Assange Vs Takky

[Wallenda]

Yep, I think that the death penalty was _half_ serious, since I don't think that the USA were/is planning to execute him (I don't belong to any Assange fanclub, actually I don't like the guy at all).

 

Anyway, as you wrote it's not clear if he committed any crime with Wikileaks at all. The USA hasn't even issued an indictment _officially_. But as the reactions of the Swedish and the Brit government show, there seem to happen a lot behind closed doors. As with the Piratebay founder's ongoing deportation from Cambo Sweden might try dirty tricks. http://torrentfreak....anakata-120810/

 

Which means: the usual rule of Swedish law might not apply to Assange, therefore I stick to my point that Assange is right to evade his extradiciton to Sweden.

 

It seems that in copyright/secret documents cases even countries with a strong rule of law are eager to break them. And it's not the first time that US government and/or US organizations are behind it. See for example here: http://www.bbc.com/n...nology-18779866

 

By the way, I wouldn't talk like this if Assange was a common criminal who for example robbed or violated a person.

 

When it comes to espionage, it's not a clear cut case at all, the prosecutors (if it happens) would have to do some convincing that the law applies to what Assange did (I don't think we yet know exactly what he did). I tend to think the degree of encouragement he gave Manning will be a key factor, though I think a case can be made that Wikileaks own stated reason for existence is in itself encouragement.

 

As for Swedish law applying to him, he's up to his neck now in the Swedish legal process, charges were made against him and he's now wanted for interrogation which is the step before being officially charged (unless things progressed past the last time I checked). Up to now, it's all been about Swedish law applying to him, so it would take something pretty unprecedented for that to change.

 

Assange obviously didn't personally hack in this case, Manning did. Then again, Nixon didn't break into Watergate himself. Nixon did help hatch the plan for the break-ins, I don't think Assange was part of the planning of the break-ins themselves, but it seems as if his role could be considered 'conspiracy' to commit. I mean if someone started a website calling for submissions of freshly severed human ears, and then ears started arriving in the mail, I think a strong case could be made that the website founder has some culpability. (and of course I realize this is a completely absurd example -- outside Germany at least ;-) )

[Wallenda]

I think you have a naive belief in the infallible integrity of the media, the establishment and governments. Down through history, governments have used the law to do daft, hypocritical, corrupt, illegal, and evil things. Does it ever occur to you that you just might be living through one of those moments now?

 

Who knows what might happen to Assange once extradited to the USA? Having witnessed the treatment of Bradley Manning I do not blame Assange for fighting extradition. We'd all do the same. We'd be dickheads if we didn't.

 

Linking 9/11 conspiracy theories to the Julian Assange extradition issue is a non sequitur and a figment of your imagination.

 

 

It's true, for example today I naively believed that Andy Murray won the US Open, which was just what they wanted me to believe.

 

If you're going to roll out that argument, that The Media is united and part of a conspiracy, it means they are all communicated behind the scenes in order to suppress the truth and report lies. And in doing this, it's actually inevitable that someone who is part of that conspiracy will eventually come forward and report it to someone willing to broadcast that news, and at that time all of the news organizations in the world will have their credibility destroyed.

 

OR... only Assange is lying.

 

Which do you think is more likely?

 

The similarity to the Zeitgeist phenomenon is that some people seem to ditch any critical faculties they seemed to possess before, choose to use them only against one side and never question the other. It's not a responsible way to consider an issue. And if you get duped by a charlatan, it will have the 'supporter' eventually making a fool of himself.

 

Actually in degree, the Zeitgeist thing was a lot more ridiculous, the things my friends said about that were a lot dumber than what people are saying here. I was starting to think some of them had lost their minds. It was bordering on cult-like behavior. And to think this was a video put together by some teenagers in their basement, with some really obviously deceptive details in it.

[robaus]

I don’t know what lies Julian Assange has supposedly told. The cables published were the words of others ....US ambassadors etc, not his. Wikileaks was merely the conduit.

 

Newspapers will only publish information that falls into their hands, or what some governments allow them to publish. They are not publishing a different account from Wikileaks, so I don’t know where your lies and conspiracy theory is coming from. Assange was pissed off with some media for not synchronising the scoop he had given them with his website and he let the world know about his annoyance. The newspapers’ denigration of Assange is tit for tat covering their arses.

 

>>As for Swedish law applying to him, he's up to his neck now in the Swedish legal process, charges were made against him and he's now wanted for interrogation which is the step before being officially charged (unless things progressed past the last time I checked). Up to now, it's all been about Swedish law applying to him, so it would take something pretty unprecedented for that to change.

 

...I’m glad you clarified the charges bit, because as you say, he hasn’t actually been charged; perhaps it would have been better to use the word “claims/allegationsâ€....by a woman who continued to house him, help him at conferences, have consensual sex with him for a week after he had a wake up root with her, until she found out he’d shagged someone else too. Then she became an ace bitch.

