Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court
Discussion
Elroy Blue said:
Does this mean we have to pay compensation to the thousands of people wanted on warrant who don't hand themselves in.
Ridiculous decision made by 'intellectuals' who seem to have completely ignored his victims. A loathsome man who will be loving the 'look at me' attention
There are no victims, as well you know. Which is what the initial prosecutor found. Before it got political.Ridiculous decision made by 'intellectuals' who seem to have completely ignored his victims. A loathsome man who will be loving the 'look at me' attention
Breadvan's constant calls of 'tinfoil' are getting annoying. Was "extraordinary rendition" imaginary? Grabbing suspects off the streets of Italy, too? See N977GA's flight plans and its patient wait at Copenhagen when the US sppoks thought they were getting Snowden, for example.
Breadvan72 said:
It's easy to make sweeping assertions, but as soon as those who make such assertions are asked to back them up with evidence, things tend to go quiet. Or you get a wave of the hand and "oh, everyone knows that X is true". Again, mere assertion. No political system or legal system is flawless, and there are indeed often subtle and sometimes less subtle influences at play in various elements of such systems, but a suggestion that the Assange case was fixed by political influence calls for some specifics to back it up.
Ok let's widen the discussion a little .If Greville Janner in his younger days had got up to the escapades that Assange
is accused of would the Swedish police have been interested, and following on from that
Would the British courts been in the least bit likely to extradite him if they were ?
The fact that Assange was instrumental in in exposing the fact that the USA government
can watch me in bed bed via my laptop , turn on my phone remotely and sundry other
invasions of my privacy give Goverments plenty of reasons to lean on the judicial process .
Can I prove it ? ...no ,
But it certainly smells a little .....
Breadvan72 said:
Sadly, I don't take orders from you! We are not presently talking about Assange's fatuous claims of a conspiracy to whisk him off to the US. You joined in the discussion of whether the UK judicial process in the Assange case has been compromised by political pressure, and appear to endorse the suggestion that it has been. If that is your contention, you are invited to support the contention by some credible evidence. If you don't join in that contention, that's fine, but all your airy hand waving isn't debate.
You've posted that courts and the executive are independent, implying that there is, therefore, no political pressure. That is absurd. That was the only point I made. You know it is absurd, which is why in a follow-up post you concede the point. Your theatrics are boring.Halb said:
There's nothing to appeal; it's not a legally binding decision.Derek Smith said:
That decision was a bit of a surprise to me.
So unlawful and arbitrary detention. I agree with the decision and see the government's argument, as reported, as derisory. He was detained in the embassy despite his freedom to leave. He would be arrested by the police so he was detained.
From what I understand, the decision came as something of a shock to Jules as well.
Aside from the fact you don't don't think he has any case to answer with regard to his (as George Galloway termed it) failure of "sexual etiquette"; Jules? Bloody Jules? Seriously? So unlawful and arbitrary detention. I agree with the decision and see the government's argument, as reported, as derisory. He was detained in the embassy despite his freedom to leave. He would be arrested by the police so he was detained.
From what I understand, the decision came as something of a shock to Jules as well.
I just can't fathom how his reasoning works, I really can't. He released thousands of classified documents from the USA, and then expected nothing to happen to him? Regardless of whether he was morally justified in doing so, to then believe you'll get away with that scott-free is just madness. By all means do it if you believe it's right, but you HAVE to accept the consequences.
I hope he strolls out the door, the Met nick him and pop him on a plane to Sweden who spend an entire day questioning him on the rape, before handing him over to the Yanks.
I mean, I don't disagree with his reasons for Wikileaks and agree it had to be done, but at the same time it irks me when people think they're above the law. Do what's right because you believe it's right, but also accept the consequences.
I hope he strolls out the door, the Met nick him and pop him on a plane to Sweden who spend an entire day questioning him on the rape, before handing him over to the Yanks.
I mean, I don't disagree with his reasons for Wikileaks and agree it had to be done, but at the same time it irks me when people think they're above the law. Do what's right because you believe it's right, but also accept the consequences.
