Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court
Discussion
TallbutBuxomly said:
I love the naievity of those who are coming here and mocking those of us who don't believe this is all as simple as portrayed by the govt of uk and sweden.
As I have already pointed out there are plenty of reasons for him to be concerned if the facts are true about the condom having none of his dna as thats what they are building both cases against him on.
It is easier to remove him from sweden IMHO (on the face of it) than the uk since in the UK he has many many rights of appeal etc on top of which the govt is quite concerned about bad press after all the neg publicity about the autistic chap etc and no doubt also about what info he and wikileaks have which would be released should they extradite him.
Sweden are much more Americas lap dog than the UK as I understand it.
Yes, well.....As I have already pointed out there are plenty of reasons for him to be concerned if the facts are true about the condom having none of his dna as thats what they are building both cases against him on.
It is easier to remove him from sweden IMHO (on the face of it) than the uk since in the UK he has many many rights of appeal etc on top of which the govt is quite concerned about bad press after all the neg publicity about the autistic chap etc and no doubt also about what info he and wikileaks have which would be released should they extradite him.
Sweden are much more Americas lap dog than the UK as I understand it.
Amongst all the other nonsense that's spoken about this what I don't get is why, if it is all a fit up, it isn't a hell of a lot more professional than this. I could imagine sitting there whilst someone explained their plan - we'll get these two women to sleep with him then they'll blah, blah.
I mean, think about it, if you were going to frame him you'd do it a lot better than this - it'd be easy, one of the women in bed with him, couple of witnesses swear they heard her scream, break in etc. etc. Easy, and far more solid than this nonsense and requiring far fewer people in on it than this would if it is fix.
WhereamI said:
TallbutBuxomly said:
I love the naievity of those who are coming here and mocking those of us who don't believe this is all as simple as portrayed by the govt of uk and sweden.
As I have already pointed out there are plenty of reasons for him to be concerned if the facts are true about the condom having none of his dna as thats what they are building both cases against him on.
It is easier to remove him from sweden IMHO (on the face of it) than the uk since in the UK he has many many rights of appeal etc on top of which the govt is quite concerned about bad press after all the neg publicity about the autistic chap etc and no doubt also about what info he and wikileaks have which would be released should they extradite him.
Sweden are much more Americas lap dog than the UK as I understand it.
Yes, well.....As I have already pointed out there are plenty of reasons for him to be concerned if the facts are true about the condom having none of his dna as thats what they are building both cases against him on.
It is easier to remove him from sweden IMHO (on the face of it) than the uk since in the UK he has many many rights of appeal etc on top of which the govt is quite concerned about bad press after all the neg publicity about the autistic chap etc and no doubt also about what info he and wikileaks have which would be released should they extradite him.
Sweden are much more Americas lap dog than the UK as I understand it.
Amongst all the other nonsense that's spoken about this what I don't get is why, if it is all a fit up, it isn't a hell of a lot more professional than this. I could imagine sitting there whilst someone explained their plan - we'll get these two women to sleep with him then they'll blah, blah.
I mean, think about it, if you were going to frame him you'd do it a lot better than this - it'd be easy, one of the women in bed with him, couple of witnesses swear they heard her scream, break in etc. etc. Easy, and far more solid than this nonsense and requiring far fewer people in on it than this would if it is fix.
Some protection might help......
WhereamI said:
Yes, well.....
Amongst all the other nonsense that's spoken about this what I don't get is why, if it is all a fit up, it isn't a hell of a lot more professional than this. I could imagine sitting there whilst someone explained their plan - we'll get these two women to sleep with him then they'll blah, blah.
I mean, think about it, if you were going to frame him you'd do it a lot better than this - it'd be easy, one of the women in bed with him, couple of witnesses swear they heard her scream, break in etc. etc. Easy, and far more solid than this nonsense and requiring far fewer people in on it than this would if it is fix.
Or look at it the other way, do you risk diplomatic relations or even war for two alleged rapes?Amongst all the other nonsense that's spoken about this what I don't get is why, if it is all a fit up, it isn't a hell of a lot more professional than this. I could imagine sitting there whilst someone explained their plan - we'll get these two women to sleep with him then they'll blah, blah.
