The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2019-04-24 09:56pm
Why do I post here? Because there's occassionally good content, and because I'll be damned if I'll let myself be bullied off the board by a misogynist troll with his head up Putin's asshole.
(Reg. misogyny, I just love how you evidently think that calling me "lady" is an insult. But I guess you would, rape apologist.)
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks" is a line from the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare. It is spoken by Queen Gertrude in response to the insincere overacting of a character in the play within a play created by Prince Hamlet to prove his uncle's guilt in the murder of his father, the King of Denmark.
The phrase is used in everyday speech to indicate doubt concerning someone's sincerity.
And I have also used similar phrasing before in arguments.
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.
Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.
Elfdart the entire reason he jumped bail was because he was being investigated with rape; they haven’t been able to investigate because he pulled a Roman Polanski and jumped bail
Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange has been sentenced to 50 weeks in jail for breaching his bail conditions.
The 47-year-old was found guilty of breaching the Bail Act last month after his arrest at the Ecuadorian Embassy.
He took refuge in the London embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden over sexual assault allegations, which he has denied.
In a letter read to the court, Assange said he had found himself "struggling with difficult circumstances".
He apologised to those who "consider I've disrespected them", a packed Southwark Crown Court heard.
"I did what I thought at the time was the best or perhaps the only thing that I could have done," he said.
In sentencing him, Judge Deborah Taylor told Assange it was difficult to envisage a more serious example of the offence.
"By hiding in the embassy you deliberately put yourself out of reach, while remaining in the UK," she said.
In mitigation, Mark Summers QC had said his client was "gripped" by fears of rendition to the US over the years because of his work with whistle-blowing website Wikileaks.
"As threats rained down on him from America, they overshadowed everything," he said.
As Assange was taken down to the cells, he raised a fist in defiance to his supporters in the public gallery behind him.
They raised their fists in solidarity and directed shouts of "shame on you" towards the court.
Assange now faces US federal conspiracy charges related to one of the largest leaks of government secrets.
The UK will decide whether to extradite Assange to the US in response to allegations that he conspired with former US intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to download classified databases.
He faces up to five years in a US prison if convicted.
Wikileaks has published thousands of classified documents covering everything from the film industry to national security and war.
Jailed for 50 weeks for skipping Bail. Which he did do whatever the reason, so seems fair to me.
No official word on whether Sweden is officially reopening their investigation and extradition request, the statute of limitations on his case expires August next year; apparently he was kicked out of the embassy because the Ecuadorian government had had enough of his bullshit over the years. Presumably while extradition hearings may take place, extradition itself won't take place until after his sentence has been completed. Apparently UK lawmakers are urging the home secretary to give priority to the Swedish claims before the USA.
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: ↑2019-05-01 10:01am
No official word on whether Sweden is officially reopening their investigation and extradition request, the statute of limitations on his case expires August next year; apparently he was kicked out of the embassy because the Ecuadorian government had had enough of his bullshit over the years. Presumably while extradition hearings may take place, extradition itself won't take place until after his sentence has been completed. Apparently UK lawmakers are urging the home secretary to give priority to the Swedish claims before the USA.
I read somewhere (I think it was the CBC) that he was kicked out by encouraging his 'followers' to investigate Ecuador's government for corruption.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
Solauren wrote: ↑2019-05-01 11:43am
Something occurs to me....
Assange hide in the Embassy for nearly 7 years, to avoid a 5 year jail term?
5 years, under Obama, when he would have been treated decently?
I think given the example of Chelsea Manning and other whistleblowers, people are going to have issues with this statement.
Solauren wrote: ↑2019-05-01 11:43am
Something occurs to me....
Assange hide in the Embassy for nearly 7 years, to avoid a 5 year jail term?
5 years, under Obama, when he would have been treated decently?
I think given the example of Chelsea Manning and other whistleblowers, people are going to have issues with this statement.
Two Words: Plea Bargain
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: ↑2019-05-01 10:01am
No official word on whether Sweden is officially reopening their investigation and extradition request, the statute of limitations on his case expires August next year; apparently he was kicked out of the embassy because the Ecuadorian government had had enough of his bullshit over the years. Presumably while extradition hearings may take place, extradition itself won't take place until after his sentence has been completed. Apparently UK lawmakers are urging the home secretary to give priority to the Swedish claims before the USA.
As Sweden withdrew the arrest warrant in 2017, the US gets priority.
As I wrote in an earlier post, if he had come here voluntarily, he wouldn't have needed to sit in the embassy for seven years as the case most likely wouldn't have ended up in court.
Solauren wrote: ↑2019-05-01 11:43am
Something occurs to me....
Assange hide in the Embassy for nearly 7 years, to avoid a 5 year jail term?
5 years, under Obama, when he would have been treated decently?
I think given the example of Chelsea Manning and other whistleblowers, people are going to have issues with this statement.
Two Words: Plea Bargain
Doesn't that assume that the US accepts a plea bargain, and that if they do accept it, that they uphold their end?
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"
- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist
"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin
I think given the example of Chelsea Manning and other whistleblowers, people are going to have issues with this statement.
Two Words: Plea Bargain
Doesn't that assume that the US accepts a plea bargain, and that if they do accept it, that they uphold their end?
Let's see...
Get to the Embassy
Contact the United States, offering them your plea bargain
(5 years minimum security prison, without access to the Internet, but allowed media interviews, and full co-operation with investigations during that period).
Publicaly say you've sent an offer to the United States, and reveal what it is.
(That full co-operation with them is a major selling point). It's now in the United States court.
Once the agreement is reached, make sure it's reproduced in all News outlets you can. In other words, so that the United States probably won't back out.
If none is reached, you have major PR points against the United States, as you made a very reasonable offer, that actually gives more then most plea-bargains in the United States.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
Uhh, do you recall the sheer furore around Assange when this all broke? If the US openly made a deal with Assange, then that's one fantastic precedent for anyone else the US wants to arrest.
But you've not addressed the other part of my point, in that once Assange is in US custody, there's no guarantee of anything.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"
- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist
"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin
Gandalf wrote: ↑2019-05-01 06:15pm
Uhh, do you recall the sheer furore around Assange when this all broke? If the US openly made a deal with Assange, then that's one fantastic precedent for anyone else the US wants to arrest.
But you've not addressed the other part of my point, in that once Assange is in US custody, there's no guarantee of anything.
Ironically, he'd be in a stronger position in that regard if he was being held in Sweden, whose extradition treaty with the US mandates that the extraditing state only charge on offenses in the request compared to the UK, whose treaty allows new charges to be laid.
In any event, it would probably be a poor defense strategy to plea bargain a case before you've exhausted opportunities to challenge extradition. Sweden's extradition case appears pretty strong, but the American case looks much weaker and seems vulnerable to litigation, which Assange has the resources to vigorously oppose.
Doesn't that assume that the US accepts a plea bargain, and that if they do accept it, that they uphold their end?
Let's see...
Get to the Embassy
Contact the United States, offering them your plea bargain
(5 years minimum security prison, without access to the Internet, but allowed media interviews, and full co-operation with investigations during that period).
Publicaly say you've sent an offer to the United States, and reveal what it is.
(That full co-operation with them is a major selling point). It's now in the United States court.
Once the agreement is reached, make sure it's reproduced in all News outlets you can. In other words, so that the United States probably won't back out.
If none is reached, you have major PR points against the United States, as you made a very reasonable offer, that actually gives more then most plea-bargains in the United States.
Its sad how you just came up with a proposal that (on its surface, at least) is way smarter than anything Assange has actually done.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver
"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.
I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
Coop D'etat wrote: ↑2019-05-01 10:58pmIronically, he'd be in a stronger position in that regard if he was being held in Sweden, whose extradition treaty with the US mandates that the extraditing state only charge on offenses in the request compared to the UK, whose treaty allows new charges to be laid.
In any event, it would probably be a poor defense strategy to plea bargain a case before you've exhausted opportunities to challenge extradition. Sweden's extradition case appears pretty strong, but the American case looks much weaker and seems vulnerable to litigation, which Assange has the resources to vigorously oppose.
Look at all of the people who got renditioned around the world with fuck all legal assistance. Why would Assange be any better treated?
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"
- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist
"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin
Coop D'etat wrote: ↑2019-05-01 10:58pmIronically, he'd be in a stronger position in that regard if he was being held in Sweden, whose extradition treaty with the US mandates that the extraditing state only charge on offenses in the request compared to the UK, whose treaty allows new charges to be laid.
