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: 7
33
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Well if Putin wants him dead and the reactionary right want him dea, thats good enough reason for me to want him to stay alive and out of the potential harm he is under. The world needs more whistle blowers not less. thought that would be a sentiment ATS would stand behind. Always complaining about the mainstream media. yet when someone comes along and shows things that are a little uncomfortable, people want him shut up silenced and punished.




posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by JamesGC

Putin has nothing to do with the US


I think you are mixing up your Palins and your Putins



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Confused here, when did Putin become involved?



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
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

My apologies then.. I took your post the wrong way.

As for the use of charges we will just move on since that has more to do with our respective backgrounds and familiarity than practical application.


Originally posted by PsykoOps
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.

Its Swedish law and the challenge Assange made in Sweden to their court system was denied. So while you think its suspicious it does not mean it os nor does it mean a conspiracy exists.

Asylum requests are suppose to be substantiated with evidence. Since the Us has not taken the actions assange is claiming, his asylum request is nothing but a hypothetical. How many times have you seen a hypothetical argument in court? Since courts deal in fact and not opinion its hard to justify Assanges claims.

Also you cannot use what occured to other people in completely different scenarios to this, and you cant compare this to those. It does not work that way for a reason. Trying to make that argument is nothing but an excuse to be honest in hopes its enough to cloud the issue.



Originally posted by PsykoOps
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.

All the claims I posted are contained in articles that have interviewed Assange and his lawyers - Source

Lawyers for the WikiLeaks founder last night released the outline of Assange's planned legal defence against his extradition.

One of their claims is that the Swedish government could allegedly send him on to the US, where Mr Assange's lawyers claim he could face the death penalty on treason or espionage charges yet to be laid by US prosecutors. For that to happen the US would have to break its treaties with Sweden.

Treason - A lie - Assange is Australian and cannot be charged wtih treason under US laws.
Espionage death penalty - A lie - US Federal law applicable to assange is a max of 10 years confinement and or fine. It does not have a death penalty as an option.

Source 2

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, could be at "real risk" of the death penalty or detention in Guantánamo Bay if he is extradited to Sweden on accusations of rape and sexual assault, his lawyers claim.

Death penalty - a lie - No charges he could face have that as an option.
Gitmo - A lie - He is not an enemy combatent and was not captured on a battlefield. He cannot be sent to gitmo.

Source 3

The lawyer for Julian Assange argued Monday that the embattled WikiLeaks founder will face a secret trial that violates international standards of fairness if sent to Sweden to face sexual assault allegations.

Secret trial in sweden - a lie - and Swedish officals have addressed this.

Substituting Swedish law for English -

Assange's lawyers also say he cannot be extradited because he has not been charged with a crime in Sweden and is only wanted for questioning — and that the allegation is not rape as understood under European and English law.


Guarantees on Assange and extradition to the US -

Nils Rekke, head of the legal department at the Swedish prosecutor's office in Stockholm, has said Assange would be protected from transfer to the U.S. by strict European rules, which would require approval from both Sweden and Britain.




Originally posted by PsykoOps
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.

The UCMJ only applies to military members. Military tribunals apply to military members and enemy combatents and the criteria is required in order to use it.

Assange is not an enemy combatent nor was he caught on a battlefield. Again he cannot face a military tribunal. If the rumors of a grand jury are even true that supports no military tribunal. They would not need to use a grand jury under military law.


Originally posted by PsykoOps
Also I have not made statements saying that he would be denied represantion in US. Not sure where this one even comes from?

The list I gave you is what Assange and his legal teams have been using as their base for the legal challenge against extradition to Sweden. I never said you made those claims.. I merely asked you to refute those claims.
edit on 19-8-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
masqua has left 3 PSA's for decorum in this thread. There will be no others. Decorum will be adhered to or posting abilities will be revoked.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by JamesGC

Putin has nothing to do with the US


I think you are mixing up your Palins and your Putins


*Facepalm*

Aren't they related though


EDIT

Been up for over 24 hours. it's showing.
edit on 19-8-2012 by JamesGC because: (no reason given)

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



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 



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! .
The point is these people have power. These people have a high profile. If they were asking for your head on a plate would you still laugh then?

If these people are such a joke and embarrassment why has the USA not reined them in?

Perception is everything and the USA hoypiloy have worked hard to form my opinion.

You may know Palin and Huckbee as fools but we have a clown of a mayor that dangles from lines that is now being considered for PM.

I trust none of them. If my life depended on them I would be in an embassy, I suspect you would be as well



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by JamesGC
 



Putin has nothing to do with the US,
Never said he did. Palin was who I linked to.