I mean, think about it, if you were going to frame him you'd do it a lot better than this - it'd be easy, one of the women in bed with him, couple of witnesses swear they heard her scream, break in etc. etc. Easy, and far more solid than this nonsense and requiring far fewer people in on it than this would if it is fix.
Maybe he was to be picked up at first possibility, then he conveniently was accused of rape, a quick sketch of a plan to nail him, but play it safe without causing too much stir?
Stranger things have happened. But one thing that hasn't happened is to raid an embassy to capture an alleged rapist.
Finlandia said:
Or look at it the other way, do you risk diplomatic relations or even war for two alleged rapes?
Maybe he was to be picked up at first possibility, then he conveniently was accused of rape, a quick sketch of a plan to nail him, but play it safe without causing too much stir?
Stranger things have happened. But one thing that hasn't happened is to raid an embassy to capture an alleged rapist.
What?Maybe he was to be picked up at first possibility, then he conveniently was accused of rape, a quick sketch of a plan to nail him, but play it safe without causing too much stir?
Stranger things have happened. But one thing that hasn't happened is to raid an embassy to capture an alleged rapist.
Who is going to war? Nobody has raided an embassy... I'm speechless....
Finlandia said:
What? Have you not read/seen/heard any news about that? I'm astounded...
About what? Are you referring to the foreign office pointing out that they could go into the Ecquadorian embassy? That was daft but they didn't actually do it. Meanwhile I have no idea what you are on about with the rest of that posting. War? Where does that come from?TallbutBuxomly said:
...if the facts are true ...
Facts are always true. But I can see how easy it is to get confused when one is a fan of Mr Assange.TallbutBuxomly said:
I love the naievity of those who are coming here and mocking those of us who don't believe this is all as simple as portrayed by the govt of uk and sweden.
As I have already pointed out there are plenty of reasons for him to be concerned if the facts are true about the condom having none of his dna as thats what they are building both cases against him on.
It is easier to remove him from sweden IMHO (on the face of it) than the uk since in the UK he has many many rights of appeal etc on top of which the govt is quite concerned about bad press after all the neg publicity about the autistic chap etc and no doubt also about what info he and wikileaks have which would be released should they extradite him.
Sweden are much more Americas lap dog than the UK as I understand it.
All you have pointed out is that you can repeat propaganda to suit a belief. As I have already pointed out there are plenty of reasons for him to be concerned if the facts are true about the condom having none of his dna as thats what they are building both cases against him on.
It is easier to remove him from sweden IMHO (on the face of it) than the uk since in the UK he has many many rights of appeal etc on top of which the govt is quite concerned about bad press after all the neg publicity about the autistic chap etc and no doubt also about what info he and wikileaks have which would be released should they extradite him.
Sweden are much more Americas lap dog than the UK as I understand it.
Where do all your so called "facts" come from? And how much of your fact base is factual rather than just snippets pieced together by an over-active imagination (encouraged by Assange's desire not to see some time in an Ikea equipped chokey eating Frikadellen 3 times a day for the next 10yrs)?
As for your understanding...it's wrong. Quite a few people have gone to lengths to explain things along the lines of what you understand, but you choose not to believe them. Fair enough, but don't then bemoan those who offer you a bit of Bacofoil.
Assange does indeed have plenty to be concerned about. 2 of them are women accusing him of rape. But doing what he did with wikileaks was a very risky strategy where one's longevity is concerned...and the US of A would be the least of my worries. For what gain? (Other than to try and use it as a get out of jail free card).
WhereamI said:
Finlandia said:
What? Have you not read/seen/heard any news about that? I'm astounded...
About what? Are you referring to the foreign office pointing out that they could go into the Ecquadorian embassy? That was daft but they didn't actually do it. Meanwhile I have no idea what you are on about with the rest of that posting. War? Where does that come from?When have a foreign office ever threatened to go into an embassy to get an alleged rapist?
Wouldn't think many have done it, and certainly not for an alleged rapist. But if they would do into an embassy, war would be a very real possibility.
Finlandia said:
So you have read/seen/heard about it after all then?
When have a foreign office ever threatened to go into an embassy to get an alleged rapist?
Wouldn't think many have done it, and certainly not for an alleged rapist. But if they would do into an embassy, war would be a very real possibility.
Out of interest, when was an alleged rapist last allowed sanctuary in an embassy?When have a foreign office ever threatened to go into an embassy to get an alleged rapist?
