Thread: Julian Assange is made an Ecuadorian citizen in effort to resolve impasse

Originally Posted by foobar

I hope he does get arrested and extradited to the US.

The backlash against the UK/US government will be immense, if Trump thinks the media are against him now, wait and see what will happen if he extradites and prosecutes a well known journalist for doing nothing more than reporting facts.

Assange will have planned for every eventuality and will be ahead of the curve whatever happens.

Trump has proven that he could line up the people who voted for him and one by one fuck them all in the arse and they'd still think he's the greatest American ever born.

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

Pity the Australian Govt didn't have the cajones to demand he was returned to Australia May would,ve flopped. The problem is we have a prime minister with a smaller nutsack than May. The Swedish extradition case was inherently week andwould not stand up in any unbiased court of law. Assange should sue both those women into poverty. Not often you would see me agree with TDs greatest Anti American but I have seen no proof at all that Assange is a Russian stooge. To say its was wrong and illegal for him to publish sensitive documents, says we who the govt is supposed to serve, are not entitled to know at least some of the shady things govts gets up to in a democracy. If that is the case we may as well live in a China or a Russia. I cant subscribe to that theory.

Funny that, isn't it?

Putin already admitted that he wanted Comrade tЯump to win.

So Russia steals a load of emails from ONE party - not the one belonging to Comrade tЯump - and then gives them to Assange who drip feeds them to the media at a critical stage of the election.

Sometimes people can't see what's staring them in the face.

And just how the fuck could Australia demand anything from May when he was not in British custody but out on Bail?

So it's OK for a foreign government to demand the extradition of one of their citizens from a foreign country when he has not been found guilty of any crime?

The last time I heard of something like that being done was when Prayuth got a Thai bloke arrested in Cambodia - without due process - and returned to Thailand for posting a nasty tweet.

https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/pol...ake-news-guilt

What is it with you lot and your fucking love fest for dictators?

Originally Posted by SKkin

Maybe you're a stooge of the West 'arry...

Maybe I can just see the fucking obvious.

And before anyone goes banging on about how there is no case for the blonde rapist to answer in Sweden, the main reason the case has been dropped is because of the statue of limitations, i.e he got away with three of the charges.

If he leaves before 2020, they can still have him arrested on the fourth. And that's why the little rapist wants to stay "in Ecuador".

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

...we who the govt is supposed to serve, are not entitled to know at least some of the shady things govts gets up to in a democracy.

People who think with their brain - what's right and what's wrong - have a proper demonstration every day what's the democracy really is:

For years following what's happening at the world, how the world leaders BS us, who we are allowed to meet and speak and who not, what we are allowed to know and what not, what privileges the govt people (endangerous species) possess, etc.

For some (please no names here) it's not enough or in fact, it does not matter...

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Maybe I can just see the fucking obvious.

And before anyone goes banging on about how there is no case for the blonde rapist to answer in Sweden, the main reason the case has been dropped is because of the statue of limitations, i.e he got away with three of the charges.

There are no charges against Assange only baseless accusations that would never even vaguely amount to rape in any civilised legal system.

Can you explain why the Swedish police interviewed Assange twice in Sweden after the 2 women had made their statements and evidence was collected, but yet never arrested or charged him?

Originally Posted by foobar

There are no charges against Assange only baseless accusations that would never even vaguely amount to rape in any civilised legal system.

Can you explain why the Swedish police interviewed Assange twice in Sweden after the 2 women had made their statements and evidence was collected, but yet never arrested or charged him?

Because he fucking legged it before they'd finished their investigation.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Because he fucking legged it before they'd finished their investigation.

It is astonishing that you haven't even bothered to furnish yourself with the basic facts of this case yet you feel obliged to scream "The blond Rapist" from the rooftops at every opportunity:

I know you're not big reader so I've put the pertinent part in bold:

20 August 2010

The Swedish Prosecutor's Office issues an arrest warrant for Mr Assange on allegations of rape and molestation.

Both women reportedly say that what started as consensual sex became non-consensual.

Wikileaks quotes Mr Assange as saying the accusations are "without basis" and that their appearance "at this moment is deeply disturbing". A later message on the Wikileaks Twitter feed says the group has been warned to expect "dirty tricks".
21 August 2010

The arrest warrant is withdrawn. "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape," says one of Stockholm's chief prosecutors, Eva Finne.

Prosecutors say the investigation into the molestation allegation will continue but it is not a serious enough crime for an arrest warrant.

