It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Assange Calls on U.S. to End 'Witchhunt' Against WikiLeaks

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 08:59 PM

Originally posted by rebellender
reply to post by sonnny1

Sonny, how did one guy come up with all this dirt on everybody? I'm not buying into the whole story.

Got me brother...........

He must be your whistle blower, hey?

Shameless plug.

posted on Aug, 19 2012 @ 09:06 PM
reply to post by SloAnPainful

Assange is telling the US what it "must do" because he is worried about his hide in that he was complicit in releasing classified information. This is a weak ploy and plays only to those who believe that Assange was strictly in this for altruistic reasons and not profit.
The US will ignore his whining and play this out at a much higher level. Of course Brad will take the big hit but Julian is sweating what might come next, after Sweden gets done with him for his playboy activities with his lady admirers. He has violated the terms of his parole and will also face UK justice. Certainly, he need not fear the black cap but may spend some time in the clink. What will the US do about Assange? No one seems to know and the US isn't doing anything in the pubic eye at this time. If some other fool sends the State Department communications to wikileaks, we will find out and Brad will gain a roomie.

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 08:19 AM

Originally posted by Alfie1
Well actually the UK does :-

(a) The UK, along with most of the world, does not recognise diplomatic asylum .

(b) Even if the UK did it is not intended to assist fugitives from justice.

(c) The UK, as a fellow member of the European Union, is obliged to act on the European Arrest Warrant issued by Sweden who want Assange in connection with sexual offences.

(d) Assange has committed offences in the UK by failing to adhere to his bail conditions and refusing to surrender to the police.

(a.) UK, along with the rest of the world, recognises the Vienna conventions with regards to diplomatic immunities, otherwise there would be NO embassies set up in UK or UK embassies abroad, and become a pariah state like Iran and Putin's Russia

(b) UK, being a lawful state ruled by law, will assist fugitives. But is Assange a Fugitive? Had he been given a fair trial and judged a fugitive?

(c) Assange is only wanted for QUESTIONING, and is not a criminal in any sense. EU is not a Stalin or CCP governed nation whereby innocents are already judged as guilty as long as someone places a report to the police. Extradition is complied by EU states, except under the most dubious circumstances such as political or economic refugee status.

Assange had complied with the Swedish authorities for questioning, had not run away, BUT to be held in UK, for entirely rational reasons that even a VILLAGE IDIOT would recognise. There ARE sufficient reasons to suspect the Swedish authorities refusal as well as UK govt's collusion to 'get this guy by hook or by crook' - which stinks of political persecution.

(d) Assange had certainly committed an offense against UK courts, by jumping bail. But did he ran far away, hid his identity, or did a thousand and one other ILLEGAL means to break his bond that another fugitive would?

He did not. He was only in the Ecuadorian Embassy, and did not cost the taxpayers a single cent to hunt for him. The concept of SANCTUARY is as old as mankind, when a man has no other recourse to find justice from the twisted and manipulated laws of man, for help.

What is the purpose for the RULE OF LAW? It is not some robotic code whereby when one breaks a civilised society's law, he is AUTOMATICALLY judged and sentence.

Far from it - the purpose had been set up to ensure each man - innocent or guilty, have a chance to be heard by a fair trial, and awarded justice, based upon the numerous complexities of life that led to that break in a society's law. and for a judge, whom must be partial and wise, and not a bootlicker of the govt, to temper any sentence with compassion, for all men, including that judge is equally flawed.

Had Assange been given a fair hearing from the UK govt who had made it very clear they would extradite him? It is with horror that the current Cameron UK govt made that decision, and many more atrocious actions to get Assange. Has UK, a great nation once that codified many laws adopted by many other nations, decided to go hypocrite and rogue today?

Ecuador, and other latin nations was once held up by UK, US and EU as banana republics, land of dictatorships, and incapable of the rule of law. Today, it had been proven that those very same republics had upheld the rule of law and ancient law of humanity, than the laughingstock UK govt that Cameron had led now.

May Cameron end the shame he had heaped upon UK today and let Assange go. It is not the problem of UK citizens to bear, nor of humankind. Justice must be served, but it must seen to be FAIRLY served, with no controversies, or doubts in the judical system will be casted and will destroy the nation itself with the loss of trust in it.

There are bigger crooks whom had robbed the nation blind and outright mass murderers slaying mankind to deal with, than someone who is prepared to face justice on fair terms for his alledged crime and in another case - simply for telling the truth, something which reporters worldwide do, at least suppose to do.

It is humankind that empowers legislatives by the vote to create laws for a civilise society to function fairly, and not some tom,dick or harry to create laws and expect humankind to follow. Humankind are not robots.
edit on 20-8-2012 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 08:58 AM

Originally posted by benrl

Ladies and gentlemen. The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society. And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago, that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweigh the dangers which are are cited to justify it.

Even today, there is little value in opposing the thread of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in assuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning


What have we allowed our country to become...

JFK would of course have been happy if all of his affairs were made public and his father exposed as the criminal he was? I doubt it, amazing how secrets are a bad thing unless they are your own.