In any event, it would probably be a poor defense strategy to plea bargain a case before you've exhausted opportunities to challenge extradition. Sweden's extradition case appears pretty strong, but the American case looks much weaker and seems vulnerable to litigation, which Assange has the resources to vigorously oppose.
Look at all of the people who got renditioned around the world with fuck all legal assistance. Why would Assange be any better treated?
If he was being subjected to illegal rendition as other have been in the past, that would be a legitimate scandal. Particularly as the US would be going far far beyond their previous justification of fighting members of terrorist organizations to do it Assange. That Assange's is being requested by a state that has conducted illegal rendition in the past doesn't immunize him from legitimate extradition though. If they can make a case through the legal process, they are entitled to make that attempt.
Neither does it follow that persons being sent by CIA action to authoritarian states who practice torture on detainees, that Assange would be subject to extralegal abuse by the legitimate American justice system.
Doesn't that assume that the US accepts a plea bargain, and that if they do accept it, that they uphold their end?
Let's see...
Get to the Embassy
Contact the United States, offering them your plea bargain
(5 years minimum security prison, without access to the Internet, but allowed media interviews, and full co-operation with investigations during that period).
Publicaly say you've sent an offer to the United States, and reveal what it is.
(That full co-operation with them is a major selling point). It's now in the United States court.
Once the agreement is reached, make sure it's reproduced in all News outlets you can. In other words, so that the United States probably won't back out.
If none is reached, you have major PR points against the United States, as you made a very reasonable offer, that actually gives more then most plea-bargains in the United States.
Its sad how you just came up with a proposal that (on its surface, at least) is way smarter than anything Assange has actually done.
It's not as smart as it sounds. At least, assuming he cares for wikileaks and its sources at all.
The sine-qua-non of the US Plea Bargain is cooperation with prosecutors, that means that at some point Assange would be put in a room with say, three high powered tech experts from the NSA and a squadron of prosecution attorneys (and his own for all the good it would do) and he would have to name names of sources. He would have to go through every channel of communications wikileaks used at the time he was actively involved in it, and he would have to agree to testify against other sources they've not got yet.
One word of 'no' or 'I cannot incriminate that person' and he is in breach of the sentence bargain and they throw the book at him. There are no fifth amendment protections for you once you have plea bargained, you have to answer any question put to you to the best of your ability.
This is the same reason that prosecutors value the use of plea bargains to flip organised crime suspects; it lets them exert enormous pressure to testify against and incriminate others.
Superior Moderator - BotB - HAB [Drill Instructor]-Writer- Stardestroyer.net's resident Star-God.
"We believe in the systematic understanding of the physical world through observation and experimentation, argument and debate and most of all freedom of will." ~ Stargate: The Ark of Truth
The deadnaming of Chelsea Manning is not something explicitly banned in the board's articles, as such I'm not going to consider it actionable only on the grounds that it is not explicitly banned in writing before now.
While there is an obvious contextual difference between examples of people being referred to by name, the issue of gender identity is explicitly one of protected identity and not just a name preference, and your continuing to use her former name above the objections of others is obviously not motivated by a desire for clarity, or using the name she was known by at the time of being arrested for any purpose other than to distress and belittle transgender persons.
Take it on board that you have now been reminded that that is the correct name (and associated pronouns reflecting real gender) Elfdart; if you continue to do so I will consider it a violation of PR7 and issue a warning on this.
As ever, you may protest to another mod if you feel you are being treated unfairly; do not protest to me on this issue or in this thread.
DR5 (Back up your Claims)
While there have been various issues in this thread, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if you wish to continue to participate in this thread Elfdart, you should straight out say under what circumstances it would be suitable, in your mind for Assange, or another activist wanted by the United States government should be brought for trial.
It appears from reading your posts that you are saying that the risk of maladministration of justice in his instance as a pretext to bring him into the hands of the United States government, should wholly exculpate him from being brought to trial for accusations of rape.
If you wish to continue posting in this thread specify:
1. What circumstances, if any, would be fitting for him to be tried.
The board does not have any problem (though members may hold this view in contempt) with you holding the intellectual position that by virtue of being involved with political leaks he should be immune to prosecution for crimes against the person globally, but it seems like you are being extremely evasive in actually saying that.
