UK 'threatens' to raid Ecuador embassy over Assange

Well, what I've heard, from various sources in different ways, is that male-female relations are a bit skewed in Sweden. That they have taken feminism a bit too far. In that sense Assange could well be justified in not wanting to go back because he may well be guilty under their laws, even though most other Western countries wouldn't consider it a crime. I certainly wouldn't.

Is it possible that the US doesn't have any plans to get him from Sweden, but his fears of being extradited to Sweden are real but for the reason that he could be convicted for the sex "crime", rather than an extradition to US threat? Or maybe he could be a bit paranoid (not unjustifiably) about the US getting him but that the threat doesn't actually exist at this time?

I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud. It still seems a bit melodramatic to me, but I certainly concede that it's highly unlikely he raped those girls.

 

The amount of resources being expended to "get him" along with the interpol request considering the nature of the ALLEGED crime for which he has not been charged with, is totally out of proportion. That in itself should send alarm bells ringing.

 

Well, the one thing that can't be questioned is that it's become extremely high-profile.

I wouldn't be surprised if subtle pressure had been exerted on the Swedes to get him back to Sweden by US people, but I think it is more likely because they think it will be a good way to either shut him up, because he may well be convictable under some crazy law, or even just to discredit him by putting the picture in people's minds of someone who takes advantage of women.

 

The amount of people I've had to correct because they believe he is wanted for rape is astounding.

 

Assange is a hacker who has had total disregard for communication and privacy laws for most of his life.
He pushed his luck just a little too far by publishing military documents online.

He has achieved what he was really after - notoriety and fame

 

I did not know that people here believe so much the story told by western guverments.

In Europe he has many supporters

 

and the guvmint is a _____________ (insert) who have total disregard for _________(insert)
and they want to achieve what they are really after _________________(insert).

 

bless you, you are so sweet and naive :|

 

Subtle? There's nothing subtle about any of this. His organisation has provided the most truthful accounts of the duplicitous nature of our totalitarian war-mongering regimes and he is unfairly persecuted for it, deemed an enemy of the state and will face execution at the hands of a government whose president personally manages a kill list.

He's on his own in a foreign country, rejected by those sworn to protect him, fighting for truth and his life. Unlike those fawning, megalomaniacal global politicians, history will be very kind to him.

 

Totally agree with you - but just because governments are lying evil bastards doesn't mean Assange is an angel

 

How exactly is he fighting for truth ?

I really do not understand the double standards expressed here.
Many on this site are constantly harping on about their right to privacy. To be able to conduct their affairs in private.

And a site such as wikileaks thinks it has the right to make public anything and everything it gets it's hands on, as it sees fit.
And that, somehow, is a noble cause and makes them fighters for truth!

How would everybody here feel if somebody hacked into the SS database and leaked a copy of all the PMs to wikileaks who published it.
Oh I suppose you don't think they would cos they are good guys and wouldn't do such a thing.

Wikileaks is at about the same level as creepshots.com (see recent article in The Age).
The guys who run creepshots are just as likely to end up in the same situation - only it would be some girl's father gunning after them rather than the US govt

 

.

 

Clearly you are not asking me for an education on the impact of wiki leaks on recent history because you would have to be living under a rock to have missed the Climategate, Abu Ghraib and similar outrageous activities they have had the fortitude to publish.

To the extent that it is not possible for you to live under a rock, Your inane analogies belie your intent.

The facts are they have imposed a huge restraint and hindrance against the global forces that would otherwise act with impunity, hiding behind a controlled and sycophantic media. To a large degree they had restored some criticality to the media and given strength to others that would see the truth of such things outed.

Opposing him, as I said is a president who has a sideline job in managing extra judicial killings and an extensive lineup of politicians and governments that support the idea of murdering and torturing potentially innocent people is appropriate. That includes, apparently, Australia, Sweden and the UK.

Go the Hawks!! Vote or else!! Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, oi, oi, oi!!

 

Trew. There are many adjectives I could use at length in a forceful rebuttal of your post.

Instead, I will use just two in a respectful way........ "wrong" and "naive"

 

As a former soldier when I heard of these leaks I was angry. Angry because the MSM showed politicians and commentators telling people wiki leaks had put lives on the line in the field. I haven't seen direct evidence of this and will sit on the fence on wether I support wikileaks because I haven't bothered to educate myself on these claims. I will say though, that wikileaks has a responsibility to filter what it releases so that real people don't get hurt.

Onto Assange. Anyone who thinks this witch hunt is legit has rocks in their head.

Firstly, and I may gain the rath of a few female members here, but here goes (freedom of speech and all).

Can you imagine what would happen if a female fronted a cop shop in Australia and told a male police officer she had been raped. He goes and gets a female colleague to help take down the details. After an hour or so of them both trying to get the story straight.

Female officer: "So you had consenting intercourse with Mr Assange?"

Victim: " Yes but I told him to wear a condom"

Female Officer: " did you see him put one on?"

Victim: " Um I don't remember, I had had a few drinks"

Female officer: "at what point did you realise that he wasn't wearing a condom?"

Victim: " Um, at the end"

Female Officer: "You mean to tell me, you had full sexual intercourse and had no idea if Mr Assange was wearing a condom or not throughout the entire event..? Did you at any time tell him to stop?"

Victim: "No"

Female Officer: "But you still consider yourself as being raped?"

Victim: "Yes"

Female officer: "Get out of my office".

The fact that the original prosecutor found no charges could be laid in a country where RAPE is a very loose term. The fact that the two "victims" only wanted that Assange be forced to take a STI test, to which he later did. The fact that Assange has from the start, said he is willing to speak to the prosecutor in person in England or via Skype and answer all questions. The fact That prosecutor refuses to do so unless in Sweden screams that this is a huge witch hunt of which ours and the UK governments should be ashamed of.

As for the comments above condemning him for breaches of privacy blah blah. Really? Bringing to light the disgusting things our governments are doing ON OUR BEHALF without our knowledge is hardly something to condem.

 

^ No rath from me

 

Hey we all know that our gubermint is a pack of thieving lying murdering kleptomaniac b@stards so what are we arguing about?

Kind Regards
non recourse

 

Yes I do live under a rock - haven't heard of any of those. You can just assume I am an ignorant moron.


I mean if they did something useful like publish the real figures of how much gold China is important I might take more notice.

 

The said thing is, ours is one of the better governments in the world.