Wikileaks Page 69

  • Page

    of 71 First / Last

  • Fab4 19 Aug 2012 17:07:31 5,990 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Go to Google news and search 'egotistical cunt'
  • spamdangled 19 Aug 2012 17:10:41 27,276 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Hmmm. Watching the news now. It's been suggested by a lawyer that one way to get Assange out of the Country and into Ecquador is to grant him Ecquadorian citizenship and making him a diplomat, thus granting him diplomatic immunity and allowing him to travel freely to the airport.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Fab4 19 Aug 2012 17:11:12 5,990 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I think he's confused though. I think he thinks Pussy Riot is a way of waking young Swedish women from their sleep.
  • Deleted user 19 August 2012 17:16:15
    What a cunt.

    A quick scan of the Page shows people still confused about why Sweden won't give him assurance that he won't be extradited... Why the fuck should they have to do that? The US have not requested him. If hypothetically they did in the future it would depend on the circumstances, so hypothetical guarantees would be useless. And you don't start pandering to egotistical cunts just because they have a stupid enough following to allow him to turn himself into a political prisoner. The only reason this case stands out and looks unprecedented is because of the way he is acting in obstructing justice and being backed in the process. The fact that a couple of Ecuadorian politicians see him as easy publicity doesn't make his case any stronger. Especially not when all this just leads to embarrassing the government that is rightly pursuing you... Shock horror leading to them upping their determination.

    He has acted like a cunt from the beginning and decided to use the media to fight his battles, he hired a Fucking media relations lawyer at first when he was being pursued for sex crimes for fucks sake. Such a shame so many idiots have fallen for it.
  • disusedgenius 19 Aug 2012 17:25:58 5,272 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    It's not that it's confusing, it's just that this is never going to be just about the sex crime until the whole US thing is taken out of the equation.
  • Deleted user 19 August 2012 17:30:44
    How exactly does this happen without a country pandering to the egotistical whims of a suspected sex offender? Why should it happen just to please said suspected sex offender and his Legion of idiot fans?

    People seem to point at some suspected difference of treatment as evidence of a conspiracy, and at the same time insist he should be treated differently because of some periphery issues that have fuck all to do with anything at hand.
  • disusedgenius 19 Aug 2012 17:36:57 5,272 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    How exactly does this happen without a country pandering to the egotistical whims of a suspected sex offender?
    It doesn't. Such is the benefit of making yourself a political entity.
  • Khanivor 19 Aug 2012 17:37:49 40,520 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    If you didn't think he was insufferable before then listening to this tone and timbre in that speech must must lead you to conclude he's a fucking bellend.
  • Deleted user 19 August 2012 17:42:23
    disusedgenius wrote:
    mowgli wrote:
    How exactly does this happen without a country pandering to the egotistical whims of a suspected sex offender?
    It doesn't. Such is the benefit of making yourself a political entity.
    So, again, why should it?
  • disusedgenius 19 Aug 2012 17:46:56 5,272 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    So, again, why should it?
    Because until it does this won't be just be about a sex crime.

    /Ariston
  • Fab4 19 Aug 2012 17:48:50 5,990 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    EyeLand wrote:
    Doesn't seem unreasonable to ask for insurance that you won't effectively get sold off to another country for their political gain. Do you think it would be unreasonable to ask it if there was a chance he'd be shipped to a totally dangerous, corrupt county - Somalia or something? It's ok cause it's the US?
    He's quite happy to take the protection of a far more dubious (in terms of human rights) country than Sweden. I wonder if he's reading their diplomatic material while he's shacked up under their roof.
  • spamdangled 19 Aug 2012 17:52:52 27,276 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Fab4 wrote:
    EyeLand wrote:
    Doesn't seem unreasonable to ask for insurance that you won't effectively get sold off to another country for their political gain. Do you think it would be unreasonable to ask it if there was a chance he'd be shipped to a totally dangerous, corrupt county - Somalia or something? It's ok cause it's the US?
    He's quite happy to take the protection of a far more dubious (in terms of human rights) country than Sweden. I wonder if he's reading their diplomatic material while he's shacked up under their roof.
    Haven't we already covered that though, in that Sweden has a history of shipping people off to other countries where they faced torture?

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Khanivor 19 Aug 2012 17:52:56 40,520 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    EyeLand wrote:
    Doesn't seem unreasonable to ask for insurance that you won't effectively get sold off to another country for their political gain. Do you think it would be unreasonable to ask it if there was a chance he'd be shipped to a totally dangerous, corrupt county - Somalia or something? It's ok cause it's the US?
    Why one Earth would the US wait to try and extradite him from Sweden rather than the UK? The UK seems to have no problem shipping folk over to the US if the Americans feel like having them. That he's been in the UK for so long without the US even filing charges against him let alone asking for his extradition should be enough to set even the most credulous bullshit meter off.

    I reckon the US is seeing how he behaves and is content with letting him destroy himself on the public stage. Saves them the bother and expense, not to mention hassle of dealing with such a self-important drama queen.
  • Deleted user 19 August 2012 17:53:37
    Yes. Everyone could protect themselves from their past coming back to haunt them by obstructing the system and insisting on assurances against hypothetical situations. That again doesn't answer the question why. Why should they. He has done nothing at all to cooperate, why should they start going out of their way. What if they did, he gets tried, it all goes away and then he starts insisting on other demands.
  • disusedgenius 19 Aug 2012 17:54:55 5,272 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    That again doesn't answer the question why. Why should they. He has done nothing at all to cooperate, why should they start going out of their way.
    Because it's probably best to get the whole sex crime thing cleared up.
  • Deleted user 19 August 2012 17:56:02
    disusedgenius wrote:
    mowgli wrote:
    So, again, why should it?
    Because until it does this won't be just be about a sex crime.

    /Ariston
    That is nonsense. Utter nonsense. Only idiots and closet conspiracy nuts consider it to be more than the stated case. Any loon on the run could do this easily if they had the resources he has.
  • disusedgenius 19 Aug 2012 17:59:52 5,272 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    That is nonsense. Utter nonsense.
    No it isn't - he's completely engineered it to be the case (as demonstrated by his speech today which was almost completely to do with the US and Wikileaks). I guess that media relations lawyer wasn't a complete waste of money...
  • Deleted user 19 August 2012 18:01:42
    Ok I'm not entirely sure where we are disagreeing now. I k ow he entirely engineered it, my point is that shouldn't entitle him to government pandering.
  • disusedgenius 19 Aug 2012 18:08:14 5,272 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    Ok I'm not entirely sure where we are disagreeing now. I k ow he entirely engineered it, my point is that shouldn't entitle him to government pandering.
    My point is that if they don't pander, that's only helping his engineering.
  • spamdangled 19 Aug 2012 18:08:39 27,276 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Khanivor wrote:
    EyeLand wrote:
    Doesn't seem unreasonable to ask for insurance that you won't effectively get sold off to another country for their political gain. Do you think it would be unreasonable to ask it if there was a chance he'd be shipped to a totally dangerous, corrupt county - Somalia or something? It's ok cause it's the US?
    Why one Earth would the US wait to try and extradite him from Sweden rather than the UK? The UK seems to have no problem shipping folk over to the US if the Americans feel like having them. That he's been in the UK for so long without the US even filing charges against him let alone asking for his extradition should be enough to set even the most credulous bullshit meter off.

    I reckon the US is seeing how he behaves and is content with letting him destroy himself on the public stage. Saves them the bother and expense, not to mention hassle of dealing with such a self-important drama queen.
    Because the UK-US extradition treaty is already considered to be grossly unfair in favour of the US, and the extradition process can take years and years (just look at Gary McKinnon, that's all been going on nearly a decade now). The whole thing has such a bad reputation that further miring it with the whole Assange thing would be a disaster for both countries when it comes to public opinion.

    On the other hand, Sweden have previously demonstrated that they don't particularly give a shit where they extradite people to or how dangerous it might be for the person being extradited.

    Edited by darkmorgado at 18:09:48 19-08-2012

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Khanivor 19 Aug 2012 18:16:38 40,520 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    So if we can judge an entire country on one example of a dodgy extradition then how do we get to judge Assange on two counts of dodgy sex?

    Also, if the treaty is grossly unfair then perhaps using someone who has dodged extradition for 10 years taint the best example to pull out. And further, since when did Assange start to make his legal decisions based on whether or not it would hurt the public image of the US and UK?

