Julian Assange: "I'm Slowly Dying Here".

*LOL*

 

Yep. The way some of them carry on, I find myself urging them to get outside and experience the real world on occasion.

 

Do you come up with this stuff on your own?

 

Logic, simple logic my dear man - and a long term memory and the ability to connect things. I have solved historical mysteries, but only on subjects that interest me.

Any other questions?

 

How would you prefer the courts handle 'skipping bail' cases other than prosecute and punish them consistent with the legislatures intent when they passed those sections of the criminal statutes? Do you believe in bail, or do you think we should hold all persons committed of crimes without bail lest they run as this man did? If we decriminalize this behavior we will have a hell of a lot more of it, and it is expensive to keep searching and finding and re-arresting suspects, then releasing them only to search and find them again and again and again. Then there is that whole new level when they get some cash, an airplane ticket to another country. Not much deterrence if you don't make the penalty stiff and enforce it.

 

By real world you mean; 'the land of the censored and home of the indoctrinated' - as Eleuthera so aptly put it.

 

So you're taking the word of a possible sexual predator against three women because you claim that in Sweden "rape is not considered rape in other countries" ? Is that right? Does it make any difference to you that Swedish prosecutors announced that they would drop their investigation into three of the allegations against Assange, because of the expiration of the statute of limitations? They say it was rape and Assange claimed it was consensual. Wouldn't it be fair to all the women to have a fair trial before dismissing their charges? So, suspicion of rape, three cases of sexual molestation and unlawful coercion, should all be just waved away with the hand because the 'definition of rape in Sweden is different than other countries'. That's what you think. I think you're wrong.

 

When I weep for people who panic, skip bail and who may be innocent of the charges, Julian Assange is not the kind of defendant that induces my tears to fall. He's had access plenty of resources to mount a full defense. He can afford the lawyers, the private investigators, maybe a separate voir dire expert to analyze the jury pool, and some very fine defense experts on the evidence on speedial. There is another schmuck, who has nothing, stuck in a cell, who's only attorney is a public defender with 8 other clients, who's being denied funds for even 20 hours of investigatory hours because the PD's office already used up all their 2019 funding last October, and can't rub two nickels together to pay overtime to the lone secretary.

 

Perhaps a good day to pardon them all would be the day Trump himself is acquitted by the Senate, which should be sometime this month. Though I suspect he may wait till the end of his presidency, as most previous presidents have.

 

Additionally, those within the embassy where he was staying reported that he had become abusive. That also speaks to the deterioration that you mentioned.

 

The real world outside of your disinformation-fueled bubble is nothing like that.

 

He has revealed evil. And now he is at their mercy. They are not merciful.

And our press refuse to do their jobs. They are complicit with this great evil who loves secrecy. To operate in the dark.

This is a question of right and wrong. And outright tyranny.

 

I agree, I have been vocal about not agreeing with what Assange has done but this has gone too far, he's being treated worse than the worst criminals. Something needs to be done, this is inhumane, I'm also disappointed with Australia's zero response... are there anyone from the Aus Government even checking on him?

 

Oh?

"Oh, Woe is Me"?

If Arrange was so worried about "slowly dying"...

...He should've thought about that Before Wkileaks and His Rape Spree in Sweden...

#NoSympathy

 

Once again, I get extremely frustrated by the stupidity and ignorance of people, and the seeming fact that every thread about Assange in this forum gets turned into the subject of the Swedish accusations situation.

We have a specific thread devoted just to that now, so please stop derailing this thread.

I have wanted to call specific people out on their stupidity and ignorance, and the fact that they're derailing this thread by starting a long discussion about that, but the moderators will just delete my posts.

Once again, if you want to read about what Assange was actually accused of in Sweden, and discuss that, see this thread:
Assange Accusations in Sweden

 

[

Funny how Assange became abusive after we had the regime change in Ecuador and they installed a new diplomatic core at the embassy. They wouldn't be lying now would they?

 

In other normal countries like the US and Sweden, skipping bail is not a criminal offense. You just remain in jail until the trial is over, or until the charges are dropped, or until it is no longer necessary.

The courts in the US and UK could have also saved Assange time, if they had wanted to or been willing to, and held extradition hearings by teleconference all those years while he was in that embassy. But they didn't.

I get extremely frustrated because it seems all these points keep getting repeated over and over again in every thread about Assange, and it seems no one listens. Many of you are the same people that took part in the debates in those other threads, so it seems it is useless trying to explain any of this to you because you did not listen then, you likely won't listen now.

 

Have you ever heard of the 5 eyes? It's the Anglosphere, and their Intelligence works in unison: US, UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand.

Frankly I think it's a disgrace that Australia is allowing this to be done to one of their citizens. But then again, one can expect anything now-a-days.

 

I also think it's a disgrace how ignorant and misinformed many of the people here are about the situation, on numerous different points.

I can't prove it, but I strongly suspect the media was complicit in intentionally creating some of these misconceptions early on.

For example, by discrediting him as a "rapist" they would almost totally destroy any public sympathy for him. (This is by way, the same sort of tactic they use in regimes like Iran against political enemies)

 

Whether one agrees with Assange or not, he is a human being and deserves the same rights as others. Whether he is guilty or not is up to the courts, not for others to decide.

I don't see what we're doing as being any different than what the Soviet Union did - only that it's not being called a Gulag.

 

I think one of the major central issues here is one of jurisdiction. Holding a citizen of one country subject to the judicial jurisdiction of another country.

And there are some people here who can't seem to understand why that is a big problem. Especially with the controversial nature of the allegations.

 

It's possible. It's also possible that after being trapped in a house for years unable to leave contributed to a mental breakdown which lead to abusive behavior.

 

Even if the possibility that he did have a mental breakdown is true (which I would argue there's still reason to believe it may not), I do not believe that detracts from the injustice of the situation facing him.

The only thing that would due is lend support to the decision of the Ecuadorian president to have him removed from the embassy.

 

So its this country's fault for criminalizing the conduct, providing him an opportunity to either skip or not, then holding him accountable for that choice. Its about one person in five that missing any court date when out on bail. That's a lot of people we are going to keep incarcerated for months thanks to the fifth.

 

If you actually sit down and logically think about it, there's no reason to hold him "accountable" for that choice.

I personally believe it is evil to try to hold him "accountable" for not trusting the authorities. Especially all the more so since he voluntarily turned himself in to authorities the first time. Think about it, if he had just fled into the embassy in the first place, he would not later have been subject to the "breach of bail" punishment.
It's almost like his crime was initially turning himself in.