Wouldn't think many have done it, and certainly not for an alleged rapist. But if they would do into an embassy, war would be a very real possibility.
War? With Ecuador? You have definitely put a double insulated layer of the foil on tonight haven't you
Finlandia said:
So you have read/seen/heard about it after all then?
When have a foreign office ever threatened to go into an embassy to get an alleged rapist?
Wouldn't think many have done it, and certainly not for an alleged rapist. But if they would do into an embassy, war would be a very real possibility.
The UK at war with Ecuador? Yes, OK, that could be interesting, have you been there? I have... Not sure their military has quite the reach to get here.When have a foreign office ever threatened to go into an embassy to get an alleged rapist?
Wouldn't think many have done it, and certainly not for an alleged rapist. But if they would do into an embassy, war would be a very real possibility.
Answer me this. If the whole thing is a plot to get Assange to the USA why didn't they just grant his application for Swedish residency and then arrest him at their leisure and extradite him?
He wanted to stay in Sweden prior to the rape allegations, without them he would still be there (assuming he hadn't been given to the Americans). They didn't need to rape allegations to get him to Sweden, he was already there.
Murph7355 said:
Out of interest, when was an alleged rapist last allowed sanctuary in an embassy?
War? With Ecuador? You have definitely put a double insulated layer of the foil on tonight haven't you
Imtiaz Hussain did the opposite, does that count? War? With Ecuador? You have definitely put a double insulated layer of the foil on tonight haven't you
Didn't the entire South America stand behind Ecuador in the matter, so it could have been a new battle with the Argies & co.
Finlandia said:
So you have read/seen/heard about it after all then?
When have a foreign office ever threatened to go into an embassy to get an alleged rapist?
Wouldn't think many have done it, and certainly not for an alleged rapist. But if they would do into an embassy, war would be a very real possibility.
FANTASTIC !!!!When have a foreign office ever threatened to go into an embassy to get an alleged rapist?
Wouldn't think many have done it, and certainly not for an alleged rapist. But if they would do into an embassy, war would be a very real possibility.
Finlandia said:
Imtiaz Hussain did the opposite, does that count?
Didn't the entire South America stand behind Ecuador in the matter, so it could have been a new battle with the Argies & co.
Not really, at the meeting of the Organisation of American States they all talked about it and the main concensus was that it had nothing to do ith them, the final announcement was so bland that even the USA voted in favour of it.Didn't the entire South America stand behind Ecuador in the matter, so it could have been a new battle with the Argies & co.
Sure, the Argentinians can be counted on to be anti-uk but the only thing that was notable was how little support Ecuador had.
WhereamI said:
The UK at war with Ecuador? Yes, OK, that could be interesting, have you been there? I have... Not sure their military has quite the reach to get here.
Answer me this. If the whole thing is a plot to get Assange to the USA why didn't they just grant his application for Swedish residency and then arrest him at their leisure and extradite him?
He wanted to stay in Sweden prior to the rape allegations, without them he would still be there (assuming he hadn't been given to the Americans). They didn't need to rape allegations to get him to Sweden, he was already there.
I have tried to explain all that earlier already, go read back on my posts.Answer me this. If the whole thing is a plot to get Assange to the USA why didn't they just grant his application for Swedish residency and then arrest him at their leisure and extradite him?
He wanted to stay in Sweden prior to the rape allegations, without them he would still be there (assuming he hadn't been given to the Americans). They didn't need to rape allegations to get him to Sweden, he was already there.
No I haven't been to Ecuador, I know nothing about Ecuador, but I'm sure a few other countries around there wouldn't mind a battle against the UK if Ecuador asked them to join in.
Have you lived in Sweden and experienced the way of politics and laws here? I have, and still do. There are plenty of political issues with the accusations and the driving forces behind the case, the known facts and real life experiences do not add up.
Finlandia said:
I have tried to explain all that earlier already, go read back on my posts.
No I haven't been to Ecuador, I know nothing about Ecuador, but I'm sure a few other countries around there wouldn't mind a battle against the UK if Ecuador asked them to join in.
