|
This remembers me of my dad (teacher of 12-18 year olds) telling us how he and his collegue teachers were told not to be with a female student in 1 room anymore to avoid being falsely accused of raping them.
That's some fucked up shit lol.
|
Why did this topic get ressurected from the dead? I know current events are related to the topic, but this topic title is really really really misleading given current events.
Can't the topic be changed to Assange getting asylum or something else less confusing.
|
I don't like defending him for whatever he did with those girls, the fact of the matter is he flew to some country with lax laws and, in all likelihood, used his wealth, age, experience, force of personality and whatever else to exploit girls he wouldn't have been allowed near in my country.
I feel that makes him scum. But scum do not warrant international hooplas with Britain threatening to bust open the doors on the embassy of a friendly country.
Take a gander at this concurrent case involving a sex offender whom britain refuses to extradite: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/06/29/britain-refuses-to-extradite-u-s-sex-crimes-suspect-on-human-rights-grounds/
But I guess that's just coincidence, the ONLY reason Britain is so gung Ho to get assange is cause his crimes, which he hasn't even been charged with, are, I dunno, somehow worse. Even though This other guy is an actual wanted man charged and or convicted with a number of rapes.
Yup, no politics going on here fellows.
|
On August 17 2012 04:11 ninini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€? Of course it's rape, if the woman resisted. The circumstances are irrelevant.
The women themselves have said it was consensual sex.
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On August 17 2012 04:28 Zahir wrote:
I don't like defending him for whatever he did with those girls, the fact of the matter is he flew to some country with lax laws and, in all likelihood, used his wealth, age, experience, force of personality and whatever else to exploit girls he wouldn't have been allowed near in my country.
Yay. Another one who has no fucking idea and just spams his opinion. These women were 26 and 30 years old. Why wouldn't he be allowed near them in the USA?
|
Funny how most of the people I know are in the mindless state of "he's a rapist!!! Disgusting person!! And of course there's no risk for him in going to Sweden! It's because he knows he is guilty of the sex crime that he won't go here! Sweden would never hand him over to the US!", with absolutely no criticism for our media.
I have no clue of whether he did the things he is accused of or not, but if I were in his position I wouldn't dare go to Sweden, too scared of being handed over to the US to do so. Even if 90% of people think that wouldn't happen. Yeah right. You don't go to these lengths over a hole in a condom...
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On August 17 2012 04:11 ninini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€? Of course it's rape, if the woman resisted. The circumstances are irrelevant.
If by resisting you mean agreeing to consensual sex between people over 25 years, throwing a party for him the next day and tweeting how awesome he the next day is then yes, they majorly resisted.
|
On August 17 2012 04:18 Nizaris wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:15 ninini wrote:On August 17 2012 04:13 Nizaris wrote:On August 17 2012 04:11 ninini wrote:On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€? Of course it's rape, if the woman resisted. The circumstances are irrelevant. which is inherently impossible to prove, so all you have is hear-say. in this case since there was no sign of abuse. But that's usually the case when it comes to rape. The jury have to listen to both sides of the story and decide which side seems the most plausible. Are you saying that we shouldn't convict ppl for rape anymore? not a women that willfully lied in some1's bed, kept hanging out with him after the alleged 'rape' and suddenly decided 3 months later it was rape. most rape case have evidence of abuse, or a toxicology report or some shred of physical evidence.
Then he will win the case easily.
|
On August 17 2012 04:34 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:28 Zahir wrote:
I don't like defending him for whatever he did with those girls, the fact of the matter is he flew to some country with lax laws and, in all likelihood, used his wealth, age, experience, force of personality and whatever else to exploit girls he wouldn't have been allowed near in my country. Yay. Another one who has no fucking idea and just spams his opinion. These women were 26 and 30 years old. Why wouldn't he be allowed near them in the USA?
......what?
You mean the talk of molestation didn't refer to child molestation?
Oh my god. These charges are such bull. Like, literally, it's embarrassing.
|
On August 17 2012 04:41 ninini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:18 Nizaris wrote:On August 17 2012 04:15 ninini wrote:On August 17 2012 04:13 Nizaris wrote:On August 17 2012 04:11 ninini wrote:On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€? Of course it's rape, if the woman resisted. The circumstances are irrelevant. which is inherently impossible to prove, so all you have is hear-say. in this case since there was no sign of abuse. But that's usually the case when it comes to rape. The jury have to listen to both sides of the story and decide which side seems the most plausible. Are you saying that we shouldn't convict ppl for rape anymore? not a women that willfully lied in some1's bed, kept hanging out with him after the alleged 'rape' and suddenly decided 3 months later it was rape. most rape case have evidence of abuse, or a toxicology report or some shred of physical evidence. Then he will win the case easily.
just look at the evidence. a dude who is already convicted of sex abuse, the UK won't even let him be extradited, let alone charge an embassy to get him. It's pretty clear to almost every1 this is not about ridiculous sexual assault charges. Ridiculous, yes unless throwing a party and tweeting how awesome your rapist is is standard practice?
|
On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€?
If you actually took some time to understand the accusations you would find that he risks more than that. Prison is not out of the question.
Someone once said: "The new fascism will be anti-fascism".
I am seriously worried about the mindset of some of you people. Mr Assange seems to be on some kind of quest where he sees himself as a citizen above others. He exposes wrong-doings and corruption in his released documents, yet he wont take any responsibility for his own actions. He thinks that he can get away with it by making accusations of "honey-traps" and other even more crazy conspiracy theories.
Meanwhile, his followers does not seem to understand why they should follow the principles of the system of justice by exposing the two women who made the allegations before the case has been treated by a court.
Yesterday the network anonymous decided it was a good idea to take down the homepage of the London metropolitan police.
Why can't a rape charge be just that?
Why do you have to go and make yourself necessary idiots by arguing that crazy conspiracies between certain countries justifies illegal activities and Mr Assange hiding from justice.
Hell, some of you don't even understand the most basic stuff about Sweden.
I'll tell you something: Do not assume that Sweden is a country that will just handily fit into your crazy theories.
In other news.
On the nation wide news this evening officials from the government said that they were very offended by Ecuador's description of Sweden as we accept thousands of asylum-seekers every year based on political reason.
The next thing that will happen is that they will call the Ecuadorian ambassador up so that he can explain why Ecuador is smearing this country and why they are interfering with the European process of justice.
Just so you know.
|
On August 17 2012 04:28 Zahir wrote:
I don't like defending him for whatever he did with those girls, the fact of the matter is he flew to some country with lax laws and, in all likelihood, used his wealth, age, experience, force of personality and whatever else to exploit girls he wouldn't have been allowed near in my country.
Since when does the US stop any man from having consensual sex with 25 year old women?
And I cannot resist commenting on the fact that you seem to think that the USA is superior to countries like Sweden because the US has no/less 'lax laws'.
Also, One-one-one
There is no rape charge. He has not been charged with any crime in Sweden. And if he is eventually charged then it will not be for rape.
As I posted earlier, the media has done some good manipulation with this story.
|
On August 17 2012 04:35 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:11 ninini wrote:On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€? Of course it's rape, if the woman resisted. The circumstances are irrelevant. If by resisting you mean agreeing to consensual sex between people over 25 years, throwing a party for him the next day and tweeting how awesome he the next day is then yes, they majorly resisted.
"Yo policeman me and mah sister met and decided to come here to talk about a dawg called Assange, at first he had consensual sex with both of us, at different times of course, we aren't into menage! But on second thought we decided it was rape and that we will be scarred for life!"
to which the policeman said : "Now, that is rape, we are calling the FBI, the CIA and the OTAN in case the terrorist decides to rip apart another condom Tarzan style"
|
Would be nice to know what Aussies think about all this, pretty sad (but not suprised) to see their goverment being so quiet.
|
On August 17 2012 04:44 one-one-one wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€? If you actually took some time to understand the accusations you would find that he risks more than that. Prison is not out of the question. Someone once said: "The new fascism will be anti-fascism". I am seriously worried about the mindset of some of you people. Mr Assange seems to be on some kind of quest where he sees himself as a citizen above others. He exposes wrong-doings and corruption in his released documents, yet he wont take any responsibility for his own actions. He thinks that he can get away with it by making accusations of "honey-traps" and other even more crazy conspiracy theories. Meanwhile, his followers does not seem to understand why they should follow the principles of the system of justice by exposing the two women who made the allegations before the case has been treated by a court. Yesterday the network anonymous decided it was a good idea to take down the homepage of the London metropolitan police. Why can't a rape charge be just that? Why do you have to go and make yourself necessary idiots by arguing that crazy conspiracies between certain countries justifies illegal activities and Mr Assange hiding from justice. Hell, some of you don't even understand the most basic stuff about Sweden. I'll tell you something: Do not assume that Sweden is a country that will just handily fit into your crazy theories. In other news. On the nation wide news this evening officials from the government said that they were very offended by Ecuador's description of Sweden as we accept thousands of asylum-seekers every year based on political reason. The next thing that will happen is that they will call the Ecuadorian ambassador up so that he can explain why Ecuador is smearing this country and why they are interfering with the European process of justice. Just so you know.