EskimoArapaho said:
There are no victims, as well you know. Which is what the initial prosecutor found. Before it got political.
Breadvan's constant calls of 'tinfoil' are getting annoying. Was "extraordinary rendition" imaginary? Grabbing suspects off the streets of Italy, too? See N977GA's flight plans and its patient wait at Copenhagen when the US sppoks thought they were getting Snowden, for example.
We know that Assange's mate Snowdon was so concerned with truth and justice he fled to....Russia. Breadvan's constant calls of 'tinfoil' are getting annoying. Was "extraordinary rendition" imaginary? Grabbing suspects off the streets of Italy, too? See N977GA's flight plans and its patient wait at Copenhagen when the US sppoks thought they were getting Snowden, for example.
I'm sure the ladies making the complaint against Assange will be pleased to know they are not victims. He is a loathsome, manipulative, self obsessed, selfish t
t. I hope he turns up in Guantanamo. Even that's too good for him. Europa1 said:
Halb said:
There's nothing to appeal; it's not a legally binding decision.t what the UN thinks or passes in it's resolutions. They have zero impact on anything.They are just a massively bureaucratic, red-taped and completely corrupt organisation. It's basically a massive money pit and easy way to make a lot of money working there. I know several friends who work at the organisation and they openly admit they've achieved sweet f
k-all in the many years they've been there. The drive is always there by the new in-takes but that gets slowly beaten away by red-tape and bureaucracy. Over time you realise it's all about influence and who you know to get things done and when you drill down to it, those people are in it for the money. No tax. Diplomatic benefits. Lots of perks and huge, over-inflated salaries.Ekona said:
I just can't fathom how his reasoning works, I really can't. He released thousands of classified documents from the USA, and then expected nothing to happen to him? Regardless of whether he was morally justified in doing so, to then believe you'll get away with that scott-free is just madness. By all means do it if you believe it's right, but you HAVE to accept the consequences.
I hope he strolls out the door, the Met nick him and pop him on a plane to Sweden who spend an entire day questioning him on the rape, before handing him over to the Yanks.
I mean, I don't disagree with his reasons for Wikileaks and agree it had to be done, but at the same time it irks me when people think they're above the law. Do what's right because you believe it's right, but also accept the consequences.
The cognitive dissonance here is off the charts. I hope he strolls out the door, the Met nick him and pop him on a plane to Sweden who spend an entire day questioning him on the rape, before handing him over to the Yanks.
I mean, I don't disagree with his reasons for Wikileaks and agree it had to be done, but at the same time it irks me when people think they're above the law. Do what's right because you believe it's right, but also accept the consequences.
Elroy Blue said:
EskimoArapaho said:
There are no victims, as well you know. Which is what the initial prosecutor found. Before it got political.
Breadvan's constant calls of 'tinfoil' are getting annoying. Was "extraordinary rendition" imaginary? Grabbing suspects off the streets of Italy, too? See N977GA's flight plans and its patient wait at Copenhagen when the US sppoks thought they were getting Snowden, for example.
We know that Assange's mate Snowdon was so concerned with truth and justice he fled to....Russia. Breadvan's constant calls of 'tinfoil' are getting annoying. Was "extraordinary rendition" imaginary? Grabbing suspects off the streets of Italy, too? See N977GA's flight plans and its patient wait at Copenhagen when the US sppoks thought they were getting Snowden, for example.
I'm sure the ladies making the complaint against Assange will be pleased to know they are not victims. He is a loathsome, manipulative, self obsessed, selfish t
t. I hope he turns up in Guantanamo. Even that's too good for him.Re the victims: the deleted (but not gone) tweets show what certainly didn't happen in these 'sex crimes'. You could find this out for youself, but, as the bold bit shows, your prejudice means you can't see straight. (Rather like that Durham University guy who was acquitted of rape last month, this question of whether he is loathsome is neither here nor there. Unless you don't care about justice.)
