EPT2011 Report p96 in report/p94 in PDF
WikiLeaks founder arrested in U.K. - Page 55
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
2011 Report p96 in report/p94 in PDF | ||
|
Dundron2000
Sweden1140 Posts
On August 17 2012 06:36 LunaSea wrote: It baffles me how stupid some people can get ... 1) Government commits insane war crimes and other atrocities. 2) Assange denounces them. 3) Proceeds with being criticized and prosecuted to the ground. Way to go ! The amount of sheep on TL is really surprising. correlation is not causation. hows that for critical thinking. | ||
|
Mandalor
Germany2362 Posts
On August 17 2012 06:40 archonOOid wrote: I pity Mr Assange as he is a really despicable human being. He has the balls to act like a dirt-bag with Swedish women but has no respect for the consequences. For those who criticize the Swedish court system take a look at the independent, The World Justice Project, shows that Sweden is one of the best justice systems in the world. He fears that Sweden will hand him over to the USA but Sweden doesn't hand over people to countries where death penalties are allowed. 2011 Report p96 in report/p94 in PDF I suggest you read up some on the case. I'm not a conspiracist and I don't think Assange really is that important, but that sexual assault case is ridiculous. He had consensual unsafe sex with two women. Somehow that's a crime in sweden. I don't think he necessarily fears death (well maybe he does, I don't know), I'd personally fear to NOT be prosecuted by US law but by Guantanamo style prosecution since the US could very well make a case of Assange being a terrorist in their eyes. | ||
|
BadgerBadger8264
Netherlands409 Posts
No it would not be the first time Goverment officials have been caught selling information from one country to the other, but im on about my country i would be happy for this to be bought in to, and im sure no one in this goverment would do something like that, and has been no records of that ever happening in UK, just Goverment officials claiming more expenses than they should. I have to beleive in people to get the most out of it like i have told others, if you don't beleive in others how can you beleive in youself? If you cannot trust the people you have voted for (or not, but thats a different story) then there is always going to be a problem for you. Here you go again with "trust", is that your only argument? You can't trust the people that you voted for? Mate. You voted for maybe two people in the past 4 years. I haven't voted for every single member of the government. Nobody has. It's stupid to think otherwise. Even if I trusted the two people I voted for, there's still about half a million of people I did not vote for. It's a stupid argument. Yes and there is due rights for company officials for sacking people for saying "my boss is a cunt" in a public place for example which is facebook. If someone called you a cunt on facebook you wouldn't be very happy would you, and if you say took him to the cinema every week im pretty sure you would stop doing that. If it was leaked to an employer he would be breaking the law straight away for having that information, if you didn't know he had it and didn't give you a reason for firing him, in UK we have a tribunal system set up for this sort of unfair dismissal, and he would be found out. Employers are using facebook and myspace as background checks at the moment look into another thread about german media claiming that if you were not on social media sites your more likely to be mentally unstable. In the UK, yes. In the US and many other countries it's perfectly legal to fire people for whatever reason possible. Besides, it's not like it's hard to just pressure somebody into quitting by making them do shitty jobs and never giving them a break (which is not illegal). And there's no law in not hiring somebody because they called you a cunt, so there's still that to consider. You made a point that because of a census (names and addresses and information on people) Hitler and his army was able to track down all the Jews in Holland easier because of it and your giving that a reason why there shouldn't be that sort of information in goverment hands? Why not? Just in case another war happens? No the Goverment need that information too, so it knows how many people are in Holland and how many people are working, what sections of work has the most employment etcetc, you know when you fill out a job application, the same details are on that (minus bank details) on the census form, so you wont want to give your employer that information in case someone gets hold of it? You have to have a bit of give and take when information like this is up for debate. Sigh. It. Was. An. Example. Of. Governments. Information. Landing. In. The. Wrong. Hands. Got it? I even said it. "Here's an example". God. It hurts to argue with you. It really does. You write up essays making no points whatsoever and only discuss unrelated things or things you "thought you read" when they weren't there at all. You have yet to make a single point besides "come on, trust the government!". It's getting rather tiresome. Yes, because most the major things this will help fight is Terrorism, do i want another 7/7 attack in London, no i bloody don't, that was horrible and could of been stopped for many a reason but was not, if there is anyway i could help by not having that happen again by voting in some sort of law which made the Goverment have easier access to what i have already stated, so be it, i'll sacrafice "my rights" for the better. You realize 50 people died in that terrorism accident, right? Let that sink in for a second. 50 people. In the course of 10 years. 50 people. Do you have any idea how insignificant that is? I'll give you a good idea. Every year, 5 people die from vending machines falling on top of them, and 10 people die from bees attacking them. This means that in the past 10 years, the kill count of terrorism is as high as vending machines, and bees have double said kill count. Yet you're willing to give up your rights to fight terrorism. It's ridiculous. Terrorism. Is. Not. A. Threat. Thinking otherwise is simply stupid. The reason you think it's a threat is because you watch too much television. "Stopping terrorism" would save nearly nobody. If you truly wanted to save people, you should get smoking banned, or increase taxes on fast food so people eat healthier, or help people stuck in poverty more. Stopping terrorism means nothing because terrorism IS nothing. The entire concept of terrorism "being a major threat" is nothing but the media getting a nice story out of it. It's more interesting to talk about 50 people dying in a terrorism incident than it is to talk about the thousands that die from unhealthy living habits or poverty yearly. EDIT: Well known fact? Yet there has been 0 charges on the company? I remember seeing/hearing a bit about something similar in the press but when it doesnt effect stock prices or media image i don't think it's true for a minute, plus no charges. http://ftc.gov/opa/2011/11/privacysettlement.shtm Charges from the FTC, Facebook settled in court. - Facebook promised users that it would not share their personal information with advertisers. It did. - Facebook represented that third-party apps that users' installed would have access only to user information that they needed to operate. In fact, the apps could access nearly all of users' personal data – data the apps didn't need. - Facebook told users they could restrict sharing of data to limited audiences – for example with "Friends Only." In fact, selecting "Friends Only" did not prevent their information from being shared with third-party applications their friends used. I don't understand people like you. You blurt out this unresearched bullshit constantly. Why? It's not like this is well hidden. Googling "facebook charges" has this as its first result. Is it really that hard to do a little research before blurting out the first thing that you think of? | ||
|
Dundron2000
Sweden1140 Posts
On August 17 2012 06:47 Mandalor wrote: I suggest you read up some on the case. I'm not a conspiracist and I don't think Assange really is that important, but that sexual assault case is ridiculous. He had consensual unsafe sex with two women. Somehow that's a crime in sweden. I don't think he necessarily fears death (well maybe he does, I don't know), I'd personally fear to NOT be prosecuted by US law but by Guantanamo style prosecution since the US could very well make a case of Assange being a terrorist in their eyes. dude, for one, having sex with someone who is asleep doesn't really pass the bar as consensual. but i think this debate has been beaten to death already. | ||
|
Ludwigvan
Germany2373 Posts
On August 17 2012 06:40 archonOOid wrote: I pity Mr Assange as he is a really despicable human being. He has the balls to act like a dirt-bag with Swedish women but has no respect for the consequences. For those who criticize the Swedish court system take a look at the independent, The World Justice Project, shows that Sweden is one of the best justice systems in the world. He fears that Sweden will hand him over to the USA but Sweden doesn't hand over people to countries where death penalties are allowed. 2011 Report p96 in report/p94 in PDF I couldn't find that in the report. Did I miss it? | ||
|
oBlade
United States6610 Posts
On August 17 2012 06:40 archonOOid wrote: I pity Mr Assange as he is a really despicable human being. He has the balls to act like a dirt-bag with Swedish women but has no respect for the consequences. For those who criticize the Swedish court system take a look at the independent, The World Justice Project, shows that Sweden is one of the best justice systems in the world. He fears that Sweden will hand him over to the USA but Sweden doesn't hand over people to countries where death penalties are allowed. 2011 Report p96 in report/p94 in PDF This is fallacious. My friend might buy the statistically safest car in the world, but it doesn't mean he won't wreck it if he's the worst driver there is. Similarly, the Swedish justice system is no doubt great for laymen, but in the case of a highly controversial political figure, it could easily get SNAFUed. | ||
|
zeru
8156 Posts
| ||
|
purecarnagge
719 Posts
He thought he had power over women because they worked hard for him, and he abused that trust/power. (allegedly) Yet, if you look at every reaction he's done its all been for himself, not his cause. Its always been him and this is my cause, but me/I'm. Its a joke. | ||
|
LunaSea
Luxembourg369 Posts
On August 17 2012 06:46 Dundron2000 wrote: correlation is not causation. hows that for critical thinking. We are discussing about somebody (Assange), who potentially perpetrated a crime and therefore gets extradited. I'm not event talking about a country (England) who's threatening an ambassador for something as unimportant as an alleged offense. This is such an overreaction that I can't find the causality there either. Funny right ? Can you ? | ||
|
Dundron2000
Sweden1140 Posts
On August 17 2012 07:13 zeru wrote: You have to be shitting me when you say the swedish justice system and work with the US in the past has been just regarding issues with international relevance. Sweden has never refused a extradition request from the US, and they sent refugees to egypt on CIAs request, to be tortured. and everything related to piratebay and its trial, simply a joke. the swedish justice system is good at dealing with internal things, but our government is still the US's bitch. Theres a reason they refuse to promise that they wont extradite him to the US after a trial for the made up crimes in sweden. completely different cases, different stakes | ||
|
Ludwigvan
Germany2373 Posts
On August 17 2012 07:19 purecarnagge wrote: no. read what the foreign minister said.Doesn't matter they are going to just file that notice where the embassy stops being an embassy (well having the legal protections of an embassy) after 10 days and go in and get the fucker. He thought he had power over women because they worked hard for him, and he abused that trust/power. (allegedly) sauce?Yet, if you look at every reaction he's done its all been for himself, not his cause. Its always been him and this is my cause, but me/I'm. Its a joke. It's true. He is trying to save his butt. | ||
|
Jalle
Sweden149 Posts
 | ||
|
Roflhaxx
Korea (South)1244 Posts
On August 17 2012 07:13 zeru wrote: You have to be shitting me when you say the swedish justice system and work with the US in the past has been just regarding issues with international relevance. Sweden has never refused a extradition request from the US, and they sent refugees to egypt on CIAs request, to be tortured. and everything related to piratebay and its trial, simply a joke. the swedish justice system is good at dealing with internal things, but our government is still the US's bitch. Theres a reason they refuse to promise that they wont extradite him to the US after a trial for the made up crimes in sweden. Indeed, he would have actually been more safe in norway, have denied extractions before, best example is this moron leader of ansar al islam, an al-qaeda organization. Assange could have easily used him as an example as to why he should not be extracted. | ||
|
Maxie
Sweden2653 Posts
On August 17 2012 07:35 Jalle wrote: Swedish media seems more interested in attacking straw men than mentioning the actual issue, it's a disgrace. Assange is basically called a coward who hides behind an asylum to escape his rape charges. Oh, extradition is also out of the picture. Apparently there's no way Sweden would ever deport anyone risking torture or the death penalty. Aftonbladet: http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/kolumnister/oisincantwell/article15270151.ab Basically calling him a disgusting coward. Yeah. Sure, Aftonbladet is known for being bad but those headlines actually surprised me. Oh, the great Swedish media, now I know why everyone around me acts as if he was proven guilty of rape already... | ||
|
Dundron2000
Sweden1140 Posts
On August 17 2012 07:53 Maxie wrote: Aftonbladet: http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/kolumnister/oisincantwell/article15270151.ab Basically calling him a disgusting coward. Yeah. Sure, Aftonbladet is known for being bad but those headlines actually surprised me. Oh, the great Swedish media, now I know why everyone around me acts as if he was proven guilty of rape already... could rape charges and extradition be two separate issues? i keep returning to this. what happened to critical thinking? what happened to judging different situations on their own merit? is it really that impossible the USA is bad and Assange is an arrogant piece of shit at the same time? on what grounds do we let allegations of rape slide? i think Assange-supporters are the kinds of people that got Christianity rolling 2000 years ago, jesus fucking christ.. | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
On August 17 2012 06:40 archonOOid wrote: I pity Mr Assange as he is a really despicable human being. He has the balls to act like a dirt-bag with Swedish women but has no respect for the consequences. For those who criticize the Swedish court system take a look at the independent, The World Justice Project, shows that Sweden is one of the best justice systems in the world. He fears that Sweden will hand him over to the USA but Sweden doesn't hand over people to countries where death penalties are allowed. 2011 Report p96 in report/p94 in PDF Just a note : the US is a federation, and most of the time 90% of the criminal laws are up to the state. In this case, well... many states don't have the death penalty! The extradition can be done between, say, New-York and Sweden, and in that case it's perfectly fine. But then Assange could run through a military trial. Really, the laws are very complex, and I came to understand that federations like the US are even more complex cases than usual. There's a good reason there are rich lawyers around! :p On August 17 2012 08:07 Dundron2000 wrote: could rape charges and extradition be two separate issues? i keep returning to this. what happened to critical thinking? what happened to judging different situations on their own merit? is it really that impossible the USA is bad and Assange is an arrogant piece of shit at the same time? on what grounds do we let allegations of rape slide? i think Assange-supporters are the kinds of people that got Christianity rolling 2000 years ago, jesus fucking christ.. There is no rape! Sexual molestation at worst. The first and main "crime" that was charged against Assange was... not putting a condom. Both women admitted a consensual sexual relationship - one of them even saying that she "admired" Assange at the time, thinking that everything was fine until she found out that another woman had had condom-less sex with him. Also, I don't see what christianity has to do with this. Jesus was an exceptional man without a doubt. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On August 17 2012 06:50 Dundron2000 wrote: dude, for one, having sex with someone who is asleep doesn't really pass the bar as consensual. but i think this debate has been beaten to death already. Guilty until proven innocent, amirite? | ||
|
Craton
United States17303 Posts
| ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
On August 17 2012 08:13 Craton wrote: Assange would go to a federal US court, not a state court. That laws are different from state to state w/ the death penalty is irrelevant. I don't know about Swedish conventions, but what I read in English extradition conventions was very clear : even if the prisoner is to face a federal court, the state laws are those who define the legal context (crime, gravity, etc). I can only assume that it is the same in the case of Sweden. | ||
| ||
