Roman Polanski?
Julian Assange to issue statement 'in front' of Ecuador embassy
- Thread starter ComputerMKII
- Start date
- Status
Roman Polanski?
Probably the only high profile name to fit the question and still not quite the same eh?
Schmattakopf
Member
Clearly his fear is not about conviction.
Oh hell no. It is too early in the morning for me to feel like this. Spoiler tagged to protect the children, and so this thread doesn't go off the rails.
I am too tired this kind of shit. And I work too damn hard for this type of bullshit. I am NOT the nigga. And I do not get talked to like that, over the Internet or otherwise. Especially not by a bitch-assed, pock-filled conspiracy theory "the boogie man is a real!" dogfucker . If you want to talk to me like that you take that shit to the private messages, okay?
Otherwise, you do have other options. You either don't come at me like that at all, or you can take your stank, prick ass and that's stick you've got stuck in it and plant yourself somewhere else. If you don't, I will be happy to pull that stick out for you. And I will go nice and slow, just the way I like it. Do you understand?
Otherwise, you do have other options. You either don't come at me like that at all, or you can take your stank, prick ass and that's stick you've got stuck in it and plant yourself somewhere else. If you don't, I will be happy to pull that stick out for you. And I will go nice and slow, just the way I like it. Do you understand?
Now I don't have a problem with what you said, just the way you said it.
Moving on. . .
ItAintEasyBeinCheesy
it's 4th of July in my asshole
Way to be Ecuador. You go girl.
He was wanted by Belgium, arrested in Malta. And he spent time in India in between.
we got a badass over here
What are you talking about?
Roman Polanski...?
Trojita
Rapid Response Threadmaker
This thread just got REAL interesting.
What the hell are you talking about? Are you living in a fantasy world? Before officially charging him with a crime in the Swedish system, they need to bring him in for more questioning. Until now, they have not officially charged him. How am I moving the goal posts by saying they want to question him?
I really don't think anyone can deny that Assange's fears of being extradited are justified. Even the Australian government believes it's likely:
It's not like Sweden has a well documented history of rendition for the purposes of torture. In this case his request for assurances that he won't be extradited are justified and necessary.
All of the evidence is laid out here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/20/julian-assange-right-asylum
radioheadrule83
Banned
KHarv has his views on this, and he educates himself reasonably well and makes some very good points, but I agree with what you've said... I don't think he's reading your posts properly because they don't jive well with his own determination of guilt. Also, him calling you a child in response to a reasonable post struck me as a bit daft tbh. But not as daft as this...
... what?
... what?
You're using a technicality to argue that they want him for questioning. That technicality is that, unlike the rest of the world, being formally charged cannot occur until you show up for an interview with the police. He is not wanted for that interview, he is wanted so they can put him on trial. If you do not care about the interpretation of the UK court (which decided that for the purposes of UK law he has been officially accused of the crime) the question is moot. The only reason it was ever raised is because it relates to whether or not he can be extradited under a European warrant and the UK decision is paramount. If you only care about the intent of the Swedish, the prosecutors have answered that -- they do not want him for questioning. They intend to put him on trial.
OpinionatedCyborg
Member
I wish this dude would disappear and give the reins over to someone who isn't a megalomaniac.
That won't happen though, because of that ego
IrrelevantNotch
Banned
No, its pretty clear he knows he's guilty. Only his paranoid supporters think otherwise.
soundahfekz
Member
mattiewheels
And then the LORD David Bowie saith to his Son, Jonny Depp: 'Go, and spread my image amongst the cosmos. For every living thing is in anguish and only the LIGHT shall give them reprieve.'
This is one of the most bizarre overreactions I've seen on this forum.
I know. To one of the most non-confrontational and non-condescending posts in the thread. What about it did he hate so much? Facts?
Also his "I am NOT the nigga". Does he really mean "How dare you talk to me as if I was a [implied worthless] black man"?
SpectreFire
Member
Do people honestly think the rape charges are made up and that Julian Assange wouldn't at all be capable of rape?
Because I'll tell you, after listening to some of the stuff Julian Assange has spoken before, I would not at all be surprised if he was delusional enough of his own self-importance and holier than thou status to think that he's beyong petty societal rules against rape.
Because I'll tell you, after listening to some of the stuff Julian Assange has spoken before, I would not at all be surprised if he was delusional enough of his own self-importance and holier than thou status to think that he's beyong petty societal rules against rape.
