Assange arrested

[Delicieuxz]

Just now, wasab said:

Hiding inside an embassy in a foreign country does make it awfully inconvenient to gather evidences doesn't it. 

 

Btw, Swedish authorities did issues an international warrant for his arrest. 

No, being in the embassy doesn't interfere with the ability to gather evidence through interviewing Assange.

 

Refusing to interview Assange in the embassy is what prevented the investigation from progressing - and that was done deliberately by the Swedish investigators and the UK government. They didn't want the investigation to possibly conclude as that would take away the public rationale for the UK government arresting Assange to extradite him.

[wasab]

6 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

 

 

Swedish investigators were invited to interview Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy since 2011, but were requested by the UK government to not do so because they wanted to keep the pretext of extradition to Sweden available so they could arrest him if he leaves the embassy.

 

 

In about-face, Sweden offers to question Assange in London

 

UK resisted Julian Assange’s offer to be questioned in London, emails reveal

 

The Swedish investigation was deceitfully designed to avoid resolving it so that the UK could maintain a pretext to arrest Assange.

Doesn't matter. He can be first flown to America where Uncle Sam will hand down his judgement and after he serve his sentence, he can then be flown to Sweden where he faces rape investigation. 

[Delicieuxz]

6 minutes ago, wasab said:

Doesn't matter. He can be first flown to America where Uncle Sam will hand down his judgement and after he serve his sentence, he can then be flown to Sweden where he faces rape investigation. 

So, you're revealing that all your arguments in this thread have been guided by ulterior motives and that you've been saying whatever to attack Assange without caring what the fact are

 

 You don't care that there are actually no charges against Assange, that the Swedish investigation never found sufficient evidence to charge Assange, that it was by deliberate choice of the Swedish investigators and UK government that the allegations against Assange weren't pursued, that the Swedish investigation was used as a clandestine front to actually arrest Assange for extradition to the US, or anything else you've asserted claims about. What you care about is getting some self-gratifying revenge on Assange for him publishing the truth in US government documents. But, the truth, it seems, doesn't matter to you.

[bradwiggo]

37 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

No, being in the embassy doesn't interfere with the ability to gather evidence through interviewing Assange.

 

Refusing to interview Assange in the embassy is what prevented the investigation from progressing - and that was done deliberately by the Swedish investigators and the UK government. They didn't want the investigation to possibly conclude as that would take away the public rationale for the UK government arresting Assange to extradite him.

How would the conclusion of the investigation mean people wouldn't want him extradited? 

[Delicieuxz]

8 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

How would the conclusion of the investigation mean people wouldn't want him extradited? 

If the investigation concluded without finding grounds to indict Assange of anything then the Swedish extradition request would be cancelled and the grounds stated by the UK government for needing to arrest Assange would be no more.

[Andreas Lilja]

19 hours ago, wasab said:

If he is innocent, why would he refuse a proper trial in Sweden?

Probably because of the fear of being extradited.

 

Sweden's prisons are basically Club Meds.

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

No, being in the embassy doesn't interfere with the ability to gather evidence through interviewing Assange.

 

Refusing to interview Assange in the embassy is what prevented the investigation from progressing - and that was done deliberately by the Swedish investigators and the UK government. They didn't want the investigation to possibly conclude as that would take away the public rationale for the UK government arresting Assange to extradite him.

Just because the investigation was not concluded does not mean he is innocent. Assange made his bed a long time ago, and whether he likes it or not he has to sleep in it. He should have done it with dignity. 

[wasab]

49 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

So, you're revealing that all your arguments in this thread have been guided by ulterior motives and that you've been saying whatever to attack Assange without caring what the fact are

 

 You don't care that there are actually no charges against Assange, that the Swedish investigation never found sufficient evidence to charge Assange, that it was by deliberate choice of the Swedish investigators and UK government that the allegations against Assange weren't pursued, that the Swedish investigation was used as a clandestine front to actually arrest Assange for extradition to the US, or anything else you've asserted claims about. What you care about is getting some self-gratifying revenge on Assange for him publishing the truth in US government documents. But, the truth, it seems, doesn't matter to you.

I'm saying he ought to face rape investigation regardless if he is in danger of being extradited to USA or not. 

