Free Julian Assange

[Olaf]

Hardly "consentual" if the woman was asleep.

[Stefano1972]

I confess to being a little surprised by the content of many of the comments.
Throughout history, the worst tragedies have occurred when the majority of people blindly believed what they were told.
Reading the definitive condemnations that many of you are already issuing towards Assange, make me think of that saying that history teaches but has few students.
In a state of law a person is guilty only after a final sentence by a court.
If there is a rape conviction against Assange, please publish it. If this condemnation does not exist, your words are worth less than cow excrement.
At least the flowers come out of those...

The problem here Stefano is you are talking as if you 100% know for certain that Assange didn't commit rape. Which you can't possibly know. Is it really condemnation to want to see him tried in court for the accusations against him. If then he could clear his name you would be right to say our words are worth less than cow excrement.

As for history teaching us anything it's that there are many wealthy men walking around who are rapists who never got to court in the first place.

Let's put it this way, the rape accusations against Assange are only alleged.
The crimes committed by the US army revealed by Wikileaks are real.

So because the rape accusations are "only alleged" and the date for a court trial has elapsed it means he is innocent?

I don't doubt the crimes by the US army are any less real than crimes by any army during many wars. Do these crimes deserve to be heard at trial and be punished, yes just as I believe Assange should stand trial for the rape allegations.

The allegations have indeed been proven to be hoax. Theres a book written by UN Special Rapporteur on torture Nils Melzer (I have it in german, dont know If there ist an english Version) who actually was in Touch with authorities, governments and witnesses and Had Access to court Files and lawyers Files. There never was a real Case, the women never intended to file for rape. They asked to local Police whether they could force him to do an HIV - test after both Had unprotected consentual sex.
The Woman never claimed he raped any of them.

I‘ve read that book some months ago, really interesting. Thanks for remembering that.

[Marky Dread]

Hardly "consentual" if the woman was asleep.

Yep despite all I've read on the subject I'm far than convinced. He (Assange) seems a real sleaze.

[Stefano1972]

Just to remind everyone that Assange is not at risk of extradition to the United States where he would end up in prison for the rest of his days, due to the rape allegations.
But, for exposing the crimes of the US military in its criminal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan...

[Marky Dread]

Just to remind everyone that Assange is not at risk of extradition to the United States where he would end up in prison for the rest of his days, due to the rape allegations.
But, for exposing the crimes of the US military in its criminal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan...

We don't need you to remind us. We are intelligent enough to make up our own minds how we feel on this subject.

How the individual feels be it wrong or right is a choice so do not assume we need reminding.

[Stefano1972]

Just to remind everyone that Assange is not at risk of extradition to the United States where he would end up in prison for the rest of his days, due to the rape allegations.
But, for exposing the crimes of the US military in its criminal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan...

We don't need you to remind us. We are intelligent enough to make up our own minds how we feel on this subject.

How the individual feels be it wrong or right is a choice so do not assume we need reminding.

Well...
From previous comments it seemed completely different. I don't belong to the category of gallows like I don't think any of us do.
I was struck by having read, for example, "So because the rape accusations are" only alleged "and the date for a court trial has elapsed it means he is innocent?"
In a Rule of Law worthy of the name, the answer is yes.
Some people may not like this answer because in the meantime they have developed a different idea due to their reading, in-depth studies... but, from a legal point of view, there is little else to say. That person is innocent until a guilty verdict occurs against him.
As I wrote in a previous comment, the Swedish judicial authorities in nine very long years of preliminary investigations (I think it is a Guinness Book of Records one) did not find sufficiently valid elements of guilt to be able to start a trial against him. This brings us to 2019, when the Swedish prosecutor's office admitted the lack of evidence and rejected all charges against Assange.
In a State of Law, this person is innocent.
The rest can only be suppositions, personal ideas or other...
Best regards to everyone and goodnight.

[Marky Dread]

Just to remind everyone that Assange is not at risk of extradition to the United States where he would end up in prison for the rest of his days, due to the rape allegations.
But, for exposing the crimes of the US military in its criminal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan...

We don't need you to remind us. We are intelligent enough to make up our own minds how we feel on this subject.

How the individual feels be it wrong or right is a choice so do not assume we need reminding.

Well...
From previous comments it seemed completely different. I don't belong to the category of gallows like I don't think any of us do.
I was struck by having read, for example, "So because the rape accusations are" only alleged "and the date for a court trial has elapsed it means he is innocent?"
In a Rule of Law worthy of the name, the answer is yes.
Some people may not like this answer because in the meantime they have developed a different idea due to their reading, in-depth studies... but, from a legal point of view, there is little else to say. That person is innocent until a guilty verdict occurs against him.
As I wrote in a previous comment, the Swedish judicial authorities in nine very long years of preliminary investigations (I think it is a Guinness Book of Records one) did not find sufficiently valid elements of guilt to be able to start a trial against him. This brings us to 2019, when the Swedish prosecutor's office admitted the lack of evidence and rejected all charges against Assange.
In a State of Law, this person is innocent.
The rest can only be suppositions, personal ideas or other...
Best regards to everyone and goodnight.

All I'm saying here is you are entitled to your point of view as others are to theirs.

Innocent until proven guilty. Of course that is the law and we don't need you to tell us that unless you sincerely think all those that disagree with your points of view are simply morons.

All you are doing here is stating the same stories everybody else here has read. Quoting books etc. You must not assume that others here haven't read the same material you have and yet have come to a different conclusion than yours.

I'm not sure I understand your comment regarding the "gallows". Are you suggesting people here would like to see you hang for your comments?

That is somewhat extreme in my opinion. You have used this site to air your views which is your choice but it should not be expected for others to agree with you.

[Stefano1972]

Just to remind everyone that Assange is not at risk of extradition to the United States where he would end up in prison for the rest of his days, due to the rape allegations.
But, for exposing the crimes of the US military in its criminal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan...

We don't need you to remind us. We are intelligent enough to make up our own minds how we feel on this subject.

How the individual feels be it wrong or right is a choice so do not assume we need reminding.

Well...
From previous comments it seemed completely different. I don't belong to the category of gallows like I don't think any of us do.
I was struck by having read, for example, "So because the rape accusations are" only alleged "and the date for a court trial has elapsed it means he is innocent?"
In a Rule of Law worthy of the name, the answer is yes.
Some people may not like this answer because in the meantime they have developed a different idea due to their reading, in-depth studies... but, from a legal point of view, there is little else to say. That person is innocent until a guilty verdict occurs against him.
As I wrote in a previous comment, the Swedish judicial authorities in nine very long years of preliminary investigations (I think it is a Guinness Book of Records one) did not find sufficiently valid elements of guilt to be able to start a trial against him. This brings us to 2019, when the Swedish prosecutor's office admitted the lack of evidence and rejected all charges against Assange.
In a State of Law, this person is innocent.
The rest can only be suppositions, personal ideas or other...
Best regards to everyone and goodnight.

All I'm saying here is you are entitled to your point of view as others are to theirs.

Innocent until proven guilty. Of course that is the law and we don't need you to tell us that unless you sincerely think all those that disagree with your points of view are simply morons.

All you are doing here is stating the same stories everybody else here has read. Quoting books etc. You must not assume that others here haven't read the same material you have and yet have come to a different conclusion than yours.

I'm not sure I understand your comment regarding the "gallows". Are you suggesting people here would like to see you hang for your comments?

That is somewhat extreme in my opinion. You have used this site to air your views which is your choice but it should not be expected for others to agree with you.

I have never claimed to impose my point of view on others, if anything it was others who insulted me and made serious accusations against me.
It's pretty boring, I know, but if you re-read the comments I don't think you'll find that I was ever the first to transcend into the offense.
Be that as it may, I deeply regret having lapsed into vulgarity in the comments. Should I receive other denigrating comments in the future, I promise to pretend not to see.
Dear Marky,
By category of gallows I meant anyone who invokes one without first waiting for a final guilty verdict from a court.
Luckily we live in a State of Law and not in a, er, Banana Republic…
Goodnight

[Marky Dread]

Just to remind everyone that Assange is not at risk of extradition to the United States where he would end up in prison for the rest of his days, due to the rape allegations.
But, for exposing the crimes of the US military in its criminal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan...

We don't need you to remind us. We are intelligent enough to make up our own minds how we feel on this subject.

How the individual feels be it wrong or right is a choice so do not assume we need reminding.

Well...
From previous comments it seemed completely different. I don't belong to the category of gallows like I don't think any of us do.
I was struck by having read, for example, "So because the rape accusations are" only alleged "and the date for a court trial has elapsed it means he is innocent?"
In a Rule of Law worthy of the name, the answer is yes.
Some people may not like this answer because in the meantime they have developed a different idea due to their reading, in-depth studies... but, from a legal point of view, there is little else to say. That person is innocent until a guilty verdict occurs against him.
As I wrote in a previous comment, the Swedish judicial authorities in nine very long years of preliminary investigations (I think it is a Guinness Book of Records one) did not find sufficiently valid elements of guilt to be able to start a trial against him. This brings us to 2019, when the Swedish prosecutor's office admitted the lack of evidence and rejected all charges against Assange.
In a State of Law, this person is innocent.
The rest can only be suppositions, personal ideas or other...
Best regards to everyone and goodnight.

All I'm saying here is you are entitled to your point of view as others are to theirs.

Innocent until proven guilty. Of course that is the law and we don't need you to tell us that unless you sincerely think all those that disagree with your points of view are simply morons.

All you are doing here is stating the same stories everybody else here has read. Quoting books etc. You must not assume that others here haven't read the same material you have and yet have come to a different conclusion than yours.

I'm not sure I understand your comment regarding the "gallows". Are you suggesting people here would like to see you hang for your comments?

That is somewhat extreme in my opinion. You have used this site to air your views which is your choice but it should not be expected for others to agree with you.

I have never claimed to impose my point of view on others, if anything it was others who insulted me and made serious accusations against me.
It's pretty boring, I know, but if you re-read the comments I don't think you'll find that I was ever the first to transcend into the offense.
Be that as it may, I deeply regret having lapsed into vulgarity in the comments. Should I receive other denigrating comments in the future, I promise to pretend not to see.
Dear Marky,
By category of gallows I meant anyone who invokes one without first waiting for a final guilty verdict from a court.
Luckily we live in a State of Law and not in a, er, Banana Republic…
Goodnight

I see what you mean now.