EskimoArapaho said:
Re the victims: the deleted (but not gone) tweets show what certainly didn't happen in these 'sex crimes'. You could find this out for youself, but, as the bold bit shows, your prejudice means you can't see straight. (Rather like that Durham University guy who was acquitted of rape last month, this question of whether he is loathsome is neither here nor there. Unless you don't care about justice.)
Explain why you think the best place for justice to be served isn't in a court of law in the relevant jurisdiction, but apparently on the internet?scherzkeks said:
Breadvan72 said:
So, just a wave of the hand, but, alas, your Jedi mind tricks don't work here. You are unable or, for some reason, unwilling to back up your assertions. This deprives your assertions of any weight.
I didn't make an assertion. His reasoning has been discussed to death. If Assange were an idiot, he'd walk out the front door of the embassy and let himself be arrested, just as you'd have him do. But he won't.
Now run along. Get your post count up to 24,000.
scherzkeks said:
What comedy. There is corruption everywhere.
You made the assertion in response to BV's rejection of the idea that English courts are subject to political influence. You meant to suggest that ther courts are corrupt. Just part of your worldview that the West and its institutions are bad.EskimoArapaho said:
First, Snowden fled to the only place where his safety was assured. You've conveniently forgetten what the USA's European allies did when American spooks thought Snowden was on Morales' plane?
Re the victims: the deleted (but not gone) tweets show what certainly didn't happen in these 'sex crimes'. You could find this out for youself, but, as the bold bit shows, your prejudice means you can't see straight. (Rather like that Durham University guy who was acquitted of rape last month, this question of whether he is loathsome is neither here nor there. Unless you don't care about justice.)
I don't do prejudice (you seem good at it). I deal in facts. Snowdon is a traitorous individual who wanted to show 'truth and justice'. His principles however, didn't stretch very far when he choose to live in a violently oppressive country.Re the victims: the deleted (but not gone) tweets show what certainly didn't happen in these 'sex crimes'. You could find this out for youself, but, as the bold bit shows, your prejudice means you can't see straight. (Rather like that Durham University guy who was acquitted of rape last month, this question of whether he is loathsome is neither here nor there. Unless you don't care about justice.)
Assange went through every criminal court in the land. Every court rejected his argument. He is wanted on a European arrest warrant, just like thousands of others. He's too much of a coward to face his accusers. He just happens to be a despicable individual as well.
Edited by Elroy Blue on Friday 5th February 12:41
it has often occured to me that in fact the US dont actually want assange. My logic for this is simple they know where he lives an is being protected by Equador. I am sur eif the US really wanted him they could get inside that building and get him out etc. We could sever ties with equador I mean what do they offer us.
yet we have done none of this because he is of no value now and in fact its just a case of getting hold of a nasty little rapist who will one day have to come out be it on his feet or in a box
yet we have done none of this because he is of no value now and in fact its just a case of getting hold of a nasty little rapist who will one day have to come out be it on his feet or in a box
EskimoArapaho said:
First, Snowden fled to the only place where his safety was assured. You've conveniently forgetten what the USA's European allies did when American spooks thought Snowden was on Morales' plane?
Typical US bully boy tactics with complicit eu support.Can you imagine if this had happened to airforce one?
Zod said:
ou made the assertion in response to BV's rejection of the idea that English courts are subject to political influence. You meant to suggest that ther courts are corrupt. Just part of your worldview that the West and its institutions are bad.
His rejection is based on nothing other than the stated claim that the courts and executive are independent. This does not rule out political pressure or corruption in the institutions being discussed. Your final sentence is off the mark, and so broad as to be meaningless.
EskimoArapaho said:
First, Snowden fled to the only place where his safety was assured. You've conveniently forgetten what the USA's European allies did when American spooks thought Snowden was on Morales' plane?
)
He actually didn't flee to Russia. He was stuck in an airport transit zone when his passport was revoked. He applied for asylum in many countries. )
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff