• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

UK to Invade Equador!!!!!!!!!!!111 IF Wikileaks dude not handed over.

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
I don't think the UK will invade the Ecuadorian embassy. I don't think the UK has made such a threat either. I think Ecuadorian representatives are full of shit, which is to be expected from a corrupt nation.

[Some] people seem to think Assange is a big deal. He isn't. If Ecuador want to host him in their embassy, abusing the political asylum status, let them. He's wanted for questioning and there is an order out for his arrest. The legal system cannot be disregarded just because some Aussie nut clinging to his tin foil hat doesn't wanna show up. Laws apply to everyone, that is how it works. If he really thinks he'll be extradited from Sweden to the US (which is highly unlikely that he will be, seeing how he might face the penalty of death) then, by all means, sit and wait in the embassy.
Yup.

I think that the thought that Sweden would extradite him is stupid and i completely agree that he has to face the law of Sweden (people argue about this but the no infomed consent laws about rape exist in both the US and the UK too) and report for questioning.

That would be required of ANYONE in ANY nation.

Don't back down on this Sweden, everyone is watching.

We will do our best to get him to you, you can count on that.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
I give up, there is no argument against CT stupidity.

I do like your sources though, from the mouth of convicted criminals.
You were saying?

http://www.theage.com.au/national/us-in-pursuit-of-assange-cables-reveal-20120817-24e8u.html#ixzz23rH1jUZy

And if you, you know, actually followed the actual story, you'd know that Assange doesn't really have anything to fear about the rape charge, the evidence is flimsy and the counterevidence against rape is pretty strong:

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-12-09/us/28247531_1_wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-swedish-women-condom

Anyone who actually thinks Assange gives a damn about the consequences of a rape prosecution in SWEDEN doesn't know what they're talking about. Him being convicted in the US without a doubt means either death or torture for life. Being convicted in Sweden (and based on the evidence, that's highly unlikely) is a relative CAKEWALK.
 
Last edited:

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
Oh and Pingvin, just a reminder that the US successfully bullied Sweden into gettting their politicians to act over FUCKING PIRATE BAY or else they'd face trade sanctions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkJR-aBoZuI

Just admit that Sweden is America's bitch.

Edit: and an excellent article on US/Sweden by one of America's pre-eminent civil liberties journalists, Glenn Greenwald:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/20/julian-assange-right-asylum

If one asks current or former WikiLeaks associates what their greatest fear is, almost none cites prosecution by their own country. Most trust their own nation's justice system to recognize that they have committed no crime. The primary fear is being turned over to the US. That is the crucial context for understanding Julian Assange's 16-month fight to avoid extradition to Sweden, a fight that led him to seek asylum, Tuesday, in the London Embassy of Ecuador.

The evidence that the US seeks to prosecute and extradite Assange is substantial. There is no question that the Obama justice department has convened an active grand jury to investigate whether WikiLeaks violated the draconian Espionage Act of 1917. Key senators from President Obama's party, including Senate intelligence committee chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, have publicly called for his prosecution under that statute. A leaked email from the security firm Stratfor – hardly a dispositive source, but still probative – indicated that a sealed indictment has already been obtained against him. Prominent American figures in both parties have demanded Assange's lifelong imprisonment, called him a terrorist, and even advocated his assassination .


For several reasons, Assange has long feared that the US would be able to coerce Sweden into handing him over far more easily than if he were in Britain. For one, smaller countries such as Sweden are generally more susceptible to American pressure and bullying.

For another, that country has a disturbing history of lawlessly handing over suspects to the US. A 2006 UN ruling found Sweden in violation of the global ban on torture for helping the CIA render two suspected terrorists to Egypt, where they were brutally tortured (both individuals, asylum-seekers in Sweden, were ultimately found to be innocent of any connection to terrorism and received a monetary settlement from the Swedish government).

Perhaps most disturbingly of all, Swedish law permits extreme levels of secrecy in judicial proceedings and oppressive pre-trial conditions, enabling any Swedish-US transactions concerning Assange to be conducted beyond public scrutiny. Ironically, even the US State Department condemned Sweden's "restrictive conditions for prisoners held in pretrial custody", including severe restrictions on their communications with the outside world.

