Socialist, not communist. Big difference
Printable View
Socialist, not communist. Big difference
Retard and Fuckwit, small difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer
From The Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary..Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer
capitalism
noun ˈkępɪtəlɪzəm ˈkępɪtəlɪzəm
an economic system in which a country's businesses and industry are controlled and run for profit by private owners rather than by the government
the growth of industrial capitalism in the West
socialism
noun
ˈsəʊʃəlɪzəm ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm
a set of political and economic theories based on the belief that everyone has an equal right to a share of a country's wealth and that the government should own and control the main industries
communism
noun
ˈkɒmjunɪzəm ˈkɑːmjunɪzəm
1 a political movement that believes in an economic system in which the state controls the means of producing everything on behalf of the people. It aims to create a society in which everyone is treated equally.2 Communism the system of government by a ruling Communist Party, such as in the former Soviet Union
You have misinterpreted my statement, but hey what's new.Quote:
Originally Posted by dobella
Along with many others heads of governmanets around the world who actually threaten countries and invade countries illegally, but hey what's new.Quote:
Originally Posted by dobella
You have also not understood that Assange is not wanted in Sweden for Rape, but again whats new. :rolleyes:
It were hylighted as a paw translation. I hav a buton whic ascs if I wont it trnslated and pooshed the button. I think the joust of it was redible.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by larvidchr
Oh Oh, I am willing to apologise if you give me your version of the 2 girls haveQuote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
'To Get On With It'.
Maybe i did read you wrong but it certainly sounded like you were supporting an accused sexual criminal.
The reported story, not mine, indicates that the two girls got together, some time after the alleged sexual molestation. One of the girls is reported to have CIA links. The two girls go the police to ask for a HIV test, as opposed to a sexual health clinic.:confused:
The police take details and pass the info on to a swedish prosecutor who rules to drop any case.
The MSM either receive details or are prompted by an unknown person to re-examine the story. A bright political prosecutor re starts the investigation. It snow ball from there with more and more conspiracy possibilities.
The fact that two girls had sex with one guy, at different times, is not in my mind a life threatening experience and as such they should get over the alleged sexual misconduct and get a life. In my youth girls were on the pill for "mensuration regularity/flow" reasons and fucked like rabbits.
Of course now there is no teenage promiscuity/they all use condoms/ they are expert at BJs and into anal.:rolleyes:
Please don't reply with any further analysis of my opinion as it doesn't matter to me, the two girls, Assange and probably most on this board one iota.
I suppose some would find not using a condom a crime, some would find not pulling your dick out of her mouth a crime, some using her arse a crime.Quote:
Originally Posted by dobella
I dont.
Ok, i have digested your view and let it go at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
It is all political anyway and we have no say in the outcome but i hope Assange gets raped in the US for being a cocky, above any law and letting personal details out that COULD cause serious damage to world relations.
So , the two ladies later stuck their heads together, and discovered that he didn't use a condom with either of themQuote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Still they slept with him on several occasions
That's it, isn't it ?
Has Sweden ever handed over people to countries with a death penalty ?
Were these people executed ?
Unfortunately yes to both
^^^^
The Girls did not go to the Police for a HIV test of themselves oHoH you got that one wrong :);) but to ask if Assange could be forced to take one, when questioned why they wanted that the Prosecutors eventually decided to interview Assange as a suspect in Rape and sexual molestation.
And Assange is not charged since they have had no chance to do the interviews necessary to present him with a formal charge, but he is wanted and ordered arrested by several Swedish Judges as a "Suspect of Rape and 2 counts of sexual molestation" and I'll happily bet you a beer that he will be charged and jailed.
If he eventually will get a conviction? I have no idea, that will have to be sorted out in Sweden.
And oHoH i hope you understand even if a sexual relation starts as consensual, if at a point one part asks you to stop and you carry on by force, it is rape no matter how you try to twist it, sex is only consensual as long as both party's still agree on having sex, if you do not understand this you might be in for a very nasty surprise suddenly. You are not setting the rules the law is.
^ and you are not telling the whole story there Helge, are we talking about returned asylum seekers or captured terrorists in Afghanistan perhaps or similar.
Does it matter ?Quote:
Originally Posted by larvidchr
You and me do still have principles ?
They properly was scum of the earth
146 is the number, do your own digging, you lazy c,,t ! :)
The swedes ain't proud of this one (well some of them ain't; not all is rosy in Gamla Fria )
Yes of-cause it matters Helge, and thanks now I don't have to look since you have given the answer by not answering ;) and I can continue being a lazy c,,t :) it is my hobby and what I do best these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by helge
^^ do you actually realise how scary that comment is Lardy? Different laws for different people, what a mockery of the entire underpining of the western legal framework.
You are making judgments about the person as justifications for extraditing them to the US and you can be sure that the US considers him to be worse than an international terrorist and thus it is perfectly alright to send him there for possible execution.
And this is the elephant in the room that the likes of Lardy are refusing to acknowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by dobella
:(Quote:
Originally Posted by larvidchr
And the answer is ?Quote:
Originally Posted by larvidchr
They were Balts handed over to the Soviets
They are dead, mate
Along with some other aspects in my life.Quote:
Originally Posted by larvidchr
But yesterday has gone, tomorrow never comes, live for the moment.