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:04 AM

Originally posted by goldcoin

Except that we pay the government in taxes to do what they do, and when we find that they are conducting illegal and inhumane makes us the criminal? I don't think so, Julian Assange is the bravest man in the room for exposing their corruption.

If, as an individual, we have direct first-hand knowledge, or evidence, of criminal wrongdoing on the part of our Government(s) then we have a moral and legal right to expose that criminal activity. Exposing such governmental criminality is laudable.

Now let's talk about what Julian Assange did...he presided over the careless and wholesale release of hundreds of thousands of confidential documents - nearly zero of which revealed any illegal activity - to the general public. Thus he impaired dozens of governments (their people's legal representatives) from properly conducting their normal affairs...and in a number of cases, putting named individuals in harms way.

Not laudable at all...

Sweeden is being pressured into bringing Assange in, they have dropped the charge and then mysteriously picked it back up again...hmm I wonder if the US had anything to do with that. Not to mention that they claim they just want to question him, which legally they can in the UK as why not? have no evidence that the U.S. was in any way involved in this decision.

Sweden has issued a legal extradition order...because he did not present himself for questioning, as he was ordered to do, while he was in Sweden - and then he fled the country. Britain's courts...even on appeal...have held that this is a lawful order, and they must therefore uphold it.

Assange does not get to make the procedural rules in a criminal investigation in which he is the prime suspect. To suggest that he does have this right...or this kind of power is....delusional.

Note that he did not even mention the fact that he is holed up in the Embassy so as to avoid having to face questioning in a criminal sexual assault case. Instead, he invites his legions of fans to play along with him in his little fantasy world, in which he is the hero in an international spy thriller - we are all supposed to ignore that he is, in fact, suspected of sexual misconduct and rape (under Swedish law).

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 10:05 AM

Originally posted by vkey08

Originally posted by TheJourney
Wait..releasing corrupt things the government does to the public is like rape?? Did I read that right??

No you did not read it right.. The extradition request from Sweden is ONLY about the two girls that are pressing charges, it's not about Wikileaks, it's not about Bradley Manning, it's not about conspiracies to extradite to the US, it's ONLY about those girls...

That's is what was being said..

You are such a voice of reason vkey, sadly a lot of people don't seem to want to listen to reason sadly.

posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:23 PM
Apparently assange is a CIA dummy.

Quote from article

The actual witch they are after is an ex intel operative by the name of Ms Andrea Davison (not her real name) who is, in her own words, equal in status to the late Dr. David Kelly - Dr David Kelly and Andrea Davison have several things in common both were experts on Biological Weapons and both were involved in the arms that went to Iraq and WMD’s and both were whistleblowers.

Andrea was an intelligence adviser to the Trade and Industry Select Committee on Arms to Iraq and also gave evidence to Scott Inquiry into Arms to Iraq, It was her whistle blowing to the then opposition leader Niel Kinnock that revealed that the then Conservative Government were selling arms to Iraq. In December 2009 she was getting a file together to send to the Chilcot enquiry.

In January 2010 13 male officers raided Andrea’s home with a warrant issued under the Proceeds of Crime Act. They took from the building everything of value, confiscating her passport, drivers licence. all the keys to her property and vehicles etc and more importantly 7000 documents about Arms to Iraq.

It was Andrea herself who stated that she was afraid she may be ‘suicided’ and cannot protect herself, as was the case with her close friend Gareth Williams, who worked for the Secret Intelligence Service and who was found dead in a large sealed bag in the bath of his Security Services “so called safe house” in Pimilico, London on the 23rd of August 2010……

I find it rather strange the way they worded the verdict: The inquest found that his death was “unnatural and likely to have been criminally mediated” …….what they meant to have said is the fact that he was assassinated……most probably by his own employer – MI5/6.

We now see a stand-off at the Ecuador Embassy with many of the world’s media camped outside, none of whom are interested in the real reason as to why the British Government may raid the Embassy.

The Embassy made the following statement yesterday at the same time as Julian gave his breif to the world media:

On June 19, 2012, the Australian national Mr. Julian Assange appeared at the premises of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to request that the Ecuadorean State provide him with diplomatic protection, thus invoking the existing Diplomatic Asylum rules. The applicant had made his asylum request based on his fear of eventual political persecution by a third country, the same country that could use his extradition to the Kingdom of Sweden to enable an expedited subsequent extradition.

The Government of Ecuador, faithful to the asylum procedures and with the utmost attention to this case, has reviewed and evaluated all aspects of this case, particularly the arguments presented by Mr. Assange to support the fear he feels regarding this situation as a threat to his life, personal safety and freedoms.

It is important to note that Mr. Assange has taken the decision to seek asylum and protection of Ecuador over alleged allegations of “espionage and treason,” which “instigate fear of the possibility of being handed over to the United States of America by British, Swedish or Australian authorities, “said Mr. Assange, since the USA is chasing him for releasing compromising information sensitive to the U.S. Government. The applicant mentions that he “is a victim of persecution in various countries, which is deduced not only from their ideas and actions, but of his work of publishing information which compromises the powerful, uncovers the truth and therefore exposes corruption and abuses of human rights of citizens around the world.”

So let’s now look at the circumstances regard that other “In-mate” who is obviously sharing the same room with Julian, Ms Davison.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in