181–190 of 287 posts
http://twitter.com/alburyj http://www.bambuser.com/channel/alburyj
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the Swedish government legitimately wanted to question Assange about the risible "rape" charges (that they didn't even bother with while he was in Sweden), why didn't they give a guarantee not to extradite him to the US? Because they want to extradite him and the "rape" case is an excuse.
Why not guarantee they won't extradite him to the US? Well first of all, either an arrest warrant is valid or it is not. If valid, why do they need to bribe someone to obey the law? Sure, I sometimes give my kids snacks to bribe them into doing something they don't want to do, but I'm not the law. Second, they cannot promise what their reaction would be. Suppose something impossibly-unlikely like the US has a video-t…
If the US shows up with a video of Assange killing someone it will have been made on a Hollywood renderfarm.
We know that because we know that the US is bent on hunting Assange down for political reasons and have set up a secret Grand Jury for this purpose.
When the law says one thing and justice says another, the customary thing to do is to push the law towards justice, not the victim of injustice towards the law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the endgame was to extradite Assange to the United States, why go through Sweden? Wouldn't it be easier just to extradite him directly from the UK to the US? It doesn't make any sense.
Extraditing from the UK would involving a court case. Untrue for Sweden, which has a fast track extradition agreement with the US. http://thepeoplesrecord.com/post/25523258635/swedish-extradi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since 9/11 the USA has shown that it does not follow the civil rules of law for non-citizens. Obama's DOJ has convened a secret grand jury investigating Assange under the Espionage Act[1]. Joe Biden has called him a terrorist [2]. Others have called for his assassination [3]. Sweden was involved in the CIA's illegal rendition program and sent people to be tortured in Egypt[4]. Assange has every reason to fear for his…
Let's not pretend that it's a problem only with the current administration and his political party. The previous one found the civil rules of law rather inconvenient also and waved them off just as easily. I am not arguing with your statement (you have said nothing wrong) but I'd like to head off the potential "Obama/Democrats is/are the problem!" rants.
The only major difference is that Obama always really wanted to catch Bin Laden and Bush -- openly -- didn't care. Now that that's over, he seems to want to run for Bush's fourth term.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Criticizing people for being impolite when you're all but justifying raping women isn't exactly arguing from a moral high ground.
This is the second comment by you where you are accusing someone of misogeny or justifying rape without basis. I think you should be careful about talking about moral high ground.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or he is someone who flees from serious charges and the British authorities don’t want to look like idiots in front of the whole world because they can’t do something simple like extradite him. Why is there this willingness to believe everything this idiot says? He’s a pompous ass, pure and simple. No conspiracy required. Meanwhile the idea of an anonymous leaks platform dies because everyone focuses on his stupid an…
> He’s a pompous ass, pure and simple. No conspiracy required. I don't get where this sentiment comes from - care to explain?
I'm a little surprised by the HN crowd's desire to turn this into some kind of Michael Bay movie with diplomatic explosions left, right and centre: the phrase "act of war" is being dropped around as if some kind of violent confrontation would ever actually occur between Ecuador and the United Kingdom based on this. This is simply not the case; at most, it would be loosely unfair of the British government to 'bully' E…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Had he remained under arrest, how could he have sought asylum with some other embassy? "Mr. Copper, I've decided to seek asylum with the Ecuadorian embassy..." "Well, Mr. Assange, I sure hate to see you go but I guess I'll drive you there myself."
He had been released on bail, pending an appeal, which he lost.
If they didn't want him walking around (where he could claim asylum in an embassy) then he should have been in custody. If he wasn't in custody, there must have been a reason he wasn't. Sounds to me like they (law enforcement) screwed up and they're now trying to blame an Ecuadorian ambassador.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not guarantee they won't extradite him to the US? Well first of all, either an arrest warrant is valid or it is not. If valid, why do they need to bribe someone to obey the law? Sure, I sometimes give my kids snacks to bribe them into doing something they don't want to do, but I'm not the law. Second, they cannot promise what their reaction would be. Suppose something impossibly-unlikely like the US has a video-t…
That's a nice abstract argument. The facts are otherwise. If the US shows up with a video of Assange killing someone it will have been made on a Hollywood renderfarm. We know that because we know that the US is bent on hunting Assange down for political reasons and have set up a secret Grand Jury for this purpose. When the law says one thing and justice says another, the customary thing to do is to push the law towar…
I remember when that idea was just the plot of a mediocre Michael Crighton book. That it doesn't strike me as absurd anymore is either amazing or frightening. How would you even begin to fight that kind of evidence in front of a jury?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might note that despite the way thesestatements are worded, neither women claimed to have been raped or sexually assaulted. Neither filed or asked to file charges. One of the women are now refusing to sign any past statements regarding the case. The other appears to have left Sweden. At tehe time prosecutor reviewed the statements and made it clear the full statements did not imply a crime had taken place. Both s…
thank you for being another voice of reason in this discussion
Even if I were to only accept the parts his own lawyers have conceded, the statements do paint the picture of someone who is quite a bit of an asshole. Maybe he is a bit of a misogynist, though I think it's more likely he is "just" a bit narcissistic and didn't really take anyones feelings into account. Add in some paranoia - even if people are after him, he comes across as believing they care more than I think they do.
I just think there are a lot of things about this case that are fishy to the point where there's good reason to be extremely suspicious about the motivations of some of the people involved, even if one discounts the idea of US involvement. He might very well be guilty for what I know, but that still doesn't mean there's nothing weird going on with how the whole situation has been handled.