Because we all know this is about getting Assange to the USA What is the saying the bigger the lie the easier it is too get people to accept.I for one am insulted that we are expected to take this outrages lie seriously when we all know this is 101 gov. tactic to get someone.What about the raping by UN troops of little african boys.Stop tell to tell me black is white.
4 comments
I really would suspect that indeed it was a tactic to get Assange. Rape and sexual crime is a classic tactic to discredit and get rid of your opponent through "legal" means. Dictatorships globally in the 20th/21st century have been using it, and I don't see why in the case of Assange they wouldn't be doing the same thing.
1) Assange seemed perfectly happy to travel to Sweden until the new Swedish prosecutor reopened the case. He then fled to Britain. Once there he had to wear a tag, but stayed at the country home of a wealthy supporter whilst on bail. When his arguments against extradition failed in the High Court and the Supreme Court, he sought asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
2) When he fled to the UK, the leaks were already being published in newspapers across the world.
3) Manning, who had provided Wikileaks with much of its material, was already in US custody by then.
4) Had the US wanted to extradite Assange, it would have made eminent sense to have done so then, as it would be far easier to extradite him from the UK than from Sweden.
5) The US has since had over five years in which to request either the UK or Sweden for an extradition. It has failed to do so.
6) Not only are the chances of extradition from Sweden somewhat more difficult than they are from the UK, but Sweden would need the UK's permission to go ahead with any extradition.
7) Getting rid of your opponents through ordinary crimes is a tactic of dictatorships, and we are told by Assange's supporters that he would be moved to a country in thrall to the US with poor form. So are we talking about Honduras? Guatemala, maybe? No, we're talking about Sweden, a neutral country with a better human rights record than the US.
8) Dictatorships can get away with doing something like this because the dictators control the courts. Sweden, by contrast, has one of the world's most transparent court systems. If the US had decided to "get" Assange through an ordinary crime, besides Denmark and Norway, it couldn't have chosen a more difficult country in which to do it. Considering that Assange was a regular visitor to Australia, the UK and other countries, the choice of Sweden for such a conspiracy seems bizarre.
9) Assange is one of the world's most high-profile fugitives. What happens to him can hardly be done in secret.
10) While there any request from the US as yet does not exist, there is the real matter of the UK wishing to arrest him for jumping bail. Providing the UK issues a European Arrest Warrant and ask for extradition once Assange is in Sweden, this would take priority over any request from the US.
11) What has the rape by UN troops got to do with the case of Assange? If anything, it is that the UN can be irresponsible in more than one capacity.
12) The OP, and Assange's supporters in general, had nothing to say about Assange's alleged victims which is not wishful thinking, derogatory, or misogynistic.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.