We cannot presume his innocence or guilt. However, we can look at the facts related to his accusers and the context of their accusations to question their motives and the substance of their claims. A rape trial should be straightforward and low key. The behavior of his accusers, the court system, and of the British, Australian, American, and Ecuadorian governments suggest that this has nothing to do with an alleged rape.
This is a show trial meant to discredit Assange and visibly punish him for Wikileaks.
I almost feel bad for that guy. I suppose I did include some mild snark by calling his assertion quaint but his reaction to that was just bizarre. Seems like he has issues. Well, if you ever read this guy, I wasn't coming at you and there is no race angle, I was just disagreeing with what you said.
And I would re-iterate that when it comes to stuff like deportation, terrorism, etc, saying that countries cannot do certain things because laws prevent them is not a great argument given the number of ways laws have been bent or broken in the name of terrorism prevention.
And I would re-iterate that when it comes to stuff like deportation, terrorism, etc, saying that countries cannot do certain things because laws prevent them is not a great argument given the number of ways laws have been bent or broken in the name of terrorism prevention.
Please read this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.htm
After that, I hope you'll see why a lot of people are questioning the charges.
With that said, I believe Julian Assange has done a lot of damage to the causes he supposedly believe and the people that support him. At this point, I think he should go to Sweden and face the allegations.
To be fair, this isn't so much about whether the US can bend their own rules, but more about whether they can get Sweden to bend theirs. There aren't any US laws preventing them from executing someone who was extradited to them, but Sweden cannot extradite anyone if they believe there's a risk they will be executed. Of course, that's not a guarantee of anything these days.
It's not even rape. He just didn't use a condom. He isn't even charged with it either and has said he is happy to discuss it over the phone, webcam, set up a meeting, but they refuse. It's so obvious they just want him there to send him to the US. The UK doesn't threaten to break international law because some dude didn't use a rubber.
The guy just doesn't want to get nabbed by the US.
But this is my question: why don't the UK just send him to the US? We are hardly above such actions.
And yes, Assange is an egomaniac who has done more harm to the Wikileaks ideal than he knows.
But like I said he hasn't even been charged. And has said he will talk to police but they don't want to hear it, they just want him in Sweden to send to America. You really think all of this is over a guy not using a condom a few years ago? People KILL and are charged with that murder and governments give far less of a shit to bring him to that country.
I don't know. Clearly they think Sweden is the easier opinion.
Joel Was Right
Member
Considering the unsavoury treatment Bradley Manning has been given, it's understandable why Assange feels he is/likely to be persecuted - especially as the Swedes have refused to give any assurances to the Ecuadorians that he will not be extradited to the US. If anything, you'd think that should be given in these circumstances
Suspected Espionage I think? releasing govt documents and embarrassing countless US diplomats, arguably endangering lives.
Essentially he took on the most powerful people in the world (Military Industrial Complex) and is now going to pay the piper.
Because he embarrassed them and they want to make him pay. It's as simple as that. Just like Bradley Manning.
jakershaker
Member
Such assurances would actually be illegal to give in Sweden. Politics can't interfer with the legal system.
Joel Was Right
Member
The criticism towards the British attitude is based on their threat to storm the embassy which suggests they are more politically, than legally, motivated
By Swedish law politicians actually make final decision in extradition cases. Supreme court decides if it's legal to extradite person X and they report to gov. but in the end gov. makes the decision if the person will be extradited, not the court. If Supreme court says it's illegal to extradite person X then the Gov. can't extradite person in question.
Are they not obliged to though? under EU directives? I have no idea how it works but I recall reading that that's part of our agreement, to obtain criminals wanted in the EU on our soil?
And the word "storm" is dramatic is it not? I doubt very much the SAS are on the roof with flashbangs.
Joel Was Right
Member
The FO have said they are within their rights, the Ecuadorians - and others, from what I understand, dispute this. There is a suspicion the UK are able to that based on domestic legislation, but are not according to international law
Then I hope we revert to my suggested stance of "not our fucking problem".
They want to charge him; they just cannot do so without questioning him first.
If he is extradited to Sweden, he cannot be further extradited without the UK's consent.
As was mentioned above, it is legally impossible to make any such assurances by Sweden.
For more details: http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/16007/a/187490
Joel Was Right
Member
What kind of precedence do you think it will set if the British go into that embassy and arrest a man who is under diplomatic immunity? What will it mean for British embassies around the world? Or its relations with Latin America? If there were no problems, they'd have gone in there already
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked