Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Assange Arrested


Recommended Posts

Today;

 

Trump today: 

 

"I know nothing about Wikileaks. It’s not my thing" 

 

Trump, Nov. 4 2016: 

 

“Getting off the plane, they were just announcing new WikiLeaks, and I wanted to stay there, but I didn’t want to keep you waiting...Boy, I love reading those WikiLeaks.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

Trump might have edged the election due to outlets like wikileaks and the dem stuff they released. Not like Trump gives a fuck though and won't be surprised if he ends up in the US, who will have played a part in getting him turfed out of the embassy in the first place I guess.

You guess? Any guesses as to way they didn't just get him turfed out years ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

And on the Today programme. Unbelievable. 

I think this is part of the reason so many don't like what you post. You just insinuated stuff without putting any meat on the bone. Why is it unbelievable? What don't you like about it? What is she defending and why do you disagree with it? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, moof said:

She said he should face his rape accusers in Sweden but not be extradited to America to be put in jail for exposing war crimes. Which is the only sensible position to take. 

It is, although exposing war crimes isn't the only thing Wikileaks have done. I don't think he should be given to the US, knowing what we know about how they treat people in off-country sites. That said, didn't the rape charges get dropped? 

 

It'll be interesting to see what happens. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I think this is part of the reason so many don't like what you post. You just insinuated stuff without putting any meat on the bone. Why is it unbelievable? What don't you like about it? What is she defending and why do you disagree with it? 

I had a feeling rico's Daily Fail headline post might not quite be the whole story of the matter. I don't particularly like Diane Abbot but she's no fool.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

And on the Today programme. Unbelievable. 

Agreed! HOW DARE HE expose our corrupt warmongering western institutions, he should have been worshipping instead!

 

Or maybe you could say that was worth it, that it needed to be done. But then he revealed the corruption of the Democrats became a PUTIN PUPPET! Nevar forget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, VladimirIlyich said:

I had a feeling rico's Daily Fail headline post might not quite be the whole story of the matter. I don't particularly like Diane Abbot but she's no fool.

 

I'm also a vocal critic of Abbott on here, but you're right; you can't trust the headline style posts that Rico puts out. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Strontium Dog said:

Yeah, it turns out they couldn't bring charges because he wouldn't go back to Sweden. How about that.

It's obviously not quite as clear cut as that, as other factors have to be taken into consideration. The Swedish authorities tried to drop it years ago in 2012-13, but the British (who refuse to say whether or not they would extradited him to the US given the chance) persuaded them not to. Plus, although not being an expert in Swedish law (forgive me... we all have our downfalls), I'm pretty sure they can reopen the case as long as it's within the statutory time limitation. Considering they dropped it, but he has still been arrested, you have to wonder if his concerns about extradition weren't legitimate. I still don't know why they couldn't question him in London earlier than they did. If you have no intention of further extradition to the US, and you eventually interview him in London anyway, why couldn't they just do it years ago. 

 

I think there's a legitimate concern, especially if he's innocent of any sexual misconduct or rape allegations, of him being fucked over in the US. It's a messy and unique situation. He absolutely should have to answer his accusers, but there's no reason for him - a man who until proven guilty should remain to be treated as innocent - to be put in the potential danger of being extradited to the US, not when they could have done it in London much earlier.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...