> So please just don't use the word rape and Assange in the same sentence. It's a disservice to actual victims, whistle blowers and our cultural identity as such. What would you call having sex without a condom with a sleeping person, whom you barely know, when they have not consented to it? Sorta-rape? Kinda-rape? Minor hooliganism? Did we all forget what the point of consent is, or something? Or are we using the me…
> “His attitude is that he is happy to cooperate with Sweden and that he wants to be interviewed and that he wants to clear his name,” Samuelson told Reuters. He spent how many years on both UK soil and then the Ecuadorean embassy to fight these Swedish allegations and now he's "happy to cooperate". He's imprisoned himself all these years for nothing.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. He could probably have been leading a quiet life in Sweden by now, having served his sentence in a nice Swedish prison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if it was true, what's wrong with that? He would be sent to USA to respond of his alleged crimes in front of a public court of justice.
>He would be sent to USA to respond of his alleged crimes in front of a public court of justice. Haha, no. He'd be sent to a secret FISA Star Chamber. There's no way he'd be tried in public. And if the Swedish authorities wanted Assange to answer for alleged crimes in Sweden, all they had to do was publicly declare that they wouldn't extradite Assange to the US. That was the sole requirement he had made of the Swedis…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The timing of the Swedish charge is very noteworthy. The charge and extradition request was made shortly after the release of the US diplomatic cables.
The diplomatic cables were released November 28 2010. The international arrest warrant November 18 2010. Before that other documents had been released, during the course of almost a year. So, the way I see it there is nothing really special about the timeline here. It is interesting that a lot of people seem to think that he should not be held responsible (or at least investigated) for the crimes he might have commit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I see no indication that this was “weaponized.” Then you haven't been following this story very closely. A few brief examples: (1) The case was closed before he left Sweden. (2) They could have questioned him remotely, which they often do, but declined to. (3) The women didn't even want to charge him. (4) There is a USA extradition order in place. How can you doubt the USA wants to extradite him? (5) This isn't "ra…
> (5) This isn't "rape" by any standard definition. The "Miss W" allegation in particular is rape by almost every country's legal definition.
This looks like a strategic move to prevent him extradited to US soils. I believe there are strong negotiations going on in the background.
Even lifetime in a Swedish prison would be preferable to solitary confinement torture.
[0] ... Which makes the Brexit soap opera a bit more interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
16000 people going through these fairly mundane bit of EU legal procedures. Some of them will have done worse things, but many of them will have done much less worse things (like the aforementioned chicken theft. What international manhunt? Man runs into embassy escaping bail - police wait outside. What other outcome could there have been?
So the actual number of extradition requests for alleged sleep-sex-offenders could actually be 0, you didn't even check in detail? This is quite anti-climatic. Alternative outcome: the brits spare 16m £, which they can then invest in fighting real crime. They arrest the alleged offender when flying or at any routine control, since he's not a danger to anyone. Anyone except those unmasked by the leaks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So please just don't use the word rape and Assange in the same sentence. It's a disservice to actual victims, whistle blowers and our cultural identity as such. What would you call having sex without a condom with a sleeping person, whom you barely know, when they have not consented to it? Sorta-rape? Kinda-rape? Minor hooliganism? Did we all forget what the point of consent is, or something? Or are we using the me…
I think the issue had more to do with not using a condom (with the explicit non-consent of the two women) than with the sex (for which he mostly had consent)