[Delicieuxz]

8 minutes ago, floofer said:

Just because the investigation was not concluded does not mean he is innocent. Assange made his bed a long time ago, and whether he likes it or not he has to sleep in it. He should have done it with dignity. 

I didn't say that it does. I said there are no charges and that in the course of investigating so far no grounds for charges were discovered.

 

And your comment about 'made his bed, now has to sleep in it' ignores the elephant in the room of the goal of Sweden, the UK, and the US to extradite Assange to the US for something else entirely.

[Guest]

Just now, Delicieuxz said:

I didn't say that it does. I said there are no charges and that in the course of investigating so far no grounds for charges were discovered.

 

And your comment about 'made his best, now has to sleep in it' ignores the elephant in the room of the goal of Sweden, the UK, and the US to extradite Assange to the US for something else entirely.

His bed includes the computer hacking charges. He knew exactly what he was doing every step of the way. Sweden has issued a warrant for his arrest, and for him to be extradited. Convenience is probably the issue. 

[Delicieuxz]

9 minutes ago, floofer said:

His bed includes the computer hacking charges. He knew exactly what he was doing every step of the way. Sweden has issued a warrant for his arrest, and for him to be extradited. Convenience is probably the issue. 

The conspiracy-to-hack charge is bogus, and something Obama's DoJ refused to prosecute Assange for due to its impact on press freedom.

 

Sweden doesn't currently have a warrant for his arrest as the deadline for the investigation expired in 2015.

 

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

The hacking conspiracy charge is bogus, and something Obama's DoJ refused to prosecute Assange for due to its impact on press freedom.

 

Sweden doesn't currently have a warrant for his arrest as the deadline for the investigation expired in 2015.

 

Of course the charge is fake, but it doesn't mean Assange isn't wanted. Assange knew what would happen if he released the documents, the authorities would get to him by any means. I think I meant to say Sweden are re-opening the rape case against Assange. Either way, it won't end well for him. 

[Delicieuxz]

8 minutes ago, floofer said:

Of course the charge is fake, but it doesn't mean Assange isn't wanted. Assange knew what would happen if he released the documents, the authorities would get to him by any means.

Assange violated no law by releasing government and classified documents. There's nothing legitimate to go after him for, there. So, He hasn't made the bed that's being served him right now, if it comes down to releasing documents.

 

The US Supreme Court ruled on this in 1971 when the NYT and Washington Post published the stolen classified military documents dubbed the "Pentagon Papers".

 

 

Quote

I think I meant to say Sweden are re-opening the rape case against Assange. Either way, it won't end well for him. 

It's been speculated by news outlets and one of the original 2 women has said she's asked for it, but, so far, that's as far as the possibility has gone.

[wasab]

13 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Assange violated no law by releasing government and classified documents. There's nothing legitimate to go after him for, there. So, He hasn't made the bed that's being served him right now, if it comes down to releasing documents.

 

The US Supreme Court ruled on this in 1971 when the NYT and Washington Post published the stolen classified military documents dubbed the "Pentagon Papers".

 

 

It's been speculated by news outlets and one of the original 2 women has said she's asked for it, but, so far, that's as far as the possibility has gone.

If you are so sure there wouldn't be legal repercussions, why would you be against his extradition to the US?

[Delicieuxz]

14 minutes ago, wasab said:

If you are so sure there wouldn't be legal repercussions, why would you be against his extradition to the US?

That question makes no sense. If there wasn't anything wrong done then it's unjust and immoral to seek to extradite and punish him.

 

If you're innocent of murder or rape or theft, why would you be against being charged and arrested for those things by a government that has clearly shown it doesn't care what the law is?

[wasab]

Just now, Delicieuxz said:

That question makes no sense. If there wasn't anything wrong done then it's unjust and immoral to seek to extradite and punish him.

 

If you're innocent of murder or rape or theft, why would you be against being charged and arrested for those things by a government that has clearly shown it doesn't care what the law is?

Because I'm being accuse and I would eagerly face my accuser to clear my name instead of being hunted down like an outlaw?

[Delicieuxz]

16 minutes ago, wasab said:

Because I'm being accuse and I would eagerly face my accuser to clear my name instead of being hunted down like an outlaw?

