Harleyman Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Perhaps because they feel that his actions have caused (or are causing) them harm? Why were the British so keen to get the Irishman Wiliam Joyce (Lord Haw-Haw) into their clutches? Haw Haw didn't pass any information of a sensitive nature to the Germans because he didn't have any to pass. His act of treason was soley as a propaganda organ for the Nazi overseas radio news service. Despicable as the man was it could be somewhat logically said that his act of treason was less serious than Manning's who did dowload and make public to friends as well as enemies of America a ton of information that could in the future possibly be detrimental to the war on terror/operations in Afganistan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USUK Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Let me ask you. Why is Assange fighting so desperately to avoid extradiction to Sweden if he's as innocent as he keeps saying he is? If I were in his place I'd go voluntarily to Sweden to clear my name. What man with any self respect would want to go around with a reputation as a rapist or sex deviant (whichever it was) on his head? Added to that by not going to Sweden he has more or less become something of a prisoner as far as his freedom to travel is concerned Should he ever in the future go to mainland Europe he will be arrested by Interpol and taken to Sweden for trial. The guy is obviously a phony and a liar through and through. I understand that the charges are that he allegedly raped one of 'em while she was asleep ! His defense will be that he didn't know she was asleep,,, he thought she was English :hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I understand that the charges are that he allegedly raped one of 'em while she was asleep ! His defense will be that he didn't know she was asleep,,, he thought she was English :hihi: I need to start reading the News of the World more often as all I know is that he has some kind of sexual assault charge against him. Trouble is they dont sell the News of the World where I live Must make a note to the missus to start picking up the Enquirer when she goes shopping. I miss out on all these kind of shenanigans going on in the outside world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Unless the bleeding hearts on here try to tell me that the call to kill all Americans [...] is not a declaration of war. If I said this, would America start a war with Britain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Perhaps because they feel that his actions have caused (or are causing) them harm? Which is patently false. Any "damage" was done by the US defence Dept having poor security measures. Assange is simply acting as a conduit (as are the other media who ran with the leaks). The US wants Assange because to not do so, would result in them having to look at their own security (this with Wikileaks is a smoke screen set up by the US govt. to divert attention from it's (poor) security. If he ever gets out of jail, and I hope he wont, I don't recommend he ever tries to visit the Amrican Legion or the VFW ( Veterans of Foreign Wars ) He would, however, be free to visit any other country on earth after his release. History will be his judge, not a few with vested interests. It's sad that your hatred of us is so palpable. You seem to be suffering from the same disease as mr motorbike; I do not hate Americans - can you get that into your head. I do, however, dislike some US policies (as I do my own government). Let me ask you. Why is Assange fighting so desperately to avoid extradiction to Sweden if he's as innocent as he keeps saying he is? Ask your own government. Ask the Swedish government why they dropped all charges then, two weeks later, re-instated them (after telling him he was free to leave the country). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Ask your own government. Ask the Swedish government why they dropped all charges then, two weeks later, re-instated them There is also the aspect that it wasn't a rape charge at first. It was "sex by surprise", or sex without a condom as far as I can translate that. The "guilt because he won't stand trial" is a terrible attack. The police know where he is, and his lawyer is representing him in the courts. If it was such a clear cut case then he never would've been allowed to leave Sweden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Let me ask you. Why is Assange fighting so desperately to avoid extradiction to Sweden if he's as innocent as he keeps saying he is? I would imagine because the US has a better chance of extraditing him from there, though I don't know for certain. It's clear from the testimony in his bail hearing where he was described as a serious flight risk that there is extra motivation coming from somewhere to get him back to Sweden. Fortunately the judge saw right through this nonsense and granted him bail. If I were in his place I'd go voluntarily to Sweden to clear my name. What man with any self respect would want to go around with a reputation as a rapist or sex deviant (whichever it was) on his head? He doesn't need to. If he's not extradited then he's innocent. He can fight his corner from where he's already at. Added to that by not going to Sweden he has more or less become something of a prisoner as far as his freedom to travel is concerned Should he ever in the future go to mainland Europe he will be arrested by Interpol and taken to Sweden for trial. If he's not extradited, that will only be because there is no evidence worth a jot, and there will be no international arrest warrant. The guy is obviously a phony and a liar through and through. There's nothing "obvious" about the man at all unless you've made your mind up without any facts. Fortunately for him, the judge presiding over his bail application saw things entirely differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 There is also the aspect that it wasn't a rape charge at first. It was "sex by surprise", or sex without a condom as far as I can translate that. The "guilt because he won't stand trial" is a terrible attack. The police know where he is, and his lawyer is representing him in the courts. If it was such a clear cut case then he never would've been allowed to leave Sweden. It seems that the prosecutor in the case has been described by some in the Swedish judiciary as a "man hater". It just gets stranger and stranger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USUK Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 If I said this, would America start a war with Britain? Don't think so 'cause it seems no one realy cares what YOU say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I don't see that there's any difference. Wikileaks didn't steal this data, it was given to them, just as it was the editors of the papers. Wikileaks has done nothing more than publish it, exactly as the various editors have done. Now see here, ya blamed liberal elitist with ya fancy book larnin' and facts! You're just tryin' fa complicate things! It's perfectly simple. That gosh darned Juliet Assarde is a communist a-rab terrorist, and we need someone like John Wayne ta up an shoot him straight in his faggot-ass head, so that freedom can prevail. God bless America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.