It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Julian Assange arrested at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

page: 30
102
<< 27  28  29    31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: purplemer
In a time of universal deceit, telling the Truth is a revolutionary act

- George Orwell


What truths are being told, coming to light, laws broken etc...lol




posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 05:26 PM
link   
2nd
edit on 14-4-2019 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2019 @ 09:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

If you break the law to prove the government is breaking the law.... Why do only you get punished?

The US in particular has started making everything classified so they don't have to be transparent. Much of it is classified not for nation security but pride.


But they released 10,000s of documents and none of it was breaking the law.... Good chunk was sensitive information we really didn't want other countries to know though.


No, we didn't want our citizens to know.

If Assange really messed up, that's his cross to bare. He should have been smarter. If he broke the law, he was dumb in the way he communicated. You won't see me die on a hill for this.

That being said, I'm willing to look at all angles. Glenn was a constitutional lawyer, and he is saying there is a case here. That's not the end all be all, but given as a liberal he navigated the Russia collusion story better than anyone... I'm willing to be skeptical seeing as he's shown he tries to approach things with integrity.

But we will see, not soon, but eventually.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted
Why do you think I was being a total ass?

Your tone...


The word 'patriot' gets bandied about on this site by many people so much without them stopping to think about what it means. If you are offended, I apologise.

Offended? Not at all, I just dislike condescending arrogance.


If you don't think it's idiocy for people not to think before they write, then I can only say I stand by what I said.

It isn't necessarily idiocy, no. With some people, maybe, if they do it constantly and/or on purpose. But quite often it is just simple carelessness or even an accident.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: RexKramerPRT
Sweden's director of public prosecutions Marianne Ny decided in May 2017 to shut a preliminary investigation into the rape allegations. She argued that since Assange could not be reached after taking up residence in the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2012, it was not possible to proceed with the probe

Read the details of the allegations. They are totally bogus, just as bogus as the ones against Judge Cavanaugh.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted
Face it, if they had much more on Obama and Clinton it would have been released at the time Trump made another promise that he couldn't keep - that he would see Clinton in jail.

Patience, grasshopper...



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Read the details of the allegations. They are totally bogus...


These are the allegations set out on the European Arrest Warrant... Where's the proof these claims were bogus?


It set out four offences:
1. Unlawful coercion On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm. Assange, by using violence. forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party's arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.
2. Sexual molestation On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.
3. Sexual molestation On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.
4. Rape On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state. It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used. still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's sexual integrity."


Source...



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: uncommitted
Why do you think I was being a total ass?

Your tone...


The word 'patriot' gets bandied about on this site by many people so much without them stopping to think about what it means. If you are offended, I apologise.

Offended? Not at all, I just dislike condescending arrogance.


If you don't think it's idiocy for people not to think before they write, then I can only say I stand by what I said.

It isn't necessarily idiocy, no. With some people, maybe, if they do it constantly and/or on purpose. But quite often it is just simple carelessness or even an accident.


Was I being arrogant? No, not really, if on re-reading it I thought I was being arrogant I would have posted to say ignore, but in this case no, although I do apologise that it was your post that I responded to if that helps.

ATS is currently at a point where if you don't follow the narrative so many follow then you are a 'lefty' which is thrown around by so many, if you disagree with a theory someone holds strong to, you are a sheep, if you question why someone has made a comment that is patently based on their opinion but masked as fact you are deluded.....

It gets a little depressing so if you thought I was condescending I apologise, but I do expect people to have some level of information if they enter into a debate, maybe that's just me. Only a page prior to me typing this someone is saying how the UK press is silent on JA being expelled from the embassy when it was actually front page news on most papers and a headline on most TV channels. To call them out on that (as another member has) - is that arrogance or trying to deny ignorance? And what, ultimately, is ignorance?



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: RexKramerPRT
Sweden's director of public prosecutions Marianne Ny decided in May 2017 to shut a preliminary investigation into the rape allegations. She argued that since Assange could not be reached after taking up residence in the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2012, it was not possible to proceed with the probe

Read the details of the allegations. They are totally bogus, just as bogus as the ones against Judge Cavanaugh.


If the ones against Cavanaugh really were bogus or simply couldn't be upheld due to lack of evidence is a moot point, don't you think?



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

Shocking, the levels of poor reading comprehension around here! Probably down to the confirmation bias thing again.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted
If the ones against Cavanaugh really were bogus or simply couldn't be upheld due to lack of evidence is a moot point, don't you think?

Anyone who doesn't see how bogus the claims against Cavanugh were is either blind as a bat, or a major TDS/RDS sufferer.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi
These are the allegations set out on the European Arrest Warrant... Where's the proof these claims were bogus?

Oh, I'm familiar with the charges...

By all means aquaint yourself with their bogosity - from a paragraph almost halfway down:

"Swedish prosecutors dropped preliminary investigations into “rape” and “molestation” allegations as early as August 2010, concluding that “no crime at all” had been committed. The investigation was only revived for political reasons. “[I]t was the police who made up the charges” wrote one of the women in a text message. Assange’s accusers admitted they had consensual sex with him, boasting of it afterwards to friends. Anna Ardin, who arranged Assange’s “safe houses” in Sweden—one of which was her apartment—was employed by leading Social-Democratic Party politicians. It was Ardin who introduced Assange to her co-accuser, Sofia Wilen. Assange’s visit to Sweden took place amid mounting US intrigue following publication of the Iraq and Afghan war leaks."
edit on 15-4-2019 by tanstaafl because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: teapot
a reply to: uncommitted

Shocking, the levels of poor reading comprehension around here! Probably down to the confirmation bias thing again.



Yeah, people saying the media has been silent, not knowing the facts before posting etc. But you would know that wouldn't you.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: uncommitted
If the ones against Cavanaugh really were bogus or simply couldn't be upheld due to lack of evidence is a moot point, don't you think?

Anyone who doesn't see how bogus the claims against Cavanugh were is either blind as a bat, or a major TDS/RDS sufferer.


Not really, just not prepared to take someone seriously who comes out with such nonsense. Cavanaugh was a scummy rat at college, behaved like a rat, sadly it's hard to provide evidence for the acts which in most likelihood he did carry out, but some people are, as you say, blind based on their bias.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Oh, I'm familiar with the charges... bogosity - from a paragraph almost halfway down:


Your link to the World Socialist Website is broken.

Either way the point about an accustion is that if it gets to court it can be challenged. Courts are where evidence is scrutinised and exposed. I am sure that if the Swedish prosecuters are really on records as saying there was no crime committed, that fact will be fully exploited by Assange's defence.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted
Cavanaugh was a scummy rat at college, behaved like a rat, sadly it's hard to provide evidence for the acts which in most likelihood he did carry out, but some people are, as you say, blind based on their bias.

And that is the point. The vast majority of the available evidence in overwhelmingly in favor of the Judge. He had dozens and dozens of classmates, many of which were women, provide glowing character references.

He had many women who have worked with and/or clerked for him who had nothing but great things to say about him.

The reality is, once a douche, always a douche, and if he had been the drunk perv that radical Christine made him out to be, there would have been plenty more come forward that were his victims over the years.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 02:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Oh, I'm familiar with the charges... bogosity - from a paragraph almost halfway down:


Your link to the World Socialist Website is broken.

Thanks, fixed...


Either way the point about an accustion is that if it gets to court it can be challenged. Courts are where evidence is scrutinised and exposed. I am sure that if the Swedish prosecuters are really on records as saying there was no crime committed, that fact will be fully exploited by Assange's defence.

Yeah, no, at least in the USA, we don't prosecute people just because there 'might be something there'.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 03:06 PM
link   
And just like that "Poof" gone from the media .



posted on Apr, 16 2019 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Gargoyle91

This may be why:


... it’s always instructive (if a bit sickening) to watch as the mandarins of the corporate media disseminate an official narrative and millions of people robotically repeat it as if it were their own opinions. This process is particularly nauseating to watch when the narrative involves the stigmatization, delegitimization, and humiliation of an official enemy of the ruling classes.

Logic, facts, and actual evidence have little to nothing to do with this process. The goal of the media and other propagandists is not to deceive or mislead the masses. Their goal is to evoke the pent-up rage and hatred simmering within the masses and channel it toward the official enemy.

The demonization of the empire’s enemies is not a deception … it is a loyalty test. It is a ritual in which the masses (who, let’s face it, are de facto slaves) are ordered to display their fealty to their masters, and their hatred of their masters’ enemies. Cooperative slaves have plenty of pent-up hatred to unleash upon their masters’ enemies. They have all the pent-up hatred of their masters (which they do not dare direct at their masters, except within the limits their masters allow), and they have all the hatred of themselves for being cooperative, and … well, basically, cowards.

Julian Assange is being punished for defying the global capitalist empire.
off-guardian.org...


Here's a link to Assange related news items, www.newsnow.co.uk... including how Ecuador are claiming to have had 40m cyber attacks since Assange's arrest, how US prosecutors are ignoring legal precedent set in 1971 and how it was not possible for Assange to hack military computers not connected to the internet www.nj.com... ml



posted on Apr, 16 2019 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: uncommitted
Cavanaugh was a scummy rat at college, behaved like a rat, sadly it's hard to provide evidence for the acts which in most likelihood he did carry out, but some people are, as you say, blind based on their bias.

And that is the point. The vast majority of the available evidence in overwhelmingly in favor of the Judge. He had dozens and dozens of classmates, many of which were women, provide glowing character references.

He had many women who have worked with and/or clerked for him who had nothing but great things to say about him.

The reality is, once a douche, always a douche, and if he had been the drunk perv that radical Christine made him out to be, there would have been plenty more come forward that were his victims over the years.


That's really your opinion, please don't try and state it as fact.







 
102
<< 27  28  29    31 >>

log in

join