You do not even understand my comment or you would not have made this post Willy.:mid:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Wilson^^ do you actually realise how scary that comment is Lardy? Different laws for different people, what a mockery of the entire underpining of the western legal framework.
You are making judgments about the person as justifications for extraditing them to the US and you can be sure that the US considers him to be worse than an international terrorist and thus it is perfectly alright to send him there for possible execution.
And this is the elephant in the room that the likes of Lardy are refusing to acknowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by dobella
There can be indeed very distinct differences on refused Asylum seekers with no invite that have entered your country illegally, and is sent back to what was mistakenly and in good faith thought to be reasonable safety in their homeland, if that is what Helge is on about ??, to even debate the issue we would have to know the whole story.
But it is no way near the same as a criminal forcefully brought to Sweden and jailed, and then later with law in hand deliberate and knowingly extradited to a death sentence in a foreign nation, and any speculation that this could happen to Assange is pure unadulterated untrue rubbish.
And don't even try to wipe other posters views of on me Monkeyarse, just stick to what I have posted if you must comment on my posts, still don't expect to get an answer from me, I rarely if ever take you seriously.
Answer? - as I correctly guessed completely unrelated to the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by helge
An old Historic event ;), sure has a lot of bearing on todays Assange case :mid: and how Swedish extradition rules is applied today.
Lots of sad stuff happened in History and no countries is probably free from having committed hideous crimes or made terrible mistakes in the past.
Why not start out with the board and editors of the New York Times ?Quote:
Originally Posted by dobella
It's all historic, Lars
But it goes to show that countries with a policy of 'never hand over to countries where a death penalty is possible', can be pressured to do just that.
You are aware of the current case DK versus India ?
I don't think the swedes wants him in the first place
It would create hell for them the day they got the the extradition request from the US
A lose lose for the swedes
So that's a no then?Quote:
Originally Posted by larvidchrYou do not even understand my comment or you would not have made this post Willy.:mid:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Wilson^^ do you actually realise how scary that comment is Lardy? Different laws for different people, what a mockery of the entire underpining of the western legal framework.
You are making judgments about the person as justifications for extraditing them to the US and you can be sure that the US considers him to be worse than an international terrorist and thus it is perfectly alright to send him there for possible execution.
And this is the elephant in the room that the likes of Lardy are refusing to acknowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by dobella
There can be indeed very distinct differences on refused Asylum seekers with no invite that have entered your country illegally, and is sent back to what was mistakenly and in good faith thought to be reasonable safety in their homeland, if that is what Helge is on about ??, to even debate the issue we would have to know the whole story.
But it is no way near the same as a criminal forcefully brought to Sweden and jailed, and then later with law in hand deliberate and knowingly extradited to a death sentence in a foreign nation, and any speculation that this could happen to Assange is pure unadulterated untrue rubbish.
And don't even try to wipe other posters views of on me Monkeyarse, just stick to what I have posted if you must comment on my posts, still don't expect to get an answer from me, I rarely if ever take you seriously.
Anyway I think you've drunk enough tonight Lardy, even taking your language skills into account you're still not making sense.
But tell me, why are you so convinced that the US considers him no ill will?
That is all too difficult for the good people here. Could you somehow include Spice Girls into this? With photos, if possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom SawyerFrom The Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary..Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer
capitalism
noun ˈkępɪtəlɪzəm ˈkępɪtəlɪzəm
an economic system in which a country's businesses and industry are controlled and run for profit by private owners rather than by the government
the growth of industrial capitalism in the West
socialism
noun
ˈsəʊʃəlɪzəm ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm
a set of political and economic theories based on the belief that everyone has an equal right to a share of a country's wealth and that the government should own and control the main industries
communism
noun
ˈkɒmjunɪzəm ˈkɑːmjunɪzəm
1 a political movement that believes in an economic system in which the state controls the means of producing everything on behalf of the people. It aims to create a society in which everyone is treated equally.2 Communism the system of government by a ruling Communist Party, such as in the former Soviet Union
Works for the Thais.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
:)
Tomorrow never dies, is a good Bond movie.
Hey, just trying to lighten this up.
This case has nothing to do with the USA.
As much as some here are desperate to make it so, it just isn't the case.
Lunatics abound.
^ I suspect Assange would be thinking very differently atm.
Get ready...........
Julian Assange expected to make statement
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2012/08/1853.jpg
Julian Assange is expected to make a public statement later on the diplomatic row that has engulfed him since being granted asylum by Ecuador.
Wikileaks says its founder will speak outside the Ecuadorean embassy in London, where he has taken refuge.
He faces extradition to Sweden over sexual assault claims, which he denies.
Ecuador's president has suggested Mr Assange could co-operate with Sweden if assurances are given that there would be no extradition to a third country.
Australian Mr Assange, 41 - whose Wikileaks website has published a mass of leaked diplomatic cables embarrassing countries including the US - first walked into the embassy in Knightsbridge, asking for protection, two months ago.
Mr Assange entered the embassy after the UK's Supreme Court dismissed his bid to reopen his appeal against extradition and gave him a two-week grace period before extradition proceedings could start.
It is established international protocol that local police and security forces are not permitted to enter an embassy, unless they have the express permission of the ambassador.