Assange's fear of ending up in the clutches of the US is plainly rational and well-grounded. One need only look at the treatment over the last decade of foreign nationals accused of harming American national security to know that's true; such individuals are still routinely imprisoned for lengthy periods without any charges or due process. Or consider the treatment of Bradley Manning, accused of leaking to WikiLeaks: a formal UN investigation found that his pre-trial conditions of severe solitary confinement were "cruel, inhuman and degrading", and he now faces capital charges of aiding al-Qaida. The Obama administration's unprecedented obsession with persecuting whistleblowers and preventing transparency – what even generally supportive, liberal magazines call "Obama's war on whistleblowers" – makes those concerns all the more valid.

No responsible person should have formed a judgment one way or the other as to whether Assange is guilty of anything in Sweden. He has not even been charged, let alone tried or convicted, of sexual assault, and he is entitled to a presumption of innocence. The accusations made against him are serious ones, and deserve to be taken seriously and accorded a fair and legal resolution.

But the WikiLeaks founder, like everyone else, is fully entitled to invoke all of his legal rights, and it's profoundly reckless and irresponsible to suggest, as some have , that he has done anything wrong by doing so. Seeking asylum on the grounds of claimed human rights violations is a longstanding and well-recognized right in international law. It is unseemly, at best, to insist that he forego his rights in order to herd him as quickly as possible to Sweden.

Assange is not a fugitive and has not fled. Everyone knows where he is. If Ecuador rejects his asylum request, he will be right back in the hands of British authorities, who will presumably extradite him to Sweden without delay. At every step of the process, he has adhered to, rather than violated, the rule of law. His asylum request of yesterday is no exception.

Julian Assange has sparked intense personal animosity, especially in media circles – a revealing irony, given that he has helped to bring about more transparency and generated more newsworthy scoops than all media outlets combined over the last several years. That animosity often leads media commentators to toss aside their professed beliefs and principles out of an eagerness to see him shamed or punished.

But ego clashes and media personality conflicts are pitifully trivial when weighed against what is at stake in this case: both for Assange personally and for the greater cause of transparency. If he's guilty of any crimes in Sweden, he should be held to account. But until then, he has every right to invoke the legal protections available to everyone else. Even more so, as a foreign national accused of harming US national security, he has every reason to want to avoid ending up in the travesty known as the American judicial system.
 
Last edited:

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,220
26
91
Sorry but I will rejoice at the rage that the lefties will show once this idiot is killed by the FSB or in a US prison.
 

gingermeggs

Golden Member
Dec 22, 2008
1,157
0
71
Well i was asked to apologize for making a mistake, you do know that everyone make mistakes?

However after this, i think i'll just tell you that i'm sorry that i thought you were another retard who is just as stupid as you are.

If that's not enough for the mods you went crying to, so be it.

Oh, and fuck off you ridiculous conspiracy theorist retard.
You make a slanderous allegation- its a mistake...
Hes makes an allegation hes a retard- starting to see who our little shell shocked Zionist lad really is, not My Gallant Darling- such irony to the Jews that really suffered in Europe over the last 500years, shame on you!

Weird, I actually liked the way you think, up until this "breakdown" your having......Bit like the music of Billy Joel, once you understand it..it stinks!
 
Last edited:

gingermeggs

Golden Member
Dec 22, 2008
1,157
0
71
And justice for the two women accusing Assange of committing a crime is to let him go to Ecuador? Justice is not following the judicial process, as stated by the law? Justice is to be granted political asylum to avoid a European arrest order?

Taking Assange's side while taking about justice is a joke.
You don't have any real knowledge on Assange you are just the cleaner for the swede injustice system! When he gets set to the USA you will disappear....

Looks like they do want him(US gub), but you already know that don't you!

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/14587818/cables-show-us-seeks-assange-report/
 

MrColin

Platinum Member
May 21, 2003
2,403
3
81
What if he did rape her? Do you know for a fact that he didn't? He should be tried as charged to see what the real facts are.

Why bring the US into it. It is between the UK, Sweden and Ecuador.
If you read the the woman's account of what happened, you'd see it doesn't sound anything like any definition of rape (non-consensual sex). She consented but he didn't wear a condom, waaaaaa!
 

PingviN

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2009
1,848
12
81
Oh and Pingvin, just a reminder that the US successfully bullied Sweden into gettting their politicians to act over FUCKING PIRATE BAY or else they'd face trade sanctions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkJR-aBoZuI

Just admit that Sweden is America's bitch.
Well TPB was (and is) illegal. Seeing how strong the US film and music industry is, I really think people overreact when the US applies pressure to have actions taken against Sweden. It's that, let it go, or invade us. They don't have any other options.

No, I don't think Sweden is America's bitch. I think Sweden and the US have several important trade connections and in this case the US went the Russian route and used them to get results. Having followed and read the TPB case, I don't think them being convicted was unjust. I think the damages were ridiculous, but there it no question in my mind that they are guilty.

Your article is the same bullshit you've posted several times already in new form. There are EU laws that stops extraditions when the penalty might be death. Re-rolling the Egyptian extradition (where guarantees were given) isn't gonna work for you. Assange is a much larger public profile. The case has been discussed over and over and over in the media. Unjustly (because penalty of death) extraditing him isn't gonna happen. The US isn't that interested. Sweden isn't that interested. He's wanted for questioning, that is. If you haven't noticed for the last, what, 16 months? Assange and pals has been on a mission to spew bullshit lies about Sweden, Swedish media, the judicial system, the UK, the US and all else. No fault can be found with Assange, it's all a big conspiracy. You know what? Throw enough bullshit around and some will stick. Assange is wanted for questioning. Swedish and European law states these questionings will be held in Sweden. Assange is required to go to Sweden for questioning. Really, it's that fucking simple. It's Assange that has made a big deal out of it and it could've been over 16 months ago. These are consequences of his own actions.
 

marvdmartian

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2002
5,515
1
81
Bucket full of fucks given is empty.

So he was granted asylum based on lies (ie, that Sweden would extradite him to the US, which is against the European Convention. He can sit and wait in the embassy for as long as he wants. Sooner or later, he will crack.

Claiming the accusations against him are a product of US exerting influence over the Swedish government is ridiculous.

Assange is fucked. He can't leave Britain so the granted asylum is worth something between jack and shit. He's a paranoid narcissist and now he has painted himself up in a corner. Ecuador is also really going out on a limb here disrespecting a European arrest order like this.
Not to mention, asylum is usually requested and granted for POLITICAL reasons.......i.e.-Cuban refugees requesting asylum because they feel they will be persecuted back home, etc.

Assange requested asylum to beat a criminal charge. Ecuador should have tossed his ass out the gate, the moment he entered. But Assange is so convinced that he's being persecuted, he's obviously been able to convince at least one other person (more than that, by the looks of this thread!) of that "fact". :rolleyes:
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
Well TPB was (and is) illegal. Seeing how strong the US film and music industry is, I really think people overreact when the US applies pressure to have actions taken against Sweden. It's that, let it go, or invade us. They don't have any other options.

No, I don't think Sweden is America's bitch. I think Sweden and the US have several important trade connections and in this case the US went the Russian route and used them to get results. Having followed and read the TPB case, I don't think them being convicted was unjust. I think the damages were ridiculous, but there it no question in my mind that they are guilty.

Your article is the same bullshit you've posted several times already in new form. There are EU laws that stops extraditions when the penalty might be death. Re-rolling the Egyptian extradition (where guarantees were given) isn't gonna work for you. Assange is a much larger public profile. The case has been discussed over and over and over in the media. Unjustly (because penalty of death) extraditing him isn't gonna happen. The US isn't that interested. Sweden isn't that interested. He's wanted for questioning, that is. If you haven't noticed for the last, what, 16 months? Assange and pals has been on a mission to spew bullshit lies about Sweden, Swedish media, the judicial system, the UK, the US and all else. No fault can be found with Assange, it's all a big conspiracy. You know what? Throw enough bullshit around and some will stick. Assange is wanted for questioning. Swedish and European law states these questionings will be held in Sweden. Assange is required to go to Sweden for questioning. Really, it's that fucking simple. It's Assange that has made a big deal out of it and it could've been over 16 months ago. These are consequences of his own actions.
Why didn't Sweden do anything about TPB *BEFORE* the US threatened trade sanctions then?

To cave in to trade sanctions just because a website lets you download movies DOES make you America's bitch. Do you ever think Sweden could make threats against the US like that and get our congress to jump for you? It's not that our movie and music industry is powerful, it's that we are the richest/most powerful nation in the world and our politicans can flex their muscles at your small country. Thus, your are our bitch.

Oh, and your shameful legal system more resembles a Banana Republic rather than a typical open democratic Western European nation.

http://www.fairtrials.net/publications/article/julian-assange-and-detention-before-trial-in-sweden

Relevant portions highlighted:

http://ggdrafts.blogspot.com.br/2012/06/swedish-justice.html

Even our state department (ironically) condemned Sweden over your shameful remand procedures. I never would have thought there'd be a western European country with a WORSE judicial system than the US:

http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/eur/154453.htm

DO YOU SEE WHY JULIAN MIGHT NOT WANT TO GO TO YOUR COUNTRY?
 
Last edited:

PingviN

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2009
1,848
12
81
Not to mention, asylum is usually requested and granted for POLITICAL reasons.......i.e.-Cuban refugees requesting asylum because they feel they will be persecuted back home, etc.
Ecuador only granted him asylum to mess with the US. Ecuador doesn't care for freedom of speech, they never have and that has not changed because of Assange. If anything, Ecuadorian journalists should seek political asylum. It's a joke. President Rafael Correa talks about "ethics" while persecuting journalists in his own country.

It's a farce. Would they've granted him asylum if Wikileaks had focused on Ecuador instead of the US? Nope.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,325
126
If you read the the woman's account of what happened, you'd see it doesn't sound anything like any definition of rape (non-consensual sex). She consented but he didn't wear a condom, waaaaaa!
I don't get that. If she did not consent to sex without a condom that would be actual rape, right? If she did consent to sex with him and then afterwards she got pissed that he didn't wear a condom, but never told him to stop during the process, then WTF?

She either said "no" or she didn't, right?
 

PingviN

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2009
1,848
12
81
I don't get that. If she did not consent to sex without a condom that would be actual rape, right? If she did consent to sex with him and then afterwards she got pissed that he didn't wear a condom, but never told him to stop during the process, then WTF?

She either said "no" or she didn't, right?
There are four complaints, one regarding unlawful coercion, two regarding sexual molestation and one regarding rape, where the woman claims he had unprotected sex with her while she was sleeping. So she didn't say neither yes nor no, because she was sleeping (her claim).
 

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,346
1
0
U.S. facing embarrassment in the OAS over Assange

The Organization of American States has 23 members. The US lost the vote 20 to 3.

Voting along side the US was Canada as well as Trinidad and Tobago.

Even if you support the US, you have to question what the return will be on spending all of this political capital to get Assange.

I mean how much more secure is each American citizen going to be with Assange in Gitmo?

Uno
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
U.S. facing embarrassment in the OAS over Assange

The Organization of American States has 23 members. The US lost the vote 20 to 3.

Voting along side the US was Canada as well as Trinidad and Tobago.

Even if you support the US, you have to question what the return will be on spending all of this political capital to get Assange.

I mean how much more secure is each American citizen going to be with Assange in Gitmo?

Uno
If we count up the vote, we get 4 and not 3:

US - 1
Canada - 1
Trinada - 1
Tobago - 1
 

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,346
1
0
If we count up the vote, we get 4 and not 3:

US - 1
Canada - 1
Trinada - 1
Tobago - 1
Republic of Trinidad and Tobago is just one country.

But if you want to award them two votes, I won't object. Though, I think that you would have more credibility if you employed correct spelling.

Uno
 
Last edited:

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
18,445
2,267
126
You don't even know the particulars of why he is being accused of 'rape' (which isn't really what it is in the first place). Don't comment on what you don't know.
You have no idea what I know and don't know. Just interjecting your silly assumptions.
 

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,346
1
0
What if he did rape her? Do you know for a fact that he didn't? He should be tried as charged to see what the real facts are.
You have no idea what I know and don't know.
What makes you think that anyone cares about what you know?

After all, everyone can read the words you post. And those words make what you don't know obvious.

Specifically:

"Contrary to popular belief, Julian Assange is not a criminal. He has not been charged with or convicted of any crime, nor is he wanted in any country on criminal charges."

You are welcome to dislike Julian. You are welcome to dislike me. That is your opinion. And you are entitled to it.

You are however not entitled to your own facts. And that's a real fact.

Uno
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,220
26
91
Why? That would pretty much prove them right about the US government.
Leaking classified documents getting people killed is a game that can only land you in one of two places.

And how would the FSB taking him out prove anything about the US government? Don't forget he pissed of the Rooskies too, and Pooty-poot is back "officially" in charge.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY