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 speaking live NOW {VIDEO}

page: 6
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Miccey


 


So the US / government are automatically guilty without ever seeing the inside of a court room



Think you're reading a little too much into some peoples statements. I mean you're just shifting the point for your own perpose and diverting what is really being said.

Are you saying you are (US Government) are always treated auto-guilty with ever case that comes to these forums? Or do you want to be more specific and say only this case.. Cause that sounds rather generalising rather than the issue at hand.

Gerneralisations lead to people going on and on and on about their own fluff until it gets boring and kills the main debate




posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Kryties
That's the most ridiculous thing I have read all day. Nice try at painting me as an "Anti-American hater". Now I know you're desperate - most Americans on this forum only resort to that when they have been completely disproven. How pathetic.


Thank you for proving my point. I have supported my position where as you have not. Quit dismissing and engage in the conversation wuld you please.


What the hell are you talking about? You accused me of being an America Hater™ , I am simply laughing at that ridiculous claim.




I asked you to stop making things up. Please show me where I stated he was guilty of the charge. Oh, wait, you cant because I never said he was guilty.



Originally posted by Xcathdra
I have called for him to be charged and held accountible for his actions and think he should be extradited to the US.


Certainly seems like you are assuming his guilt in the sex crime.


again please stop making things up and then ignoring it when you get called out ina desparate attempt to shift the conversation away from your mistake.


A bit like what you are doing now I have called you out for accusing me of being an America Hater™?



Im not the one claiming the US is gunning for him nor am I the one telling the british / swedish courts this was all set up by the US without offering anything to support the claim.


I posted my evidence in the previous page in this thread - pity you ignored it.
edit on 19/8/2012 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
3rd and final mod note in this thread:

The tone of recent posts is inching towards personal attacks again.

Point 1: this thread is too important to close on the day of Assange's balcony appearance.

point 2: any member found to be slinging personal attacks again will be post banned for 3 days.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
www.sbs.com.au...

""Australia has confirmed that its diplomatic post in Washington had been preparing for Julian Assange's possible extradition to the US but played it down as "contingency planning""

And clearly tonning it down, which SBS generally does. Unlike some netowrks (rom both countries) SBS don't publish junk.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Wow, hold your horses. I wasn't pointing a finger at you. You at least have argued your case with facts unlike some other people who constantly bring up words like charges. I do recall you saying that but not after it was replied that there are no charges




By all means, refute it.
Show how the Us is invovled with the UK and Sweden when it comes to the sex charge and his extradition. Please show me proof Assange can be charged with treason in the US.
Please show me proof Assange will be sent to gitmo.
Please show me proof Assange will face a military tribunal.
Please show meproof where Assange will be denied access to the legal system to mount a defense.


No dodging here. I've said multiple times that the refusal of swedish authorities to follow the letter of the law in regards the accusations is more than suspicious and grounds for asylum and fear for ones personal safety. This is a country that lets CIA snatch people up for torture vs. UK where extradition is quite systematically analysed and heard.
I am very well aware that JA cannot be tried for treason. I dont recall ever making that claim. Also if you could quote someone affiliated with WL making that claim I'd appreciate it cause I dont recall it happening. Same with Gitmo. Althought that wouldn't surprise me one bit considering that by US standards it's ok to send people to be tortured in foreign prisons.
When it comes to military tribunal I'm not an expert in this specific aspect but consider that the leaks were afgan war files, iraq war files and collateral murder I wouldn't be surprised by that either.
Also I have not made statements saying that he would be denied represantion in US. Not sure where this one even comes from?



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by colin42
JA has been granted asylum. Sweden has been invited to interview him at the embassy which is the normal and accepted route as far as I know. Why has this not been perused?

Yes he has, under an OAS treaty that no countries in Europe are a party to. Sweden has explained why they cannot do that interview and the swedish courts have upheld the extradition arrest warrant, as has the UK courts. It is not a common place occurence to do that in a foreign embassy for Sweden. We cannot use a perosnal opinion of how you think it should be and just ignore the laws of the country in question.




Originally posted by colin42
The UK threatening to storm the Embassy of a foreign power is not the norm and is something the British government would condemn from any other nation.

If you read the protocols you will also see an embassy cannot be used for the sole purpose of hindering prosecution when there is no evidence to support the claims made. Again the Swedish, UK as well as the EU court systems all allow for appeals.

When an embassy is used in an action that is inconsistent with its status, the diplomatic status of that building can be challenged in court and be stripped if the judge finds in favor of the UK government. Entering the building once that happens is not an assault on a foreign embassy.

Why do you and others ignore the part of the legal process and diplomatic status? Is it because without mentioning that info it makes the situation appear to be something more than it really is? Like playing on the emotions of those people dont bother to do research and think for themselves or?



Originally posted by colin42
The information JA and Wiki Leaks has released has never to my knowledge been challenged as untrue.

Assange and his legal teams have claimed -
Assange will be charged with treason by the US - A lie since assange is not a US citizen.
Assange will be sent to Gitmo - A lie because he is not an enemy combatent and does not fall under military jurisdiction.
Assange will face a military tribunal - A lie because the military has no jurisdiction.
Assange will face the death penalty - A lie since there is nothing he can be charged with under federal law that carries that as a penalty.
Assange will be held without trial - A lie.. This is a variation of the same argument they used in the British court when making their argument against going to sweden about sweden. He also stated he would be be treated unfairly yet cannot prove it.

Finally everyhting assange has accused the US of has never occured (above list) so yes, he has made claims that are untrue.




Originally posted by colin42
So the only reason for the threats, the actions outside the norm is to punish someone that told the truth and to get JA to the USA where he will not face a fair hearing. Treason? He is not an American citizen, how does that work?

@ treason - He is the one who made that argument, not me. I have been stating he is not subject to treason charge in the US because he is not a US citizen. Assange is the one making threats in case you didnt notice,and they are directed towards the US.

As I have stated time and again had Manning and Assange only released info documenting criminal actions I would be fine with that. Even now I have no issues investigating accusations against the government. What I dont condone is the releasing of classified information that shows no criminal wrong doing.

Im pretty sure you would notlike it if your entire medical/ financial / personal information was released simply because it belongs to you. You guys keep missing that point, instead you argue that its all inclusive when in fact its not.

Finally when speaking of a fiar trial you are making an assumption and passing it off as fact. It would be like me demanding your arrest because sometime in the future it might be possible you could kill me. It does not work that way and people choose to ignore that.



Originally posted by colin42
This sites mantra is 'deny ignorance' yet people on this thread are complaining that someone has done just that.
I make that comment all the time.. I have supported my position with facts and references to the law while others launch personal attacks at me while offering nothing to support their position. Ironic the same people demanding assange be allowed to exercise his rights while denying the very same to those who dont agree with Assange.



Originally posted by colin42
Sex crimes are such an easy charge to make so please, wake up. The pursuit of JA would never happen if it was Joe Bloggs from Sussex charged with the same crime.
Yeah I know how they work and have done my fair share of invetigating them and testifying in court. What you ignore is the fact that its up to the judge / judicial system to determine guilt, not me nor you.

you dont get to dimiss something because you dont like it. It does not work that way and you know this. You cannot state what would or would not have occured so please, dont try. You dont know because you were not present for it.



Originally posted by colin42
This is about the revenge of TPTB for the embarrassment Wiki Leaks has caused and JA is the public face. Why are the other members of WL not being pursued?

Nope - its about Assange, Sweden the UK and sex charges.

the only person who is embarassing wikileaks is Assange himself - no one else.
As for tohers being pursued ask the government. To date the Us government has not issued any arrest warrants or extradition requests. Or are you suggesting wikileaks violated the law but someone other than assange should be held accountible for it?



Originally posted by colin42
Even if you do not like the person we should be supporting the revelation of the truth

Again I support the exposing of criminal activity and I support the investigation and prosecution of that activity - In a court of law.

As I have stated anything Assange released that does not show criminal activity is a violation of US law. You guys want accountability but only if the same is not applied to Assange.

A court of law in Sweden is responsible for ajudicating the sex claims.
A court of law in the UK is responsible for the extradition issues.
A court of law in the US is responsible for ajudicating any criminal wrongdoing by Assange.

Since there are no warrants / charges against Assange, then the argument against the US is without foundation.
edit on 19-8-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Yes he has, under an OAS treaty that no countries in Europe are a party to. Sweden has explained why they cannot do that interview and the swedish courts have upheld the extradition arrest warrant, as has the UK courts. It is not a common place occurence to do that in a foreign embassy for Sweden. We cannot use a perosnal opinion of how you think it should be and just ignore the laws of the country in question.


This one I have to chime in. Swedish law doesn't prevent them from conducting their interview in UK. They actually have precendence that it can be done. On top of that they have said they refuse for the reason of "prestige" and not based on any law. Entirely political witch hunting.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Ecuador Grants Assange Asylumreply to post by Xcathdra
 
So maybe the USA needs to be transparent in what they intend to do with JS and we all know they intend to do something.

You ignored Joe Bloggs would not be pursued in the same way. Why?

Ecuador is a nation. It knows the laws and rules that govern asylum. It has without doubt looked into its legal standing.

Unless you are a political law expert how do you dismiss all other opinions?



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by JamesGC
Think you're reading a little too much into some peoples statements. I mean you're just shifting the point for your own perpose and diverting what is really being said.

I dont think I am.. the Us has nothing to do with sex charges, Assange, swedish or the UK. Yet for some reason the wikileaks side of the fence continues that position with nothing to support the claims.



Originally posted by JamesGC
Are you saying you are (US Government) are always treated auto-guilty with ever case that comes to these forums? Or do you want to be more specific and say only this case.. Cause that sounds rather generalising rather than the issue at hand.

I have stated in this thread a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not public opinion. Assange is innocent until a court says otherwise, just as the US government is innocent until a court says otherwise.

Assange is the one who is attempting to confuse the issue by making claims he cant support.



Originally posted by JamesGC
Gerneralisations lead to people going on and on and on about their own fluff until it gets boring and kills the main debate
In case you have not noticed Assange as well as a lot of his supporters on this site are also generalizing when it comes to the US and what they are accused of doing, regardless if the facts support their argument or not against.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





So maybe the USA needs to be transparent in what they intend to do with JS and we all know they intend to do something.


What do they intend to do? Why do you have this suspicion?



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
What the hell are you talking about? You accused me of being an America Hater™ , I am simply laughing at that ridiculous claim.

Just using your mindset back at you. Next time dont assume my position and patriotism are one in the same.



Originally posted by Kryties
Certainly seems like you are assuming his guilt in the sex crime.

Not at all and you should actually read and understand before making a claim thats not true. I said he should be held accountible and extradited. That in no way shape or form means he is guilty. Court of law, not public opinion and yhere is a difference contrary to what you may think (or try to spin in your favor).



Originally posted by Kryties
A bit like what you are doing now I have called you out for accusing me of being an America Hater™?

right after you accused me of being blinded by patriotism.. So dont try to claim the moral highground when your own mindset is used back against you. Ironic your ok to use it against others but seem to be offended when its applied to you.


Originally posted by Kryties
I posted my evidence in the previous page in this thread - pity you ignored it.
edit on 19/8/2012 by Kryties because: (no reason given)
no you posted conspiracy theories that arent supported by fact.

again, there is a difference.
edit on 19-8-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

I dont think I am.. the Us has nothing to do with sex charges, Assange, swedish or the UK. Yet for some reason the wikileaks side of the fence continues that position with nothing to support the claims.

I have stated in this thread a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not public opinion. Assange is innocent until a court says otherwise, just as the US government is innocent until a court says otherwise.

Assange is the one who is attempting to confuse the issue by making claims he cant support.


You keep missing the point that there is clear evidence of a political witchhunt at the behest of the US. The sex charges are a croc, coinciding with the US making public claims they wanted Assanges head on a platter. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what is happening.

Combine that with an over-inflated sense of American patriotism and you get what we see in this thread.




edit on 19/8/2012 by Kryties because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 





, coinciding with the US making public claims they wanted Assanges head on a platter.


I am confused. What does "The US making public claims" mean?




Combine that with an over-inflated sense of American patriotism and you get what we see in this thread.


Sorry, but since when does taking laws seriously equate to patriotism?



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
i don't think any of us have actually said he should not go to court.

People have said they don't believe he is guilty 9And i agree that's just opinion dominating agrument0 But has anyone said here that they don't think he should go to court and have his day at all?

Most people don't feel he is going to get a fair trail, thats what a lot of followers believe.

How can you prove it'll be a completely fair trail and that there is completely no other agender. That it will be all peachy. To say it will be with absolut, will be to say never in the history of man has a wrong been done in the court of law.

The only way you could ever know is if you were part of the progress. I know you understand how big this is, we all do. Rhis is no weeny case here, it's going to be historic, the outcome.

But to say that there is NO possability other factors will be at place is to also believe that he is completely innocent and believeing in blind faith.

The guy needs to step up, but the fact this is getting blown up to huge proportions is showing signs that everythig is hard to believe. Thus the tug of war.

I was just watching FOX news where they were saying he should be killed illegally.

Yes, nobody should ever watch FOX, i know.

But this is only the early days. This isnt even finished yet. A lot of people (NOT us here ATS) still have much to say, prove and do.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by colin42
 





So maybe the USA needs to be transparent in what they intend to do with JS and we all know they intend to do something.


What do they intend to do? Why do you have this suspicion?
Palin calls for the exceution of assange

US embassy calbles culprit should be executed

Lawyer condemns call to assassinate Assange

Why would you think I would not suspect the intentions of TPTB and more accurately the USA.

Can you tell me what state JS the USA intends to extradite JS to and does it have the death penalty?

The rich and powerful do not like to be embarrassed.

edit on 19-8-2012 by colin42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by Kryties
 


I am confused. What does "The US making public claims" mean?


Our media here in Australia has been playing a clip of Hillary calling for Assanges arrest and extradition to the US on TV for a few days now. I can't seem to find it on Youtube though unfortunately - although any Aussie who has been watching the news here for the last few days will confirm this.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by colin42

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by colin42
 





So maybe the USA needs to be transparent in what they intend to do with JS and we all know they intend to do something.


What do they intend to do? Why do you have this suspicion?
Palin calls for the exceution of assange

US embassy calbles culprit should be executed

Lawyer condemns call to assassinate Assange

Why would you think I would not suspect the intentions of TPTB and more accurately the USA.

Can you tell me what state JS the USA intends to extradite JS too and does it have the death penalty?

The rich and powerful do not like to be embarrassed.


Haha, Huckabee and Palin are TPTB? Looks like you have nothing to worry about then.

I can see it now, Huckabee and Palin organizing an assasination attempt. Planning the perfect crime. Lol. Fear them!



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by colin42

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by colin42
 





So maybe the USA needs to be transparent in what they intend to do with JS and we all know they intend to do something.


What do they intend to do? Why do you have this suspicion?
Palin calls for the exceution of assange

US embassy calbles culprit should be executed

Lawyer condemns call to assassinate Assange

Why would you think I would not suspect the intentions of TPTB and more accurately the USA.

Can you tell me what state JS the USA intends to extradite JS too and does it have the death penalty?

The rich and powerful do not like to be embarrassed.


Putin has nothing to do with the US, neither does a Lawyer and the person working at the Embassy will probably have to appologise in front of the media as it's now public and they hold an important position.

They are purely opinion too and will not effect Government. I'm sure a lot of kids are saying the same thing and we do not mention them.

I completely agree with what your saying though, but we should acknowledge this day over fighting for who is right and who is wrong, because it isn't going to make an ounch of differenc eto the others.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by Kryties
 


I am confused. What does "The US making public claims" mean?


Our media here in Australia has been playing a clip of Hillary calling for Assanges arrest and extradition to the US on TV for a few days now. I can't seem to find it on Youtube though unfortunately - although any Aussie who has been watching the news here for the last few days will confirm this.


You seem to misunderstand our Political system. Hillary Clinton is not the "US". Her opinion is not the "Official stance of the US".

I happen to agree with Hillary btw.




top topics



 
33
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join