Sorry, but this is ridiculous.

 

We're talking about disingenuous charges, made by a government that doesn't care what the law says, to be judged on by a secret espionage court that isn't accountable to the public.

 

If you're innocent, you'd eagerly walk into a trap that is meant to incarcerate or disappear you regardless of what the law says and what justice is?

 

You don't value your money (which you'll be spending a ton of) or your time (which you won't have) or your freedom (which you also won't have) because you want to face the not-even-identified accusations people who simply want to destroy you will decide on in a secretive tribunal?

 

Then you have no sense.

 

 

So, if China decides to accuse you of terrorism against the state of China right now, based on nothing, you'd immediately be eager to go to China to defend against those accusations?

 

I think you're saying things either without thinking about them, or hoping that people reading them won't think about what it is you're saying.

[wasab]

2 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

Sorry, but this is ridiculous.

 

We're talking about disingenuous charges, made by a government that doesn't care what the law says, to be judged on by a secret espionage court that isn't accountable to the public.

 

If you're innocent, you'd eagerly walk into a trap that is meant to incarcerate or disappear you regardless of what the law says and what justice is?

 

You don't value your money (which you'll be spending a ton of) or your time (which you won't have) or your freedom (which you also won't have) because you want to face the not-even-identified accusations people who simply want to destroy you will decide on in a secretive tribunal?

 

Then you have no sense.

 

 

So, if China decides to accuse you of terrorism against the state of China right now, based on nothing, you'd immediately be eager to go to China to defend against those accusations?

 

I think you're saying things either without thinking about them, or hoping that people reading them won't think about what it is you're saying.

1

unwilling to trust the justice system is either 

1) the system is corrupt

2) you are actually guilty

 

Over here in the US, I believe in the latter. 

 

Also, guys like him tend to go around in western democracies, most of who are allies of the US and have extradition treaties with the US government. If he desires sympathy in his goal of exposing corrupt governments and atrocities, he can go work for human rights watch and leak secret information from north Korea or something. Why does he want to leak something from western democracies which put the lives of countless anti-terrorism operatives and military personnel at risk? 

[Delicieuxz]

2 hours ago, wasab said:

unwilling to trust the justice system is either 

1) the system is corrupt

2) you are actually guilty

 

Over here in the US, I believe in the latter.

I feel like I'm being punked.

 

In what way do you see shrouded and trumped-up accusations meant to lock someone away regardless of what truth and justice are as reflecting anything other than corruption on the part of the accuser?

 

The US "justice" system is extremely corrupt with for-profit prisons, judges selling black people to jails (because imprisoning people is a for-profit business in the US), militarized gun-happy police, elected judges who pay their way into their position, Supreme Court judges being appointed along political party lines, the world's worst incarceration rate (because imprisoning people is a for-profit business in the US), being able to buy more lenient jail sentences and nicer jail cells, black people convicted at a disproportionate rate to white people and receiving harsher sentencing than white people, war criminals and bankers who cause financial crises walking fee without consequence for their crimes, innocent and vulnerable people targeted by the system...

 

Anyone with some knowledge on the matter knows that the US justice system is extremely corrupt. And even when a justice system isn't corrupt, it's absurd to think that someone wouldn't care about being subjected to baseless or unjust accusations that could carry heavy penalties, especially when those accusations are coming from someone who desperately wants revenge for having their dirty deeds exposed.

 

Further, what awaits Assange in the US isn't the US' public justice system, but a secret espionage court that exists outside of the normal justice system.

 

Your view will probably mature a lot beyond a 2-dimensional perspective once you get some experience in the real world.

 

Quote

Also, guys like him tend to go around in western democracies, most of who are allies of the US and have extradition treaties with the US government.

"Guys like him"... as in, Westerners?

 

Quote

If he desires sympathy in his goal of exposing corrupt governments and atrocities, he can go work for human rights watch and leak secret information from north Korea or something. Why does he want to leak something from western democracies which put the lives of countless anti-terrorism operatives and military personnel at risk? 

So, not only do you not care what the truth is, but you also don't care about justice. You just want to take down other societies which you regard as opposing teams to your own, while whitewashing your own 'team''s offences.