Edit. See your response stared it now get some sleep. Palin is the one that rides dinosaurs putin is the one that has never lossed a judo match.

I believe neither


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



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
deleted
edit on 19-8-2012 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
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.


We are in disagreement on this issue. An opinion issued by a retired judge does not make it a standard requirement. The prosecutor addressed that claim and noted there was a ruling from an active judge in another matter where an interview done outside sweden in an embassy was thrown out.

It does not matter what you or I think of Swedish law. Its swedish law and they are responsible for it, not us.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted 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.

There are no charges pending.. what more do you want?

Maybe Assange and his legal team should be transparent instead of making up lies about the US in order to avoid being sent to sweden?



Originally posted by colin42
You ignored Joe Bloggs would not be pursued in the same way. Why?

huh?


Originally posted by colin42
Ecuador is a nation. It knows the laws and rules that govern asylum. It has without doubt looked into its legal standing.

then they should have chosen one that is recognized by the international community instead of one that only applies to South Central and North American countries?

The 1954 OAS treaty is what Excquador is using. The 1961 convention on diplomatic protocol is what all other countries use.



Originally posted by colin42
Unless you are a political law expert how do you dismiss all other opinions?

My college education, the training I have received from 2 academies dealing with diplomatic relations, embassies, consular officials and international extraditions etc etc etc etc.



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



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 





The point is these people have power. These people have a high profile. If they were asking for your head on a plate would you still laugh then?


Absolutely. I couldn't bring myself to take anything they say seriously.

Dont worry, they are clowns even to their own parties.



If these people are such a joke and embarrassment why has the USA not reined them in?


Dont ask me, I've never voted for either.




You may know Palin and Huckbee as fools but we have a clown of a mayor that dangles from lines that is now being considered for PM.


He sounds hilarious.



I trust none of them. If my life depended on them I would be in an embassy, I suspect you would be as well


I'd face it like a man.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
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.

You are missing the point that paranoia is not a substitute for facts. There are no charges pending against Assange from the US - something Assange supporters continually point out when arguing Assange has done nothing wrong. Now you guys use it to argue a conspiracy point of view to once again drag the US into something you have no proof of.

Any person in the Us can express their opinion. The opinions of those people have nothing to do with the investigation, the judicial system oir any prosecution / denial of prosecution. So again, quit arguing assange has rights while ignoring the rights of citizens who feel differently.



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

Paranoia, unsubstantiated accusations at the UK, US and Sweden with blind loyalty for Assange while seeing conspiracies in every shadow.

This has nothing to do with American patriotism. It has everything to do with Assange, Sweden and the UK. A point you can try to ignore all you want by clouding the argument with crap that doesnt have anything to do with it.


Assange... Sweden... UK

NOT US.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmikeS
If he was innocent he would stand his ground, but yet he hides, that's your hero, the coward...


nah you're wrong. he KNOWS the game is rigged and the US/UK has set a trap for him. hes making the ONLY smart safe play he can. it takes balls to do what hes doing. what you're doing takes a laptop.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
There is an ongoing law enforcement investigation and planned grand jury.

Grand jury was outed by senior executive of Stratfor in their leaked files, and Australia confirmed there's an investigation.

Some here don't want to hear that.



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
There is an ongoing law enforcement investigation and planned grand jury.

Grand jury was outed by senior executive of Stratfor in their leaked files, and Australia confirmed there's an investigation.

Some here don't want to hear that.


There has always been an ongoing investigation into this mess when the information was leaked so thats nothing new. Laws were violated so why would they not investigate?

A grand jury can be convened for any number of things and to assume its geared towards Assange alone begs the question how do you know?

Its not relevant if Australia confirms or denies it since they arent the ones who ar repsonsible for enforcing Us law. Secondly I love how people slam Australia and ignore their info when it doesnt support their agenda but embraces them with open arms when they speculate and that spcuelation supports your argument.

If US laws were broken they should be investigated.
If the invesitgations lead to PC then people should be charged and tried.

After all its the exact same thing Assange had his supporters have demanded of governments they feel broke the law.

Or does that standard only apply to everyone but assange and wikielaks?



posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


You are not factoring politics into your law assessment.

An independent person can distinguish between real info or politicised info.

Why did Australia's position on Assange upto 3 days ago prior to Fairfax Media release of FOI docs change?

They had claimed opposite to since 3 days ago now they admit. And trying their best to minimise damage.

Coldly analysing just from a LEO POV is not advised.




top topics



 
33
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join