More on Julian Assange

No idea how many here are following the story, I know a couple are but I think most aren't. If you don't know what the latest on this is, two months ago the UK court ruled that Assange needed to be extradited to Sweden to answer more questions relating to his "rape" charges. In response, Assange jumped his bail and ran to the Ecuador embassay in London which is a rather tiny apartment. He has been holed up there for 2 months now while seeking asylum claiming that the whole thing is a pretext to extradite him to the US where he'll disappear in guantanamo or a similar prison facing torture or simply be killed as many of our politicians have publicly spoken out that they want him executed.

Ecuador has agreed to turn him over to Sweden if they give assurances that he won't be sent to the US. Sweeden refuses. On top of that documents came out recently that showed the Obama adminstration was putting considerable pressure on the UK to make sure he's apprehended and turned over to Sweden (and the US has a great extradition treaty with Sweeden, almost anyone either country asks for gets turned over). Ecuador has also offered to allow Sweden into the embassy to question Assange and Sweden has refused. They've also refused to ask over telecommunications equipment.

Now, Ecuador has announced that they're granting Assange diplomatic asylum on the basis that if he's handed over to Sweden he will likely face extradition and execution in the US. The UK response to this has been interesting. They've massed a bunch of cops outside of the building (300 at last count), and have also placed cops inside of the embassy along all corridors in the building as the connecting halls don't count as foreign territory. Last night a military special operations team was sent into the building, sneaking in through the fire escape, presumably to apprehend Assange. However, there's a huge mass of protestors outside and they got caught.

In addition to all of this the UK has said that if Ecuador doesn't turn Assange over they're going to storm the embassy and take him. This is a huge deal, if the UK shows they won't respect another countries embassy when it's not convenient they face many of their embassies across the world being shut down. Most Latin American countries have responded saying that if the UK storms the embassy all UK embassies in their countries will be shut down and corporate contracts (including a lot of oil) will be canceled. In response to this the UK backed up on their statement and said they don't recognize the Vienna convention (despite using it to defend their own embassies many times in the past) and won't storm the embassy. Instead they're going to revoke it's diplomatic status and storm it when it's just another building. Effectively closing down the Ecuador embassy.

I'll say one thing for Assange, he's great at stirring up drama. This whole attempt to apprehend him is bullcrap in the first place though. To start with, the authorities in Sweden have already questioned him, twice. They want to do so again saying the previous questioning isn't good enough because it's a new investigation (the "rape" case has been thrown out twice). Next, it's called rape but it isn't really rape. They're using a definition of rape that's really loose. Basically it comes down to the fact that a woman had unprotected sex with him, continued to have sex with him (but with condoms) many times afterwards, and later when she asked him to get an STD test for the time without a condom he refused. In Sweden that counts as rape. In the case with the other woman, he had sex with her then a week later (after they spent a week together) she decided that he wasn't as amazing as she initially thought and felt that he mislead her about how amazing of a person he was and that had she known him as well at the end of the week as at the beginning of the week she wouldn't have had sex with him.

Both women admit to these details in their rape cases, and they aren't even seeking prosecution. Instead it's Sweden itself trying to prosecute the rape case and the cases have been thrown out twice in the past (by women prosecutors) now it's a man prosecuting it and he says it's a grievous sex crime against all women and Assange needs to be brought to justice.

The guy needs to drop some balls and turn himself in. He wanted to play with the big boys and now he has his wish.

I couldn't care less if he used condoms in Sweden.

The whole case smacks of a conception trial.

They want him to be extradited to the US where he would face penalties for leaking out state secrets.
If they succeed, the US-UK establishment will be seen as secret police transnational organization like the one under Brezhniew in Soviet times.

If th US wants extraditions, the just thing would be to try him there for his Sweden charges, which would amount to nil. But we know that's not what they have in mind.
Come on, how many males refuse to test to STD's way after an intercourse?
Has the woman been tested for STD's she claims she might have gotten from Julian?

It look to me like they sent two hookers to trap him. It's that simple.

Originally posted by Chargeit
The guy needs to drop some balls and turn himself in. He wanted to play with the big boys and now he has his wish.

and what is it he needs to turn himself in for?
having sex with willing parties?

This is more of a smoke screen in any case, the magician is making us watch the assistant and we are not watching his hands, lets look at what else is happening in the world.

Originally posted by Chargeit
The guy needs to drop some balls and turn himself in. He wanted to play with the big boys and now he has his wish.

By ‘big boys’ do you mean the US blubberment and its unending warmongering and corruption?

If so, do these ‘big boys’ realise that the world has woken up to their unethical and dishonest behaviour?

I’m sure you also realise that anyone who professes to be a ‘big boy’ really only has a tiny weeny specimen

Assanage & Manning are heroes for showing us exactly what your government is capable of - what they have done and continue to do across the globe is appalling and disgusting.

America is not the world police, your government is a joke and you’re doomed to financial ruin.

But of course, torture and execute people that leak the truth…… I assume that this is ok in your book, as long as your government saves face?

Is it nice to have your head berried in the sand? I assume that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy knowing who you elected will do whatever they want without your authority, permission or knowledge; because that’s the way it’s supposed to be?

I am assuming you like the fact your government is out of control and out of touch, would I also assume correctly when I state that you would provide positive back up for whatever your government does, even for example if you dropped a nuke on innocent civilians?

Mickierocksman

reply to post by Vrill


What I really don't get is why this hasn't gotten more coverage. Not just from MSM but also from social media and the like. I mean, his name and wikileaks has become normal household knowledge. I don't know anyone who hasn't heard of him. Even with an active campaign to ignore ongoing coverage, it just seems it would warrant more talk. (And I'm not referring to the sex charges, just the crucifixion that's followed)

There's also an issue in Sweden where prisoners the US wants and ask for simply disappear from the system. Part of the law in the EU says that they can't extradite a prisoner who's facing a probable death penalty. However Sweden has had a couple of cases in the past where they've "misplaced" a prisoner the US was asking for that was blocked on that extradition issue.

Technically extradition shouldn't even be an issue because Assange isn't officially charged with anything in Sweden he's just wanted for questioning. But things are coming out that the US is putting a lot of pressure on Sweden and the UK to bring him in. The fact that they won't question him (and it's common practice for them to question people in other countries, Sweden is 2 hours away from London) because they want him in custody and once he's in custody anything can and will happen to him.

As for US law, they can define him as a terrorist and arrest him anywhere in the world in accordance with the law, you can thank Bush for that we've given ourselves authority to chase and apprehend terrorists all over the world. It's perfectly legal in the US, and not many countries will risk a military confrontation to prevent their own laws from being trampled.

One thing Julian Assange can't be accused of is being an idiot. He recognises a trap when he sees one. He knows that if he is forced from the Ecuadorian embassy he will not be seen again until he and Bradley Manning are bunk-mates.

here's that speach he just did...

I was looking at these pictures of his speech -

cryptome.org...

You can tell he is wearing a lot of makeup - note the makeup line on his neck -

but is he also wearing a fake nose?

It looks like it to me.

There's a lot of peeling on his face, like he's been sunburnt - (but his white neck doesn't seem to show a lot of sun exposure) or like there is glue or peeling latex on his face.

Or maybe it is just me.

Great speech.

I'm still not 100% sure if he's part of the show or not tho....

reply to post by Beavers


You may have a valid point.
If anyone hasn't seen this please read (if you can be bothered).
This person has kindly translated all of the Swedish newspaper reports on the case so far.
assangerape.tumblr.com...
Sorry if this has been posted before.
Interesting to note that the cheif of Police who decided to charge him is a feminist lesbian who is heavily involved in womens rights politics.
Just saying....................

Originally posted by Vrill
Assange jumped his bail and ran to the Ecuador embassay in London which is a rather tiny apartment.

> There was no "bail" to be "jumped".
> The 'Ecuador plan' was a contingency measure in place months ago that was forwarded to the country back when Assange interviewed the Ecuadorian president.
> There are no "rape charges" either, as nothing has been formally filed. Sweden claim they only want to interview Assange in relation to some allegations a coupe of girls belatedly made. An interview that he offered to them already (on UK soil) but was refused and, suffice to say, could easily be conducted via video conferencing.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven with the fetor of the US information deniers clutching desperately for a scapegoat to conduct a public execution of, as an example to other would-be bean spillers; which includes mainstream news agencies. It's disgusting and people should really be fearful of what this could lead to, actually.

Bring Julian home to Oz and make him Prime Minister.

We need to get rid of the brown nosing ranga (Julian Gillard).

Julian is no "yes man"

So it seems this man is so important, that Great Britain would spoil their relations with Latin America? If they storm the embassy, it means coming to another country's soil without permission, which is act of war. Does Britain want war with Ecuador? Seems like false-flag, they use Julian Assange as reason to invade Ecuador. Another war for oil.

Leave this man alone, you shouldn't get life sentence for broken condom, it wasn't even rape. Julian knows that ever leaves to Embassy, he will be sent to USA and he will never be free man, or there is "accident" after the sentence.

Originally posted by hadriana
There's a lot of peeling on his face, like he's been sunburnt - (but his white neck doesn't seem to show a lot of sun exposure) or like there is glue or peeling latex on his face.

Or maybe it is just me.

I recall reading previously that they have installed a sun-bed (or some equivalent) in the room that he is staying in. This would explain the weird tan lines - has probably mostly been lying on his back with the lights in front or above him.

reply to post by Comatose


Did you look closely at his nose though? It looks like it is attached. It doesn't look right.
To me his whole face really doesn't look right. He's been out of public eye for a while, has he been having plastic surgery?

I was a big Wikileaks fan - browsing the site everyday - checking out all the "dirt" of our governments .. and it was very interesting. That was the early days of wikileaks - than came the time when I lost 100% confidence into Wikileaks - the time of Assange. First I had no idea who that person really was and honestly who cared - it's Wikileaks right? But when it came around that Assange was associated with Wikileaks - Wikileaks itself lost credibility. One person took credit of thousands and he had no shame to show that - down to the level that the page itself was locked down only with donation requests for his defends. Key issue is that Assange was never in danger, never followed by any Government, never the guy who was actually threatened - yeah and he still isn't today. The real people behind Wikileaks are either dead or live in fear (or are imprisoned). That whole "Assange Worshiping" was so disturbing that I completely lost confidence not only in Wikileaks but anything what Wikileaks produced. Suddenly it was not a website that leaks Government details but it was a organization that "profits" from that. I know how much it costs to run servers,etc - and you don't really need $600k+ for that. Alone the fact that Wikileaks was down for months asking for money, showed me the real side of that organization.

Then came the whole leaking of US Confidential Information and building misguiding videos together. I seen these patterns - the Nazi's used the same methods of propaganda. Wikileaks looked more like a gossip site, talking and (mis)-representing facts. The TMZ of Governments Secrets. That next level was more than disturbing and really showed the face of Assange. However this time it was not just documents about dumping "illegal" substances - but real raw classified details about a ongoing war.

This ultimate destroyed Wikileaks as an authentic and independent resource. It's not really trustworthy if a website reports about misconduct while there is no real misconduct - especially in war times when there is really everything far away from the norm. Essential the only reason why someone would do that is to gain fame!

Assange bascially killed Wikileaks for his own purpose. This is how I see it:

Assange - a failed journalist - wanted to become famous - he doesn't really know and finds that group called Wikileaks and get involved. He becomes their front-man, releases some real ugly stuff and gains some fame - but really only for a very short time - because people don't really care - which he doesn't get because "man, I am the guy who exposed the USA and their evil behavior - killing innocent reporters surrounded by people with machine guns". He invents this whole story that the USA wants to kill him - and he goes to Sweden where human rights and whistle blower protection are sacred. There he enjoys a good level of fame and gets involved in some relationships with some girls. Because of his fame and behavior, he is extremely arrogant and can't take rejection. He does something stupid, hides, leaves the country, hides again and finally asks a different country for help - under the umbrella of a lie.

Many people here really think that it is a conspiracy that they want to kill him, but I really think that this guy did it and he try's to run away from the law to avoid prosecution using his fame and work he was in. Very easy to say, big impact, because you never can be 100% sure - the perfect strategy. There is always room for both sides, but I am convinced that he "raped" those girls and he is just another criminal that try to commit the "perfect" crime.

Afterall, if it turns out that he really did it, than all of you (supporters) supported a rapist! Think about that!

London's crime rate must be really low if they can spare 300 policemen for 24 hr. surveillance on one guy wanted for questioning in another country. Don't they have a murderer or something they could be looking for?

This whole matter speaks volumes about the integrity of the US and UK governments.

reply to post by Thebel


My thoughts exactly. What is so special about any man that would make it worthwhile to risk war between two sovereign states? Ecuador is not any superpower, but it is entitled by international law to confer asylum to whoever it pleases. Certainly it wouldn't be such a big deal if Assange was not behind Wikileaks.

British government positions seem highly suspucious as it is. I really devote a lot of respect for Britain, especially after the Olympics, which only reminded us how much the world really is indebted to British culture in general.

It is very sad, however, to see Great Britain so subservient to USA's interests.