Since he hasn't been charge yet with anything, why does he even have to go to Sweden at all ? Convicted sexual felon don't get extradited from the UK so why him, just to answer some question ? ....
|
On August 17 2012 04:41 ninini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:18 Nizaris wrote:On August 17 2012 04:15 ninini wrote:On August 17 2012 04:13 Nizaris wrote:On August 17 2012 04:11 ninini wrote:On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€? Of course it's rape, if the woman resisted. The circumstances are irrelevant. which is inherently impossible to prove, so all you have is hear-say. in this case since there was no sign of abuse. But that's usually the case when it comes to rape. The jury have to listen to both sides of the story and decide which side seems the most plausible. Are you saying that we shouldn't convict ppl for rape anymore? not a women that willfully lied in some1's bed, kept hanging out with him after the alleged 'rape' and suddenly decided 3 months later it was rape. most rape case have evidence of abuse, or a toxicology report or some shred of physical evidence. Then he will win the case easily.
I sure as hell wouldn't go back to sweden just because i get accused for some bullshit.
I mean:
Best case: I get free but my name is allready tainted, the people that wanted to inform themselves were informed before.
Worst case: You get fined and are now a sex offender for something that wouldn't be a crime anywhere else.
Truely a WIN/WIN for assange, yay!
Btw: How did this absolutely retarded law make it ever into swedens books?
Assange may be an ass but this whole case is just so damn absurd that i just cannot not sympathise whit him...
|
On August 17 2012 04:44 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:28 Zahir wrote:
I don't like defending him for whatever he did with those girls, the fact of the matter is he flew to some country with lax laws and, in all likelihood, used his wealth, age, experience, force of personality and whatever else to exploit girls he wouldn't have been allowed near in my country.
Since when does the US stop any man from having consensual sex with 25 year old women? And I cannot resist commenting on the fact that you seem to think that the USA is superior to countries like Sweden because the US has no/less 'lax laws'. Also, One-one-one There is no rape charge. He has not been charged with any crime in Sweden. And if he is eventually charged then it will not be for rape. As I posted earlier, the media has done some good manipulation with this story.
I had assumed hed had sex with minors (age of consent in Sweden is 15)
I mean It just didn't compute that someone would actually storm an embassy over A rape accusation that my local police would laugh in my face about if I brought them this shit evidence.
A fucking child rapist, Britain won't expedite but a dude who had consensual sex with two mature adult chicks who accuse him of some shit like breaking a condom, suddenly they are gonna bust open the Ecuadorean embassy..... How is this even possible.
|
On August 17 2012 04:50 Nizaris wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:44 one-one-one wrote:On August 17 2012 03:52 Kukaracha wrote:On August 17 2012 03:37 DwD wrote:On August 17 2012 03:02 Fenrax wrote:
It is pretty ridiculous. I am very biased against rapists but this trial is just a joke. And everyone who defends the USA-Sweden-Great Britain connection should check the facts on this case first.
There was no rape. There was no molestation. Well thank god you were there so you know everything that happened!!! Why didn't you step up 2 years ago and this whole mess could've been avoided!!! ... If he is so afraid of getting extradited to the USA from Sweden why did he praise our country so much, placed his wikileaks servers here and even stayed for some time freely in Sweden? ... This whole idea of Sweden extraditing him is such a big lie, if USA wanted him so badly they would've talked to UK since they have a closer relationship. Assange is a coward, who doesn't have the courage to stand up for what he did and now he is trying to make a circus out of it. This is the guy who wanted the truth to come out and for people to stand for their actions. Yet he is unwilling to do so himself. The US-Sweden extradition conventions are different from US-UK extradition conventions, UK law is different from Sweden law, His only risk in Sweden regarding these "rape" charges (if not putting on a condom is rape...) is a 1000€ fine. So, do you think that everyone around him is so blind that they would throw hundred of thousands to help him to avoid that 1000€? If you actually took some time to understand the accusations you would find that he risks more than that. Prison is not out of the question. Someone once said: "The new fascism will be anti-fascism". I am seriously worried about the mindset of some of you people. Mr Assange seems to be on some kind of quest where he sees himself as a citizen above others. He exposes wrong-doings and corruption in his released documents, yet he wont take any responsibility for his own actions. He thinks that he can get away with it by making accusations of "honey-traps" and other even more crazy conspiracy theories. Meanwhile, his followers does not seem to understand why they should follow the principles of the system of justice by exposing the two women who made the allegations before the case has been treated by a court. Yesterday the network anonymous decided it was a good idea to take down the homepage of the London metropolitan police. Why can't a rape charge be just that? Why do you have to go and make yourself necessary idiots by arguing that crazy conspiracies between certain countries justifies illegal activities and Mr Assange hiding from justice. Hell, some of you don't even understand the most basic stuff about Sweden. I'll tell you something: Do not assume that Sweden is a country that will just handily fit into your crazy theories. In other news. On the nation wide news this evening officials from the government said that they were very offended by Ecuador's description of Sweden as we accept thousands of asylum-seekers every year based on political reason. The next thing that will happen is that they will call the Ecuadorian ambassador up so that he can explain why Ecuador is smearing this country and why they are interfering with the European process of justice. Just so you know. Since he hasn't been charge yet with anything, why does he even have to go to Sweden at all ? Convicted sexual felon don't get extradited from the UK so why him, just to answer some question ? ....