 

WikiLeaks' reveals so far haven't put anybody at risk.

[wasab]

4 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

 

The US "justice" system is extremely corrupt with for-profit prisons, judges selling black people to jails (because imprisoning people is a for-profit business in the US), militarized gun-happy police, elected judges who pay their way into their position, Supreme Court judges being appointed along political party lines, the world's worst incarceration rate (because imprisoning people is a for-profit business in the US), being able to buy more lenient jail sentences and nicer jail cells, black people convicted at a disproportionate rate to white people and receiving harsher sentencing than white people, war criminals and bankers who cause financial crises walking fee without consequence for their crimes, innocent and vulnerable people targeted by the system...

 

 

Well, Assange isn't black so your argument is invalid. Plus, racism in court works in reverse too. Plenty of blacks walk away as freemen for murders because the jury(full of black jurors) turned against white officers and sided with the defendents due to racial reasons. Look at the case of O.J. Simpson. That guy was so smug, he even wrote a book how he committed the crime and got away with it. 

[Noctus]

7 hours ago, wasab said:

You do know many victims of abuse stay with their abusers for years right?

You do know he was visiting for w/e political reason and it was a PARTY right? And she allowed him to stay AFTER the party for several days, right? Even though he more than likely had other places to actually stay for the duration of his trip? They weren't husband and wife or dating, therefore im not buying it.

6 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

How would the conclusion of the investigation mean people wouldn't want him extradited? 

Because as said by other's on the net and what i believe, it's a honeypot. Designed to get him in their hands so he can be sent across the water. The Embassy move had stopped that from happening. What other actual logical reason did they stop the investigation for if all they had to do was walk into the embassy, interview him, then leave. It's a joke.

[wasab]

3 hours ago, Noctus said:

You do know he was visiting for w/e political reason and it was a PARTY right? And she allowed him to stay AFTER the party for several days, right? Even though he more than likely had other places to actually stay for the duration of his trip? They weren't husband and wife or dating, therefore im not buying it.

 

Yeah? Then he would have no problem of going to Sweden for a full investigation now would he? After he serves his sentence in the US for leaking classified documents that is. 

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

9 hours ago, wasab said:

If he desires sympathy in his goal of exposing corrupt governments and atrocities, he can go work for human rights watch and leak secret information from north Korea or something. Why does he want to leak something from western democracies which put the lives of countless anti-terrorism operatives and military personnel at risk?  

Wait ... what?

 

He leaked all kinds of info on several governments, not just the US.  The fact of the matter is that the US simply has more to hide and hence has a lot more info to leak.

 

Stop thinking that the US are the good guys, they're far from it. 

Good guys don't support dictators, don't fund and train terrorist organizations, don't sell arms to human rights abusers, don't drone strike their own citizens without trial or even an attempt to apprehend them, don't knowingly kill journalists, don't upset the entire middle east by overthrowing regimes they don't agree with under the guise of "bringing democracy", don't start wars under false pretenses, don't have overseas prisons where people can be indefinitely detained and tortured without trial, etc etc

 

[Guest]

Looks like Ecuador is after him now. Pretty meritable stuff too, engaging in these hacking sort of activities while in the embassy.

[wasab]

8 hours ago, Captain Chaos said:

Wait ... what?

 

He leaked all kinds of info on several governments, not just the US.  The fact of the matter is that the US simply has more to hide and hence has a lot more info to leak.

 

Stop thinking that the US are the good guys, they're far from it. 

Good guys don't support dictators, don't fund and train terrorist organizations, don't sell arms to human rights abusers, don't drone strike their own citizens without trial or even an attempt to apprehend them, don't knowingly kill journalists, don't upset the entire middle east by overthrowing regimes they don't agree with under the guise of "bringing democracy", don't start wars under false pretenses, don't have overseas prisons where people can be indefinitely detained and tortured without trial, etc etc

 

And? 

Did the names of 250,000 military personel and intelligence agents leaked by Manning and published on wikileaks helped stopping dictators and terrorists? I bet these guys family can sleep easy knowing Taliban has their names while they are on foreign soil combating terrorists.