I think it's highly unlikely Assange will get a fair trial where he is heading regards the leaks. How these leaks may have compromised others in the active field is still very much in dispute for me. I also feel the amount of time Assange has spent in prison is down in part to himself for hiding away.

I'm not content regards the rape allegations at all. I'm aware that neither woman wanted to come forward for those allegations but there's something more there I feel in the manner which Assange acted towards them. So I'm just not convinced to his innocence. I don't really have any more to say on this issue. Respects to all.

[Olaf]

I think Marky is deliberately trying to sabotage the Ignore feature here.

[Stefano1972]

We don't need you to remind us. We are intelligent enough to make up our own minds how we feel on this subject.

How the individual feels be it wrong or right is a choice so do not assume we need reminding.

Well...
From previous comments it seemed completely different. I don't belong to the category of gallows like I don't think any of us do.
I was struck by having read, for example, "So because the rape accusations are" only alleged "and the date for a court trial has elapsed it means he is innocent?"
In a Rule of Law worthy of the name, the answer is yes.
Some people may not like this answer because in the meantime they have developed a different idea due to their reading, in-depth studies... but, from a legal point of view, there is little else to say. That person is innocent until a guilty verdict occurs against him.
As I wrote in a previous comment, the Swedish judicial authorities in nine very long years of preliminary investigations (I think it is a Guinness Book of Records one) did not find sufficiently valid elements of guilt to be able to start a trial against him. This brings us to 2019, when the Swedish prosecutor's office admitted the lack of evidence and rejected all charges against Assange.
In a State of Law, this person is innocent.
The rest can only be suppositions, personal ideas or other...
Best regards to everyone and goodnight.

All I'm saying here is you are entitled to your point of view as others are to theirs.

Innocent until proven guilty. Of course that is the law and we don't need you to tell us that unless you sincerely think all those that disagree with your points of view are simply morons.

All you are doing here is stating the same stories everybody else here has read. Quoting books etc. You must not assume that others here haven't read the same material you have and yet have come to a different conclusion than yours.

I'm not sure I understand your comment regarding the "gallows". Are you suggesting people here would like to see you hang for your comments?

That is somewhat extreme in my opinion. You have used this site to air your views which is your choice but it should not be expected for others to agree with you.

I have never claimed to impose my point of view on others, if anything it was others who insulted me and made serious accusations against me.
It's pretty boring, I know, but if you re-read the comments I don't think you'll find that I was ever the first to transcend into the offense.
Be that as it may, I deeply regret having lapsed into vulgarity in the comments. Should I receive other denigrating comments in the future, I promise to pretend not to see.
Dear Marky,
By category of gallows I meant anyone who invokes one without first waiting for a final guilty verdict from a court.
Luckily we live in a State of Law and not in a, er, Banana Republic…
Goodnight

I see what you mean now.

I think it's highly unlikely Assange will get a fair trial where he is heading regards the leaks. How these leaks may have compromised others in the active field is still very much in dispute for me. I also feel the amount of time Assange has spent in prison is down in part to himself for hiding away.

I'm not content regards the rape allegations at all. I'm aware that neither woman wanted to come forward for those allegations but there's something more there I feel in the manner which Assange acted towards them. So I'm just not convinced to his innocence. I don't really have any more to say on this issue. Respects to all.

Of course, Assange should have kept his cock itches at bay. His behavior ended up jeopardizing the enormous work of vikileaks and its collaborators, as well as his very existence.
He was naive at the very least, he should have known that overseas they was expecting just one false move on his part in order to frame him.
But, given the gravity of the moment, I prefer to focus on the real risk of extradition to the United States, rather than on his certainly deplorable lifestyle.
If Assange is extradited to the United States it will be a gigantic shame even for the British institutions themselves. It's impossible not to think about what happened years ago when the Spanish judge Garzon asked the English authorities for the extradition of the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, who at the time was in London for medical treatment.
Unfortunately, English behavior was very different from what happens today for Assange, extradition was denied for health reasons and the dictator responsible for the death of tens of thousands of human beings was able to return to his home.
He entered a plane in a wheelchair and left a few hours later walking on his own two feet.
That's all, I hope I have only contributed to enriching the treasure of dialogue and mutual understanding.
Cheers

[Marky Dread]

I think Marky is deliberately trying to sabotage the Ignore feature here.

How else am I supposed to converse with you.

[Olaf]

I think Marky is deliberately trying to sabotage the Ignore feature here.

How else am I supposed to converse with you.

I'd say messenger pigeons, but they need to stay away from Paul and Topper.

[Marky Dread]

I think Marky is deliberately trying to sabotage the Ignore feature here.

How else am I supposed to converse with you.

I'd say messenger pigeons, but they need to stay away from Paul and Topper.

Emails on the roof just doesn't have the same ring to it.

[Stefano1972]

Thanks Rome
https://www.italianinsider.it/?q=node/12310