Bells
Staff member
BS,
Everyone of your links was to TV commentators and journalists.
You haven't provided a single link to where a congressman called for his assassination.
Learn to read then.
I have. Several times. Referring to him as a terrorist means he'll be given a welcome with open arms in the US? No. How do you treat what you call terrorists again? Ah yes, Gitmo without charge? Or kill on sight? Interrogation off shore? And then, of course, execution.. I have provided countless of links in this thread.countzero said:Then post something.
I've followed the stories fairly closely and seen nothing about assassinations. Unless, of course, you are making the rhetorical leap that drone attacks are assassinations. They are not.
The people calling for Assange's assassination are all out of government and are journalists and such.
Rape cases, by their very nature, need to be private. If the Swedish prosecution believed he had raped those women, they would hardly be releasing what would normally be very personal and explicit information about their rapes before the individual is even charged. How little do they respect the alleged rape victims in their actions?I am not disputing any of this. I am saying that one cannot attack the notion of confendtiality and privilege and then complain a lack of them when a lack of both becomes personally uncomfortable.
His complaint, and it is a valid one, is that they have not even charged him yet for rape or even sexual assault. So why did they suddenly decide to leak this information about the case? It is not the lack of confidentiality and privilege that he is unhappy about. It is the motivation behind it. Have him tried by the public before he is even charged.. If such a thing were to happen in Australia, the case would be thrown out of court instantly. What this reeks of is their lack of actual evidence to charge him, same lack of evidence that existed the last time they tried and their own courts threw it out and they dropped the charges because of said lack of evidence - so they go after him another way, attempt to discredit him and take scrutiny off the document dumps and go after him personally. That is what he is angry about and rightly so.
Not very much actually. I don't keep up with celebrity gossip.Again. Not arguing these points. But I would point out this happens all the time. How much do you know about Kobe Bryant's rape allegation and Tiger Wood's situation, for example, that you shouldn't?
So do you think it is acceptable that they have not charged him with anything yet, have not even provided his lawyers or himself with the allegations and what they supposedly want to charge him with, but release tidbits of information about his alleged crimes to the media?Probably not. Most European countries don't.
Me and my ilk?You and your ilk have generally lauded European enclaves, such as Sweden, and trashed the US for most of my involvement on this site.
Please provide a link where I have lauded the criminal justice system of Sweden.
I await your link with great anticipation.
Drop it.. kick it.. same thing.The claim he could not get a fair trial is a claim. Nothing more. And I have no idea what you mean by kick it. Drop the charges? Because of the leak? That's hardly justice.
And drop what charges? He hasn't been charged with anything yet. Or did that little fact escape you?
The court rejected the case previously due to a complete lack of evidence. The charges then were immediately dropped by the prosecution and only resurfaced when, amazingly enough, he did the last document dump that we know as cableleak. The previous charge also coincided with a previous document dump by Mr Assange.
He won't get a fair trial in Sweden or anywhere else. The Swedish prosecutors have ensured that. Their release of minute tidbits about the alleged rape shows a streak of desperation and anger on their part. The evidence has not changed from the last time they tried to charge him with rape. Their own courts and previous prosecutors dropped the charges on the same day.