 

It wouldn’t take anything unprecedented at all. The claims have already been thrown out once by a Swedish prosecutor then mysteriously re-instated. Assange offered himself for interview for several weeks back in Sweden and was given permission to leave. If the sex claims are ALL the Swedes and Brits are concerned about ...why don’t they simply talk to him about it in the Ecuador embassy?

 

I do indeed believe that the US, UK, and Swedish governments are conspiring to get Assange into a US jail.

 

So, what is your explanation for the extraordinary steps that have been taken ...simply to talk to Assange over allegations of bad mannered sex. Please explain...Europe’s most wanted list, $$milllion police presence surrounding Ecuador embassy, threats to invade embassy, huge diplomatic stoush with South America, all over a matter that was once dismissed as having less evidence than a traffic warden catching you on a double yellow line.

 

..What do you reckon this is all about then... just a typical day in the life of a London bobby?

 

Bloody Nora, it would have been cheaper to get Dog the Bounty Hunter and the Canadian Mounties on the case...at least they get their man!

 

Thank Buddha the US government is not chasing 99% of the members of this board....prostitution is illegal in Thailand you know!

 

I’ll be back in Sin City next week...Sshhhh..don’t tell ‘em!

 

[kamui]

I do indeed believe that the US, UK, and Swedish governments are conspiring to get Assange into a US jail.

 

So, what is your explanation for the extraordinary steps that have been taken ...simply to talk to Assange over allegations of bad mannered sex. Please explain...Europe’s most wanted list, $milllion police presence surrounding Ecuador embassy, threats to invade embassy, huge diplomatic stoush with South America, all over a matter that was once dismissed as having less evidence than a traffic warden catching you on a double yellow line.

 

 

Me too! Just compare the Brit/Swedish actions in regard to Assange with other fugitives. I don't have details about the Brits, but in Germany, only in case of murder or million EUR scams or so police goes after fugutives living abroad.

I wonder why the Brits went so far to even risk a diplomatic crises with Latin America?: NYT: Ecuadoreans Close Ranks in Assange Standoff

 

 

By the way, the developing case of the deportation of the Piratebay founder Gottfrid Svartholm Warg shows how far Sweden is willing to go for to get a fugitive - who was working also in the field of the spreading data via the interent and who by the way had connections to Wikileaks.

 

Cambo officially deported Svartholm because his visa expired (usually he would have paid a small fine). And usually the person being deported has the choice of country to go. Not this time. Svartholm was being ecorted out of the country by Swedish officials and handed over to Swedish policemen in the transit zone of Swampy airport who put him on a flight to Sweden.

 

I wonder how many laws have been bent/broken during the process and how much did Sweden pay to Khmer officials for the extralegal deportation of Svartholm.

Interestingly the deportation happened just when Sweden signed a contract to give 60 Mio USD aid to Cambo. This is like handing over plastic bags full of cash to Khmer officials, since it is well known that a huge percentage of every foreign aid transfer vanishes in the pockets of the Khmer elite...

The latest news on the deportation at Torrentfreak and The Guardian

 

By the way, as soon as the Piratebay founder landed Swedish police handed him another charge, which hadn't been made public before. Therefore we can assume that the same might happen to Assange as soon he enters Sweden...

[panadolsandwich]

 

I wonder how many laws have been bent/broken during the process and how much did Sweden pay to Khmer officials for the extralegal deportation of Svartholm.

Interestingly the deportation happened just when Sweden signed a contract to give 60 Mio USD aid to Cambo. This is like handing over plastic bags full of cash to Khmer officials, since it is well known that a huge percentage of every foreign aid transfer vanishes in the pockets of the Khmer elite...

 

 

Kamui, I fully respect what you are saying, but whilst it's not obvious that the Swedish authorities are venal - it is certainly the case with the Khmer ones. You answered your own question, and I haven't checked the facts myself, but $60M seems appropriate to me. I mean diplomatically this is a internationally well publicised case, and frankly, I think the Khmer authorities should have asked for a lot more.

 

My prediction - more luxury Lexus SUVs in one of the worlds poorest countries; or else Rangerovers because there are so many Lexus bought with the flood of foreign aid that has gone directly to the elite; well they have to distinguish themselves somehow - and the roads aren't fantastic either... And what's more worrying is they may be developing a taste for democracy - but the US would never allow that; naturally the elites aren't fans of that idea either...

[kamui]

Kamui, I fully respect what you are saying, but whilst it's not obvious that the Swedish authorities are venal - it is certainly the case with the Khmer ones. You answered your own question, and I haven't checked the facts myself, but $60M seems appropriate to me. I mean diplomatically this is a internationally well publicised case, and frankly, I think the Khmer authorities should have asked for a lot more.

 

My prediction - more luxury Lexus SUVs in one of the worlds poorest countries; or else Rangerovers because there are so many Lexus bought with the flood of foreign aid that has gone directly to the elite; well they have to distinguish themselves somehow - and the roads aren't fantastic either... And what's more worrying is they may be developing a taste for democracy - but the US would never allow that; naturally the elites aren't fans of that idea either...