Where do you think they'll try to establish a beachhead, Finlandia? I'm no expert. But, I reckon the Ecuadorians and their Allies will probably take a leaf out of the Nazi's - you know the Nazis well, don't you, Finalandia - Operation Sea Lion and could storm ashore along the South Coast. Somewhere between Ramsgate and the Isle Of Wight.No I haven't been to Ecuador, I know nothing about Ecuador, but I'm sure a few other countries around there wouldn't mind a battle against the UK if Ecuador asked them to join in.
Here's where the Nazis planned to land. As you know.
That's my best guess.
You?
Murph7355 said:
TallbutBuxomly said:
...if the facts are true ...
Facts are always true. But I can see how easy it is to get confused when one is a fan of Mr Assange.TallbutBuxomly said:
I love the naievity of those who are coming here and mocking those of us who don't believe this is all as simple as portrayed by the govt of uk and sweden.
As I have already pointed out there are plenty of reasons for him to be concerned if the facts are true about the condom having none of his dna as thats what they are building both cases against him on.
It is easier to remove him from sweden IMHO (on the face of it) than the uk since in the UK he has many many rights of appeal etc on top of which the govt is quite concerned about bad press after all the neg publicity about the autistic chap etc and no doubt also about what info he and wikileaks have which would be released should they extradite him.
Sweden are much more Americas lap dog than the UK as I understand it.
All you have pointed out is that you can repeat propaganda to suit a belief. As I have already pointed out there are plenty of reasons for him to be concerned if the facts are true about the condom having none of his dna as thats what they are building both cases against him on.
It is easier to remove him from sweden IMHO (on the face of it) than the uk since in the UK he has many many rights of appeal etc on top of which the govt is quite concerned about bad press after all the neg publicity about the autistic chap etc and no doubt also about what info he and wikileaks have which would be released should they extradite him.
Sweden are much more Americas lap dog than the UK as I understand it.
Where do all your so called "facts" come from? And how much of your fact base is factual rather than just snippets pieced together by an over-active imagination (encouraged by Assange's desire not to see some time in an Ikea equipped chokey eating Frikadellen 3 times a day for the next 10yrs)?
As for your understanding...it's wrong. Quite a few people have gone to lengths to explain things along the lines of what you understand, but you choose not to believe them. Fair enough, but don't then bemoan those who offer you a bit of Bacofoil.
Assange does indeed have plenty to be concerned about. 2 of them are women accusing him of rape. But doing what he did with wikileaks was a very risky strategy where one's longevity is concerned...and the US of A would be the least of my worries. For what gain? (Other than to try and use it as a get out of jail free card).
Whether thats true or not I dont know as I dont believe the swedish have said publicly if its true. I have also never said any of what I have written on here is fact to the contrary I tend to point out that it is merely heard and not to be relied upon as fact.
But its ok carry on being condescending and insulting because you believe you know more or better.
Finlandia said:
I have tried to explain all that earlier already, go read back on my posts.
No I haven't been to Ecuador, I know nothing about Ecuador, but I'm sure a few other countries around there wouldn't mind a battle against the UK if Ecuador asked them to join in.
Quite frankly the whole of South America could declare war on the UK and they would still not be able to engage in battle with us - it's an awfully long way to deliver force against a member of NATO. But it's not going to happen, the concept of war over this is ludicrous.No I haven't been to Ecuador, I know nothing about Ecuador, but I'm sure a few other countries around there wouldn't mind a battle against the UK if Ecuador asked them to join in.
Finlandia said:
Have you lived in Sweden and experienced the way of politics and laws here? I have, and still do. There are plenty of political issues with the accusations and the driving forces behind the case, the known facts and real life experiences do not add up.
I haven't lived in Sweden but don't need to in order to understand one thing. Assange was in Sweden voluntarily. He wanted to be there for whatever reason and he applied for residency there. Given that, why would they dream up a really bad plot to get him arrested for rape? They had him in what you think was the right environment to extract him whenever they wanted him, a quiet word to get them to give him residency and then wait a while for the fuss to die down, a knock on the door in the middle of the night, bundle him onto a plane and off to where ever they wanted. If you believe that they'd fake the rape allegation then surely you'd believe they'd do that - it makes a hell of a lot more sense yet it didn't happen, why not?
Or if they were going to dream up a rape so he could end up in a Swedish prison why not do it properly? As I said above, put him in a room with an attractive women, get a couple of 'witnesses' and they could have him banged up for rape with no problem at all so long as their stories added up. Why come up with such a convoluted story?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff