|
i still wonder how this works.
So in the heat you decide to not use a condom.
The woman, knowing this, still sleeps "consensual" with you.
3 Months later she accuses you of... Having consensual sex whiteout a condom?
The fuck?
|
On August 17 2012 04:53 Zahir wrote:
dude who had consensual sex with two mature adult chicks who accuse him of some shit like breaking a condom
People really should look into things before arguing one way or another ... The charges were even quoted from wikipedia earlier in this post but I will quote this from this article to show the charges once again:
Four were outlined at the hearings:
• That Assange "unlawfully coerced" Miss A by using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
• That he "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.
• That he "deliberately molested" Miss A "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".
• That he had sex with a second woman, Miss W, without a condom while she was asleep.
source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-q-and-a
Now I am not saying he is guilty.. but I still think he should held accountable for what he is accused of and face questioning ...
There is something suspicious from both sides of this case and I'm sure noone that isn't directly involved has a full grasp on the situation (if people involved even do)
|
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.
You seriously have no idea what the world looks like outside your room?
You can live on your own fancy world where sweden is the flagship of justice but most people are calling it as it is. Sweden/uk are the USA's bitch, thats just how the world works right now. If you seriously think this is about rape where even the girl said she did it willingly then ........ Yea no words, keep rambling about the wonderful state of sweden, bearer of the sword of justice, leader of the truth. Awayyyyyy we go.
User was warned for this post
|
On August 17 2012 05:01 Niflheim wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:53 Zahir wrote:
dude who had consensual sex with two mature adult chicks who accuse him of some shit like breaking a condom People really should look into things before arguing one way or another ... The charges were even quoted from wikipedia earlier in this post but I will quote this from this article to show the charges once again: Show nested quote +Four were outlined at the hearings:
• That Assange "unlawfully coerced" Miss A by using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
• That he "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.
• That he "deliberately molested" Miss A "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".
• That he had sex with a second woman, Miss W, without a condom while she was asleep. source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-q-and-aNow I am not saying he is guilty.. but I still think he should held accountable for what he is accused of and face questioning ... There is something suspicious from both sides of this case and I'm sure noone that isn't directly involved has a full grasp on the situation (if people involved even do)
Wasnt she tweetng about her wonderful morning the next day? Im sure we would all be tweeting happily when we have our "sexual" integrity violated.
|
On August 17 2012 04:53 Zahir wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:44 hzflank wrote: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.
Hence the conspiracy theories. The UK sends to him to Sweden, the US issue a warrant for a non-political crime that they never actually have to convict him for, Sweden sends him to the USA and the USA charges him with terrorism related crimes and executes him.
And the reason he has to go via Sweden is because the UK does not typically extradite people to the USA. Our judges often uphold appeals against extradition to the US as it is the opinion of UK judges that non-american citizens would not get a fair trial in the USA.
@sekritzzz: the Uk government is the US government's bitch. The UK courts are not bitches to the US, which is why a third party (Sweden) is involved.
|
On August 17 2012 05:01 sekritzzz 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. You seriously have no idea what the world looks like outside your room? You can live on your own fancy world where sweden is the flagship of justice but most people are calling it as it is. Sweden/uk are the USA's bitch, thats just how the world works right now. If you seriously think this is about rape where even the girl said she did it willingly then ........ Yea no words, keep rambling about the wonderful state of sweden, bearer of the sword of justice, leader of the truth. Awayyyyyy we go.
I'm pretty sure Sweden stands by their selves. Its not like my country hasn't been trying to get them to take down TPB for I don't know for a long ass time... Another points to make is that Mr.Assange pissed off a lot of countries around the world with posting those leaks. Its not that I'm against the leaking of the leaks, but I do believe he should have at least censored the names of the people who's lives are now in danger because of those leaks.
|
On August 17 2012 05:05 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:53 Zahir wrote:On August 17 2012 04:44 hzflank wrote: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. Hence the conspiracy theories. The UK sends to him to Sweden, the US issue a warrant for a non-political crime that they never actually have to convict him for, Sweden sends him to the USA and the USA charges him with terrorism related crimes and executes him. And the reason he has to go via Sweden is because the UK does not typically extradite people to the USA. Our judges often uphold appeals against extradition to the US as it is the opinion of UK judges that non-american citizens would not get a fair trial in the USA. @sekritzzz: the Uk government is the US government's bitch. The UK courts are not bitches to the US, which is why a third party (Sweden) is involved.
So we just execute everybody now? If he gets extradited to the united states more or less what will happen is he will face jail time, and even then I highly doubt it with how many people adore the man, its most likely he will just get house arrest or pay a fine.
|
On August 17 2012 05:04 sekritzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 05:01 Niflheim wrote:On August 17 2012 04:53 Zahir wrote:
dude who had consensual sex with two mature adult chicks who accuse him of some shit like breaking a condom People really should look into things before arguing one way or another ... The charges were even quoted from wikipedia earlier in this post but I will quote this from this article to show the charges once again: Four were outlined at the hearings:
• That Assange "unlawfully coerced" Miss A by using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
• That he "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.
• That he "deliberately molested" Miss A "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".
• That he had sex with a second woman, Miss W, without a condom while she was asleep. source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-q-and-aNow I am not saying he is guilty.. but I still think he should held accountable for what he is accused of and face questioning ... There is something suspicious from both sides of this case and I'm sure noone that isn't directly involved has a full grasp on the situation (if people involved even do) Wasnt she tweetng about her wonderful morning the next day? Im sure we would all be tweeting happily when we have our "sexual" integrity violated.
Yes, she has. And also she's part of a very leftist feminist party. About the second women I don't know.
|
On August 17 2012 04:54 one-one-one wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:50 Nizaris wrote: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.
ahem, i dont really think anyone questions that the legal papers for the extradiction has all the lines filled properly, same way Sweden will extradite him to US with a legal decision that you will most probably blindly accept it cause... it's court's order...
|
On August 17 2012 04:57 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +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 : Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +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.
Well, refusing to put on a condom wasn't the only allegation.
Why are we even discussing this? None of us know all the details since everything hasn't been revealed.
The attorney in Sweden thinks she has enough for a case. Then that is how it is.
That is why she issued an arrest warrant which the UK eventually accepted.
Most of you don't know how the legal process works it Sweden, so why act like you know that he will at worst have to pay a 576€ fine. You can't know this!
Are you saying that requests from attorneys in other countries shouldn't be accepted like this?
The Swedish legal system is one of the best and most well regarded in the world.
I find it funny that random people on the internetz suddenly not only knows a lot about Sweden and its legal system in particular, but apparently also all the important details in the case at hand.
You work by the assumption that something is fishy and grasp to find proofs for it.
|
On August 17 2012 05:01 Niflheim wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:53 Zahir wrote:
dude who had consensual sex with two mature adult chicks who accuse him of some shit like breaking a condom People really should look into things before arguing one way or another ... The charges were even quoted from wikipedia earlier in this post but I will quote this from this article to show the charges once again: Show nested quote +Four were outlined at the hearings:
• That Assange "unlawfully coerced" Miss A by using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
• That he "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.
• That he "deliberately molested" Miss A "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".
• That he had sex with a second woman, Miss W, without a condom while she was asleep. source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-q-and-aNow I am not saying he is guilty.. but I still think he should held accountable for what he is accused of and face questioning ... There is something suspicious from both sides of this case and I'm sure noone that isn't directly involved has a full grasp on the situation (if people involved even do)
So I'm curious, what's your opinion on Britain threatening to burst into an embassy of a friendly nation to see assange brought to justice on these crimes, when a charged and convicted child rapist, they refuse to extradite. All the other people gb could have extradited, they set their sights on this guy and even threaten to bust open the embassy to get him. For the crime of sex with women who later post about how awesome he is... Just curious how you feel on that one.
You don't see anything curious about the way Britain and Sweden are acting on this one. Childrapist chilling out while assange has to hide in an embassy that they threatening to break into.
|
On August 17 2012 04:59 Velr wrote:
i still wonder how this works.
So in the heat you decide to not use a condom.
The woman, knowing this, still sleeps "consensual" with you.
3 Months later she accuses you of... Having consensual sex whiteout a condom?
The fuck?
It's the law.
They added additional charges later on, but their first concern was to get Assange tested for STDs. They apparently met each other and found out he hadn't used a condom with both, and this is when they declared that they were "raped" although they both agree it was a consensual sexual relationship.
Also, if I remember correctly, W is the 26 year-old woman who actually "preyed" on him, getting in the same restaurant as him and dragging him away from the group, because she was (I quote) "impressed with his personality"...
|
This thread has ruined my utopian thoughts about Sweden. Thanks guys. :/
|
On August 17 2012 05:10 Zahir wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 05:01 Niflheim wrote:On August 17 2012 04:53 Zahir wrote:
dude who had consensual sex with two mature adult chicks who accuse him of some shit like breaking a condom People really should look into things before arguing one way or another ... The charges were even quoted from wikipedia earlier in this post but I will quote this from this article to show the charges once again: Four were outlined at the hearings:
• That Assange "unlawfully coerced" Miss A by using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
• That he "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.
• That he "deliberately molested" Miss A "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".
• That he had sex with a second woman, Miss W, without a condom while she was asleep. source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-q-and-aNow I am not saying he is guilty.. but I still think he should held accountable for what he is accused of and face questioning ... There is something suspicious from both sides of this case and I'm sure noone that isn't directly involved has a full grasp on the situation (if people involved even do) So I'm curious, what's your opinion on Britain threatening to burst into an embassy of a friendly nation to see assange brought to justice on these crimes, when a charged and convicted child rapist, they refuse to extradite. All the other people gb could have extradited, they set their sights on this guy and even threaten to bust open the embassy to get him. For the crime of sex with women who later post about how awesome he is... Just curious how you feel on that one. You don't see anything curious about the way Britain and Sweden are acting on this one. Childrapist chilling out while assange has to hide in an embassy that they threatening to break into.
Again you seem to be suffering from an inability to read... did I not just say "there is something suspicious from BOTH SIDES"? I believe that means that yes I do find it curious how the governments are acting in response to it...
I hope that no embassy status is removed and I do not know the specifics of those cases that you are talking about so I can't really comment on what I think of the situation because you seem to hardly be a source of reliable information
All I said was that I believe he should be questioned for what he is accused of... it is unfortunate that Sweden did not agree to have it done out of country, but I can't say that I blame them for not wanting to be forced onto embassy grounds to question a person suspected of criminal activity in their country
|
On August 17 2012 05:01 sekritzzz 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. You seriously have no idea what the world looks like outside your room? You can live on your own fancy world where sweden is the flagship of justice but most people are calling it as it is. Sweden/uk are the USA's bitch, thats just how the world works right now. If you seriously think this is about rape where even the girl said she did it willingly then ........ Yea no words, keep rambling about the wonderful state of sweden, bearer of the sword of justice, leader of the truth. Awayyyyyy we go.
May I ask where you are from?
Of course it is about the rape. Ironically, the fastest way for Mr Assange to get to Ecuador is to go directly to Sweden, face the charges, serve his time/pay the fines and then take the first plane to Quito.
As someone else said. The Pirate Bay is still operating despite all the efforts from the US.
Your post managed to convince me to stop reading and writing in this thread for tonight.
The level of ignorance here is just too high.
Bye!
|
On August 17 2012 05:12 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:59 Velr wrote:
i still wonder how this works.
So in the heat you decide to not use a condom.
The woman, knowing this, still sleeps "consensual" with you.
3 Months later she accuses you of... Having consensual sex whiteout a condom?
The fuck? It's the law. They added additional charges later on, but their first concern was to get Assange tested for STDs. They apparently met each other and found out he hadn't used a condom with both, and this is when they declared that they were "raped" although they both agree it was a consensual sexual relationship. Also, if I remember correctly, W is the 26 year-old woman who actually "preyed" on him, getting in the same restaurant as him and dragging him away from the group, because she was (I quote) "impressed with his personality"...
Stop being sexist, these are friendly women, they merely thought that he was a friendly man and ergo brought him to their apartment to help him catch some sleep, because there were no hotels available, they wanted nothing more, but then he seduced them into consensual sex with his terrorist magic and then, later on, on second thought, after a joint decision, they agreed upon them being raped by the friendly man with the impressive personality.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On August 17 2012 03:59 Scheme wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 03:48 Pandemona wrote: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? On August 17 2012 03:39 Scheme 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.. No one cares about the petty stuff, people have issue with privacy when it comes down to more important things. Like things which could damage people in power, but still should be heard. I have experience crime as well, but I didn't think about surrendering all my rights to stop it. I hate quoting people as I think its overdone, but here, it just fits: He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither. Benjamin Franklin Nice quote from the 1700s... So whats your argument on not letting people know what your sending in a text message, or maybe once in a blue moon listening in on a phone call? Whats wrong with that? Or seeing what you browse on the internet? Or looking at you on a CCTV camera at 11pm a night walking home from a pub or something? I have yet to be told a proper reason as to why this would be a bad idea? Thanks. I liked the 1700s.... I don't think the government should have the right to interfere in your personal life. you said it, its my browsing history. My phone conversations. No one else. The issues of allowing a government to have such powers is that they can be abused. The problem is that most of this privacy invasion have no judicial oversight. So in the UK local council were snooping, without anyone approval on people if they thought they had lied about where they live when it came down to school places. What stops this people doing the same for personal gain. (<---- good reasons) If judicial approval is granted to listen to a persons call for example, as they need to be justified to an impartial(in theory) judge. This creates a way of checking whether invasions of privacy are justified, say for someone suspect of committing a crime. I don't have a problem with that at all. By the way, there is a reason why we don't give that sort of power to governments around the world. They were abused as power corrupts! e.g.: Stalin et al.
Ok im glad you gave me some sort of reason. But your saying it's ok for people to lie to the council where they live so they can send they children to a different school? or are you agains that? Any type of lieing to the tax payers/goverment/council is bad imo, and has no way to be justified. There is alot of people who don't even pay tax in UK and do everything "cash in hand" and things like council's "snooping" on people are catching them so the likes of people who pay tax every month (me) don't get out of pocket for the ones who don't!
Yes, the goverment have made a hell of a lot of mistakes and 90% of them have no idea how the real person lives i get that argument, but without trust you get no where, the problem is to get into power you need to have gone the top school and have the the right backing by people (normally through financial gain) so it's all a huge circle, all you can do is make sure you yourself follow the rules and hope others. Thats how im trying to live my life!
Yes im liking that your coming round to the terms of listening into calls/emails/texts/browser history but you really think (ok this is going to sound silly but please try and stick with it) if jack bauer was real and 24 was actually true that within 2hours they can get a judge to justify listening in to peoples calls who they think are terrorists? It doesn't happen in that time it's to long and before you know it people have succeded in bringing huge devestation due to the stupid privacy we rules we have for potentially people who have broke the law or are about too. You have seen it on the news itself when most people who do an act of crime are pictured on CCTV or have been "known" to the police but they have not been able to charge them etc due to x y z rules of human rights. There is to many pros to not being able to "invade peoples privacy" imo to the cons.
|
On August 17 2012 05:18 one-one-one wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 05:01 sekritzzz wrote: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. You seriously have no idea what the world looks like outside your room? You can live on your own fancy world where sweden is the flagship of justice but most people are calling it as it is. Sweden/uk are the USA's bitch, thats just how the world works right now. If you seriously think this is about rape where even the girl said she did it willingly then ........ Yea no words, keep rambling about the wonderful state of sweden, bearer of the sword of justice, leader of the truth. Awayyyyyy we go. May I ask where you are from? Of course it is about the rape. Ironically, the fastest way for Mr Assange to get to Ecuador is to go directly to Sweden, face the charges, serve his time/pay the fines and then take the first plane to Quito. As someone else said. The Pirate Bay is still operating despite all the efforts from the US. Your post managed to convince me to stop reading and writing in this thread for tonight. The level of ignorance here is just too high. Bye!
how come they don't guarantee that they wont extradite him to the US? that simplifies things a lot. They did initially then withdrew their statement. Plus Wikileaks > pirate bay.
If I was a swede I would be offended at all the statements about the Swedish justice system, which I'm sure its 10x better than US or UK justice system. But you can see why asange wouldn't put his life on the line on the chance that Sweden doesn't buckle to US pressure if it came down to it. American do crazy things in name of fighting against terrorism.
|
On August 17 2012 05:12 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 04:59 Velr wrote:
i still wonder how this works.
So in the heat you decide to not use a condom.
The woman, knowing this, still sleeps "consensual" with you.
3 Months later she accuses you of... Having consensual sex whiteout a condom?
The fuck? It's the law. They added additional charges later on, but their first concern was to get Assange tested for STDs. They apparently met each other and found out he hadn't used a condom with both, and this is when they declared that they were "raped" although they both agree it was a consensual sexual relationship. Also, if I remember correctly, W is the 26 year-old woman who actually "preyed" on him, getting in the same restaurant as him and dragging him away from the group, because she was (I quote) "impressed with his personality"...
Is rape even the right word in English? And how do you defend yourself against this kind of accusation (or prove it)? Never have sex without a condom?
|
On August 17 2012 05:23 Pandemona wrote:
Yes im liking that your coming round to the terms of listening into calls/emails/texts/browser history but you really think (ok this is going to sound silly but please try and stick with it) if jack bauer was real and 24 was actually true that within 2hours they can get a judge to justify listening in to peoples calls who they think are terrorists?
lol.. oh man, again I am reminded... There was a Fox & Friends episode where they quoted Jack Bauer and used clips of 24 to justify torture. I'm not even joking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