Once more with feeling,

All statements and evidence regarding the rape allegations were collected and fully investigated, Assange was interviewed twice in Sweden by Swedish police but released without charge.

It was only when the Americans started circling the case did he feel the need to leave Sweden and seek protection.

Originally Posted by foobar

It is astonishing that you haven't even bothered to furnish yourself with the basic facts of this case yet you feel obliged to scream "The blond Rapist" from the rooftops at every opportunity:

I know you're not big reader so I've put the pertinent part in bold:




Once more with feeling,

All statements and evidence regarding the rape allegations were collected and fully investigated, Assange was interviewed twice in Sweden by Swedish police but released without charge.

It was only when the Americans started circling the case did he feel the need to leave Sweden and seek protection.

Yeah, you wish.

He'll stay there until 2020 if the Ecuadorians let him, the fucking rapist knows they can reapply the warrant any time they like.

Jeesus Harry, you really are letting your dislike of Assange get in the way of facts. Please show evidence that either woman had a reasonable rape case. If you were the pilot of the first moon landing you be somewhere near pluto by now.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Yeah, you wish.

Are you suggesting the Chief prosecutor for Stockholm didn't say that or the text below is somehow fake?

Can you point out exactly which of the facts I've posted are untrue?

20 August 2010

The Swedish Prosecutor's Office issues an arrest warrant for Mr Assange on allegations of rape and molestation.

Both women reportedly say that what started as consensual sex became non-consensual.

Wikileaks quotes Mr Assange as saying the accusations are "without basis" and that their appearance "at this moment is deeply disturbing". A later message on the Wikileaks Twitter feed says the group has been warned to expect "dirty tricks".
21 August 2010

The arrest warrant is withdrawn. "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape," says one of Stockholm's chief prosecutors, Eva Finne.

Prosecutors say the investigation into the molestation allegation will continue but it is not a serious enough crime for an arrest warrant.

You need to stop living in the past mate. Lots of things have happened since you last read about this case in 2010.

Sweden drops rape charges against Julian Assange — but not because they think he’s innocent

By Sarah WildmanMay 19, 2017, 2:10pm EDT

Swedish prosecutors announced today that they are dropping a years-long rape investigation against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. Assange, 45, has spent the past five years hiding outin the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, sheltered both from extradition to Sweden, where he faced rape charges, and possible extradition to the United States, where he is under investigation for the release of thousands of highly classified documents leaked by former US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning.



But just because Sweden is dropping the rape charge doesn’t mean he’s free.

British officials said today they would still arrest Assange if he stepped beyond the embassy’s grounds — it turns out they have a warrant for his arrest for a different charge: failure to appear in court in the United Kingdom. And the US Justice Department is reportedlypreparing charges against him. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has called Assange’s arrest a “priority.”

Nor does this mean Sweden believes him to be innocent.

“I can conclude, based on the evidence, that probable cause for this crime still exists,” Marianne Ny, the lead prosecutor in Sweden, told reporters today.


The case revolves around accusations from two women leveled against Assange back in 2010 in Sweden. In both cases, the women say the sex began as consensual but when they wanted to stop, it became forced. And in at least one of the cases, the accuser saw her identity tarnished as a result of stepping forward.

But the Swedish lead prosecutors believe the investigation has been completely stymied by Assange’s continued protection by Ecuador. Ny vowed to reopen prosecution — but only if Assange shows up in Sweden before 2020, when the statue of limitations runs out on the case. That’s unlikely to happen.

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/5/19/...ecuador-london

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

You need to stop living in the past mate. Lots of things have happened since you last read about this case in 2010.

The alleged rape incidents took place in 2010.

The police investigation was completed in 2010.

Assange was questioned twice and released without charge in 2010.

The arrest warrant was withdrawn in 2010.

Stockholm's chief prosecutor said "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape," in 2010.

No new evidence has emerged since 2010.

The article you posted doesn't mention any new evidence?
----

You said:

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Lots of things have happened since you last read about this case in 2010.

Yes, Harry lots of things have happened since 2010, 2 World Cups, 8 summers, Trump getting elected etc

But, can you list all the new evidence against Assange in regard to these rape allegations that has come to light since 2010 ?

Originally Posted by foobar

The alleged rape incidents took place in 2010.

The police investigation was completed in 2010.

Assange was questioned twice and released without charge in 2010.

The arrest warrant was withdrawn in 2010.

Stockholm's chief prosecutor said "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape," in 2010.

No new evidence has emerged since 2010.