 

Nah, Hun Sen won't allow any hint of democracy in Cambo. Don't forget he is the longest ruling leader in all over Asia and one of longest ruling in the world (since 1985). I guess that's why Takky is so fond of him. Hun Sun knows how to play the game. And I guess Hun Sen like Takky since he even has much more money than him.

 

 

PS: in regard to the 60 mio USD, you'll find the info at the Swedish embassy website in PP.

[Guest lazyphil]

assange will soon learn to be a woman in pelican bay high security prison, wipe that smug whiney smirk off his face

[Flashermac]

Nah, Hun Sen won't allow any hint of democracy in Cambo. Don't forget he is the longest ruling leader in all over Asia and one of longest ruling in the world (since 1985). I guess that's why Takky is so fond of him. Hun Sun knows how to play the game. And I guess Hun Sen like Takky since he even has much more money than him.

 

 

When people protested about Hun Sen allowing Vietnam to annex unquestionably Cambodian territory along their border, Hun Sen had his police attack the demonstrators with bullets and fragmentation grenades! Yet he is Takky's friend, so the red shirts love him ... whilst calling Abhisit a murderer for those killed during the red shirt violence.

 

 

 

 

 

[panadolsandwich]

When people protested about Hun Sen allowing Vietnam to annex unquestionably Cambodian territory along their border, Hun Sen had his police attack the demonstrators with bullets and fragmentation grenades! Yet he is Takky's friend, so the red shirts love him ... whilst calling Abhisit a murderer for those killed during the red shirt violence.

B

So what? What are you getting at? This is a very tenuous link you are making. One I thought you would be above making. I always picture you with a kink of spiritual probity.

 

I think most commentators misjudge and are completely out of touch with the level of discontent in Thailand. The invisible hand is possibly the worst culprit of this.

[Wallenda]

Seems like you completely misunderstood the point I attempted to make about Zeitgeist and 9/11 denial. That's fine, no need to go down that path.

 

...I’m glad you clarified the charges bit, because as you say, he hasn’t actually been charged; perhaps it would have been better to use the word “claims/allegationsâ€....by a woman who continued to house him, help him at conferences, have consensual sex with him for a week after he had a wake up root with her, until she found out he’d shagged someone else too. Then she became an ace bitch.

First here, you're taking one detail ("he hasn't been charged") and turning it into something it is not. Assange is wanted for arrest, at which time he'll be interrogated AND charged. The prosecutor and court dictates this process, not the accused. The only reason he hasn't been charged yet is because in Sweden that must be done with the person in custody. It's the reason he can't just be questioned in England, he has already been questioned, they're no longer after mere answers, they are at the point of placing him under arrest. Your second part here gives your version of the facts of that case. You and Assange clearly have a different view of the situation than the women do. But it's the right of a citizen in all of our countries to go to the police with a complaint, and if that complaint is deemed credible and criminal, police and prosecutors act on it, which is what's happened. The women's side of it gets to be heard. We've heard a lot of Assange's side outside of a court, we can't help but notice that he's unwilling to go to that court room to let the other side be heard--but in the society he grew up in, that's how situations like this are handled.

 

It wouldn’t take anything unprecedented at all. The claims have already been thrown out once by a Swedish prosecutor then mysteriously re-instated. Assange offered himself for interview for several weeks back in Sweden and was given permission to leave. If the sex claims are ALL the Swedes and Brits are concerned about ...why don’t they simply talk to him about it in the Ecuador embassy?

The only part of this that is true is the beers. The 'throwing out' you talk about here is what you just said was old news. He is currently wanted for 4 separate accusations, one of which was officially stated as 'rape' by the Swedish court. Here they are, and if you disagree with any of the below, you are in disagreement with the Swedish court:

 

1. Unlawful coercion

 

On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm. Assange, by using violence. forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party's arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.

 

2. Sexual molestation

 

On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.

 

3. Sexual molestation

 

On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.

 

4. Rape

 

On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [sW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state.

 

It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange. who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used. still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's sexual integrity.

 

And despite Assange's and his lawyer's description of the charges, the British court ruled that the charges as stated would be considered rape in the UK.

 

I don't know why you think he was given permission to leave the country. (Source?) On 22 Sept 2010 the Swedish prosecutor informed Assange's lawyer that he was required for interrogation, this after he'd been initially questioned in relation to these accusations on 31 Aug. This is important because it means Assange was officially informed of the accusation face to face by police -- so he was aware of what he was being accused of, and that there was an investigation underway. On 25 Sept he went to the UK.

 

You asked why he can't just be questioned by the Swedes in the Ecuador embassy. The answer is that he's not wanted simply for questioning any more, that was an earlier stage of the investigation that has already happened, he's now wanted for arrest for interrogation and to be prosecuted.