I already answered that a few pages ago.
Charges or not is a moot point. He is to be extradited because Sweden requested it and the British high court found the request legal.
|
On August 17 2012 03:48 Pandemona wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 03:33 BadgerBadger8264 wrote:On August 17 2012 02:45 Pandemona wrote:On August 17 2012 02:25 BadgerBadger8264 wrote:On August 17 2012 02:09 Pandemona wrote:On August 17 2012 01:53 Trowa127 wrote:On August 17 2012 01:44 Pandemona wrote:On August 17 2012 01:17 Zennith wrote:On August 17 2012 00:58 TheRealArtemis wrote:
Funny to see people stand up for the guy who may or may not have raped a girl. I dont care what dirty secrets he uncover. The key phrase here is "OR MAY NOT HAVE" He hasn't even been fucking charged with a crime. So if he "didn't" why run from the law, citing the "there going to kill me because i uncovered secrets plee" i think he is digging himself a deeper and deeper hole, there is so many human rights crap you can pull on the wikileaks case, but he knows if he gets found guilty of child rape he will be found guilty no matter what. I think he is hiding for a reason and must be giving Ecudar alot of money to stay hiding. Ok, people really need to look up what he's actually accused off. Throwing around the words 'child rape' is ridiculous, it was consensual sex and only later did the Women decide to bring a complaint against him. If I was him, I'd be scared of extradition as well, the U.S and the U.K have no problem murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians, you think a politically motivated extradition is out of the question? And one-one-one - why is that an issue? What right do the government have to invade our private lives? Some people don't reference 1984 and still make completely valid arguments. Our governments show a complete lack of regard for human rights and international law, and then people are suprised that someone might be scared of them? Is this really so hard to follow? The whole 'anyone who cares about their right to privacy is a conspiracy theoring wielding nutjob' thing is getting so, so old. Its just a back stop when you can't come up with a real argument. For the 10% that ruin our lives doing countless crimes and all the other illegal crap, the policing of the world is having to go this far to find out what and who is breaking the law, and what and who are plotting to do stuff (terrorist sense) To have a safer world for people to "invade my privacy" i could not care less, im all for them invading anything they want of mine i have nothing to hide, feel free, especially if it helps catch the 10% that is ruining it for the rest of us. http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/Commentators often attempt to refute the nothing-to-hide argument by pointing to things people want to hide. But the problem with the nothing-to-hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. By accepting this assumption, we concede far too much ground and invite an unproductive discussion about information that people would very likely want to hide. As the computer-security specialist Schneier aptly notes, the nothing-to-hide argument stems from a faulty "premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong." Surveillance, for example, can inhibit such lawful activities as free speech, free association, and other First Amendment rights essential for democracy. Well that is some shocking article lmao. I still am all for anything like ID Cards, or mass CCTV camera's because unlike some i have experinced crime and nothing been done about it because not enough CCTV camera's on or anything, from silly things such as my bike being stolen or (not me my auntie) having her car hit whilst she was parked in a car park and the driver drove off and left her to pay the bill which was not her fault. To the bottom quote, you really think the police have enough man power to come after you for swearing in public or saying "fuck the police" or something as petty as that? I don't think so.. Fair enough. I think we should all write down our real names and addresses here, then. You know, in case one of us posts child porn. It'll help stop crime. Trust me. If you aren't posting child porn, what do you really have to hide? Right? Im all for that it if it went to the right people, i would not post it on team liquid so any old smuck can prank call me or send me stupid shit in the post lol. I would however have no problems giving out my personal information to goverments and what not if it was "to keep me safe" i don't get what the argument at all can be against not having ur "information" invaded, i mean what is there that they can manipulate and abuse?