The article you posted doesn't mention any new evidence?
----

You said:

Yes, Harry lots of things have happened since 2010, 2 World Cups, 8 summers, Trump getting elected etc

But, can you list all the new evidence against Assange in regard to these rape allegations that has come to light since 2010 ?

It seems English is not your first language. The lead prosecutors quotes speak for themselves.

By the way, this is world news, so even if your posts are irrelevant and out of date, a link is still required.

Making the usual array of new friends within SP/World News, huh Harry.

Good to see.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

It seems English is not your first language. The lead prosecutors quotes speak for themselves.

Nothing in that article you posted or any of the quotes you've provided suggest any new evidence has emerged since 2010 so saying the article speaks for itself just means you have nothing to back up the nonsense you post.

The allegations of both women are a matter of public record, you can find all the required information within 30 secs of googling and you yourself have called Assange a rapist dozens of times on these boards, ...so can you say in your own words which specific details of these allegations amount to rape in your view?

Please dont post links to articles you've obviously not read or can understand, I want you to articulate in your own words which specific part of these allegations amount to rape?

Originally Posted by foobar

Nothing in that article you posted or any of the quotes you've provided suggest any new evidence has emerged since 2010 so saying the article speaks for itself just means you have nothing to back up the nonsense you post.

The allegations of both women are a matter of public record, you can find all the required information within 30 secs of googling and you yourself have called Assange a rapist dozens of times on these boards, ...so can you say in your own words which specific details of these allegations amount to rape in your view?

Please dont post links to articles you've obviously not read or can understand, I want you to articulate in your own words which specific part of these allegations amount to rape?

Sorry, but which bit of this do you not understand?

This bit?

“I can conclude, based on the evidence, that probable cause for this crime still exists,” Marianne Ny, the lead prosecutor in Sweden, told reporters today.

Or this bit?

the Swedish lead prosecutors believe the investigation has been completely stymied by Assange’s continued protection by Ecuador. Ny vowed to reopen prosecution — but only if Assange shows up in Sweden before 2020, when the statue of limitations runs out on the case.

Perhaps the Lead Prosecutor on the case doesn't use unattributed Google links as the basis for her evidence?

The Lead Prosecutor is quite damning about how the rapist is trying to avoid facing justice.

So is the victim.

Why is it so hard for you to accept?

She accused him of having sex with her as she slept without using a condom, despite repeatedly having denied him unprotected sex – an act that constitutes rape under Swedish law.

<snip>

Mr Assange was questioned by an Ecuadorian prosecutor with Swedish officials present inside the embassy in November, following a bilateral agreement that ended years of legal wrangling.


Prosecutors said the interview sparked further investigations but "no further measures remaining that are possible to take in order to further the investigation".

Ms Ny said the investigation could have progressed if Mr Assange was “formally served notice of the crimes of which he is suspected”, adding: “This was a measure which was to have been conducted during the interview in London but Mr Assange refused to make it possible.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7744741.html

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/5/19/...ecuador-london

"By Sarah Wildman May 19, 2017, 2:10pm EDT "

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

“I can conclude, based on the evidence, that probable cause for this crime still exists,” Marianne Ny, the lead prosecutor in Sweden, told reporters today.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7744741.html

"

• Lizzie Dearden
  
• @lizziedearden
  
• Friday 19 May 2017 13:31

You're waffling again. That's two posts in two threads.

Not had your morning coffee yet?

Harry, those quotes you provided relate to unsubstantiated opinions and make zero reference to any fact based evidence about the case.

As you've called Assange "The blonde rapist" at least a dozen times on these boards, I've therefore asked you to point out in your own words the specific detail in the statements/testimonies( available via google ) of both women which you consider make a case for rape?

If you fail to provide a detailed answer in your own words, we can only assume you're a stooge for the right wing echo chamber who doesn't actually understand the meaning behind what he posts but is happy to mindlessly and moronically regurgitate something which didn't make any sense the first time it was said....by other people.

Any known case that a whistleblower was appreciated once he publicized an info showing a despicable handling of a govt given a full trust by their subjects?

Originally Posted by David48atTD

I used to have a bit of time for this guy, but recently he's proving himself to be a complete twat.

I would imagine 6 years in a room with a cat would lead to some profound mental readjustments - to be polite

Originally Posted by Airportwo

I would imagine 6 years in a room with a cat would lead to some profound mental readjustments - to be polite

Just realised why Hick is in Ecuador, him and Pat are working for MI5