    Nonsense argument is total fucking nonsense.
  • angerisagift 19 Aug 2012 18:23:18 1,947 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    What a cunt.

    A quick scan of the Page shows people still confused about why Sweden won't give him assurance that he won't be extradited... Why the fuck should they have to do that? The US have not requested him. If hypothetically they did in the future it would depend on the circumstances, so hypothetical guarantees would be useless. And you don't start pandering to egotistical cunts just because they have a stupid enough following to allow him to turn himself into a political prisoner. The only reason this case stands out and looks unprecedented is because of the way he is acting in obstructing justice and being backed in the process. The fact that a couple of Ecuadorian politicians see him as easy publicity doesn't make his case any stronger. Especially not when all this just leads to embarrassing the government that is rightly pursuing you... Shock horror leading to them upping their determination.

    He has acted like a cunt from the beginning and decided to use the media to fight his battles, he hired a Fucking media relations lawyer at first when he was being pursued for sex crimes for fucks sake. Such a shame so many idiots have fallen for it.
    I've not often agreed with Mowgli's views in the past on these forums but this post was as if he had REACHED INTO MY BRAIN like some sort of Vulcan mind meld and transferred my thoughts into the written word.

    +1

    XBL GT: C0keMachineGl0w
    PSN ID: StarrySummerSky

  • Lamb 19 Aug 2012 18:25:33 474 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    The sex crime with the two women is a farce at least the way it came out and was represented.

    Bradly Manning betrayed the trust of his country by releasing confidential documents.

    What the hell was in those documents that was so important and so damaging?

    Definitely the shooting of the Al Jazeera reporters was damaging but was there anything else? If a smoking gun was going to be made of the case against Assange the intel will have to be revealed in any civil court.

    What better way to bury such a reveal than trying and sending him to prison for an unrelated charge.

    Assange wants his fame & fortune but is he entitled to it?

    Certainly he swore no oath to the US Government and though its questionable he owes his fealty to a higher authority. Though at this time we don't know what that authority may be.

    So the real question is has Assange kept back any leverage that would be even more damaging if he were to irresponsibly release it.

    I am suprised they don't compartamentalize more sensitive data. Certainly that such and such ruler is a flatulent son of a bitch and hates his people should be public knowledge anyway. Like Green Goblin said to Spiderman "We are alike you and I" :p :D
  • Deleted user 19 August 2012 18:36:22
    Lol, why would such mysterious documents have to be revealed in court?
  • spamdangled 19 Aug 2012 18:38:51 27,276 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Lamb wrote:
    If a smoking gun was going to be made of the case against Assange the intel will have to be revealed in any civil court.
    Not quite. Military trials in the US are held behind closed doors.

    3DS: 4055-2781-2855 Xbox: spamdangled PSN: dark_morgan Wii U: Spamdangle Steam: spamdangled

  • Lamb 19 Aug 2012 18:39:17 474 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @mowgli

    Its a civil case thats part of the procedure. Granted the judge can do as he pleases within reason because of the additional spotlight.

    @darkmorgado

    Well its debatable he swore no fealty, and wasn't on any premises nor did he hack into any servers. So he is like a reporter with a smoking gun. A USB stick belonging allegedly to Manning.

    He could be court martialed but that would open up a can of worms on the 1st Amendment. The law needs to be applied consistently whatever decision is made.

    It would be interesting to follow nonetheless because it will be the first time to my knowledge the fallout of cold war spy tactics are applied in an internet case.

    Maybe someone could recommend a good book though all outcomes in fiction are usually solved by intrigue.

    Edited by Lamb at 18:51:37 19-08-2012

    Edited by Lamb at 19:49:12 19-08-2012
  • Lamb 19 Aug 2012 18:47:05 474 posts
    Seen 6 days ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Post deleted
  • Deleted user 19 August 2012 18:49:20
    Lamb wrote:
    @mowgli

    Its a civil case thats part of the procedure. Granted the judge can do as he pleases within reason because of the additional spotlight.
    Em, no. Do you really think a us judge is going to disclose top secret documents? It is not part of the procedure. How exactly could it be argued that revealing these docs is essential to the defence. And civil case?
  • Page

    of 71 First / Last

Log in or register to reply