Who do you think is sitting there looking at your information? The government isn't some magical entity. There are people working there. Do you trust all of them unconditionally just because they were hired by the government? That sounds really, really stupid.
As for your "what is there to manipulate and abuse", the answer to that is everything. I'll just go off on a little rant here, because you seem to think very little of your personal information, which is extremely stupid. Any bit of information can be used against you. How do you think facebook earns so much money? They have hundreds of millions of users and have no advertisements at all, yet they make billions of dollars every year. Why do you think that is? Simple. They sell your personal information to companies and people that want to abuse said information. That's how much personal information is worth. It's literally a multi-billion dollar a year industry. They can use your information to target advertisements at you, or to send you spam mail (real life or email), or to attempt to scam you, or to steal your identity or impersonate you.
Do you honestly trust every single person at the government to not sell your information or to abuse it for their own good? If so, why in gods name would you trust random people with it? You said you wouldn't post your information online on TL because people you don't know would see it, so why would you trust random people working for the government with it? Do you really think massive amounts of information on every citizen in the country would only be handled by CIA professionals or something of the sort? Hell no, they'll be handled by any guy that applies for a job there.
So why do you think the government will not leak out this information to others? This thread was originally about discussing wikileaks, essentially a large collection of government secrets that they couldn't keep safe at all. Why do you think they will do better with your personal information exactly? They'll probably do worse. Much worse. And all your information will get stolen from the government sooner rather than later.
Now, you said you did nothing wrong, correct? Here's the thing. You did not "do nothing wrong'. You think you did nothing wrong. And there's a big difference between the two. Namely, it doesn't fucking matter that you think you did nothing wrong. The person looking at your information does not care about your view of "right" or "wrong". I personally think there is nothing wrong with being gay, and that there's nothing wrong with being black, or with masturbating, or with eating bacon, or with having sex before marriage. Here's the thing, millions of people disagree with me, and people will attack gays/blacks, or destroy their property, or threaten them. It doesn't fucking matter that you think you did nothing wrong, others think otherwise. Imagine not being hired for a job because your employer doesn't agree with your political views, or if they have a record of you using a competitors product. What about them firing you because you said something bad about the company once? That would be a lot easier if everyone knew everything about everyone, no?
As a good example of this, I'll bring up a piece of history. In my own country, the Netherlands, we have kept a list of every registered citizen for a very long time together with information about them, facts such as their name, place of residence and religion are kept here, and we've been keeping this list for more than a century. Now, when the Germans invaded in WW2, over 80% of all Jews in the Netherlands were taken to concentration camps. A large deviation from the 50-60% of the Jews that were taken in most other countries. Why do you think the Nazi's captured and murdered so many more Jews in the Netherlands than they did in other countries? It was because of the list of registered citizens. They had no trouble finding every Jew all around the country as there was a nice list telling them who was Jewish, and where they lived. (Source)
Now, when you would ask a Jew prior to WW2 living in the Netherlands whether or not he was okay with the government keeping his name/address/religion, he'd probably say, "yea, why not, I've done nothing wrong". And immediately the fault of this argument becomes apparent. What happens when such information falls into the wrong hands? You trust your government (for little good reason, too), but what happens when your information is stolen from their servers?
- What happens when a group of White supremacists suddenly acquire a list of all the black people living in their town together with their addresses?
- What happens when Iran happens to have information on you saying that you don't like their country, and they capture you when you're on holiday in the middle east?
- What happens when the government stops being in a good relationship with their people, and they have information on you that you might not like them and might be participating in a revolution?
And here's another question for you, why do you think the government will use this information to protect you? Why do you put so much blind faith into them?
|
On August 17 2012 04:44 one-one-one wrote:
If you actually took some time to understand the accusations you would find that he risks more than that. Prison is not out of the question.
Look, we get that you're all patriotic with this, but :
On August 17 2012 04:18 Nizaris wrote:
not a women that willfully lied in some1's bed, kept hanging out with him after the alleged 'rape' and suddenly decided 3 months later it was rape.
most rape case have evidence of abuse, or a toxicology report or some shred of physical evidence.
On August 17 2012 04:29 Kukaracha wrote:
The women themselves have said it was consensual sex.
For refusing to put on a condom in the heat of the moment, he can get a fine of ~576€. You won't go to jail simply because you didn't put a condom on.
So no, the risks are very low. But you seem to know better than the army of lawyers around this case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
