It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Xertious
The UK is getting a bit of stick about this for no reason. Ecuador has already broken numerous articles of the vienna convetion. Ecuador has show disregard to UK and Swedish law. Ecuador knows the UK will extradite him regardless of what they do so giving him asylum in the UK, in a UK owned diplomatic building is purpose aggravation.
Yet by mid-year, the case was increasingly in question. Anna Ardin, one of the complainants, had added an accusation of physical sexual coercion, though she had earlier told a newspaper that Assange was ''not violent''. Tweets indicating a continued relationship with Assange vanished from the record, and were retrieved by bloggers; a leaked police file had a witness recalling one complainant saying she had been railroaded into making an accusation by the police and others.
When the leaked police report went into wider circulation, it did not take long for people to notice that the name of the initial investigating officer, Irmeli Krans, was familiar from somewhere else. In fact she was one of the links listed on the blogroll of Anna Ardin, the first complainant and organiser of Assange's visit to Sweden in August last year. That was unusual, though of itself not impossible - Stockholm is, in many ways, a small town. But the links rapidly proved beyond coincidence, many of them unearthed by Sweden's libertarian Flashback mega-blog.
The delay in securing a potentially vital piece of evidence remained unexplained, as did the process by which Ardin's accusation changed from a misdemeanour crime of annoyance to a felony, sexual coercion. The question as to why Ardin would have kept a torn condom for a week when she had no initial intention of going to the police also remained unanswered.
Originally posted by moniker
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Jargonaut
Technically, the USG has a valid claim and a valid point. Assange is not only guilty of violating U.S. secrecy laws but still holds material of a National Security nature that would be of imminent threat if released.....OR...so the argument can sure be made.
I have 0 sympathy to the Government's claim, but I certainly will admit they have one. Hmmmm....
You appear to say that US laws should apply worldwide, for any national.
In the same sense the USA have no right for him possibly breaking US laws as an Australian citizen, working outside the USA.edit on 16/8/2012 by moniker because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by misfitofscience
So here is an interesting thought to put all others to the test.
If Conspiracies are real, If there was some sort of secret government, if sources were killed by black ops, then I am sure someone causing this sort of malignancy or thorn in the side of so many (J.A) would be one of the first to be snuffed out, would he not be?
But alas he hasnt, which, makes me ponder, were conspiracies created to cover up the weak system we are lead to believe is stronger than they let on to be?
Originally posted by trysts
reply to post by JacKatMtn
I don't get the whole Julian Assange thing. Wikileaks has never informed me about anything I haven't already assumed. I'm going to stick to my gut feeling about him, which is that he works for some "intelligence" agency, and I can't bring myself to caring about his weird situation.
Originally posted by purplemer
Originally posted by jerico65
Originally posted by purplemer
So, the truth will set you free, huh?
If the whole sexual assault charge is crap, then by all means then, show up for trial, beat them in court, then ask the Prosecutor to look into a false crime report.
Hiding in foreign embassies, skipping bails in deportation proceedings... all that doesn't exactly scream innocent.
One thing is, I wonder if he realises that he will actually be safer in Sweden than he will in Ecuador.