There will be no further disciplinary action from posts prior to this one in this thread, but take under advisement that ignoring either of these informal warnings will cause disciplinary action.
The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2019-05-01 11:12pm
Its sad how you just came up with a proposal that (on its surface, at least) is way smarter than anything Assange has actually done.
I'm actually alot more intelligent then I let on.
Unfortunately, Mr. Assange appears to be even less intelligent then he appears.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
Elfdart wrote: ↑2019-04-16 12:12am
Great leap in logic from both of you fucktards. Using your standard, I could argue that the reason you want Assange extradited to Sweden is BECAUSE they have a track record of enabling the torture or foreign nationals and you just have a hard-on for waterboarding and strappado. Guess you don't want to admit that you think torture and other brutal treatment are swell as long as the target is someone you've convinced yourself was responsible for Hillary losing an election to a racist game show host. You two dickheads can take your poorly crafted strawmen, light them on fire, and stick them right up your asses.
It takes a Grade A lying shitstain to turn "opposes handing suspect over to police state torture regime" into "supports whatever crime the suspect is accused of". You're every bit as much of a lowlife as the morons who claimed that anyone who opposed "rendition" and torture of suspected terrorists was somehow "pro-terrorist". Now go play in traffic, you fucking imbecile.
Ralin wrote: ↑2019-04-15 12:02pm
Do you agree that Assange should be extradited to Sweden once the prosecutors there get their act together? Yes or no.
Ralin wrote: ↑2019-04-15 06:40pm
Elfdart opposes Assange facing trial for the rapes he has committed.
Ralin wrote: ↑2019-04-16 02:43amCONTEXT ELFDART IS AWARE OF BUT IGNORING:
Assange’s known rapes were committed in Sweden. Assange facing trial for the rapes he has committed requires him to be in Sweden because that’s where the Swedish government holds trials. Getting Assange to Sweden requires him to be extradited to Sweden (or for him to go there of his own free will for some reason, I guess). Elfdart has stated he does not agree that Assange should be extradited to Sweden.
Where’s the lie, Elfdart? Yes or no, do you believe Assange should be tried for the rapes he has committed (in Sweden)? If yes then do you agreed that Assange must be extradited to Sweden to be tried for the rapes he has committed (in Sweden)?
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver
"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.
I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
Julian Assange hit with 18 federal charges in new indictment
A federal grand jury has indicted WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on 18 felony charges for his alleged involvement in the 2010 leak of classified documents by Chelsea Manning, the Justice Department announced Thursday.
...
Manning, a former Army intelligence analyst, was convicted of leaking classified information and served seven years in prison before her sentence was commuted by President Obama in 2017. In March, she was sent to jail by a federal judge in Virginia for refusing to appear before a grand jury investigating WikiLeaks. She was briefly released when the grand jury's term expired, but ordered back to jail when she refused to comply with a new subpoena. It's unclear whether either either grand jury returned Thursday's indictment.
...
Meanwhile, Swedish prosecutors have said they are reopening a rape case against Assange. They said they will seek his extradition after he has served his sentence in the U.K.
I believe he should not be extradited to the US, because the DOJ, particularly under Trump, shouldn't be trusted to respect law or human rights.
Send him to Sweden. Let the Swedes finish their investigation, try him for rape if they wish, and then let him be either acquitted or convicted on the merits of the evidence. If convicted, let him serve his time, and then emerge a free man.
He's a loathsome little vulture of a man, but the law applies to all, or it applies to none.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver
"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.
I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
The Romulan Republic wrote: ↑2019-05-23 06:50pm
I believe he should not be extradited to the US, because the DOJ, particularly under Trump, shouldn't be trusted to respect law or human rights.
Send him to Sweden. Let the Swedes finish their investigation, try him for rape if they wish, and then let him be either acquitted or convicted on the merits of the evidence. If convicted, let him serve his time, and then emerge a free man.
He's a loathsome little vulture of a man, but the law applies to all, or it applies to none.
I'd rather that the US was just told to wait until after Swedon was done with him, conviction or not.
If he's convicted, Trump will be out of office before Assange is out of jail. Especially if Assange appeals and fights for years.
If he's not convicted, there is still a decent chance of Trump being out of office.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
