Free Julian Assange

[Marky Dread]

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.

[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.

[Marky Dread]

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.

[Olaf]

Doc you sure know some swell people.

I only get the Rich Asshole Pedos Inc newsletter for the crossword puzzle!

Heston gets it for the record reviews.

And the chart positions.

Shakin Stevens: The Rich Asshole Pedo's Elvis.

Poor Shaky doesn't deserve this.

[Dr. Medulla]

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.

No, Marky, think it thru, follow the logic. Because the US has engaged in war crimes (does anyone here actually doubt that?), accordingly the women who accused Assange of sexual assault are "NATO whores." It would be moronic to give the benefit of the doubt to the women because, you know, women regularly lie about this stuff. Women are always coming forward and accusing men—especially high profile men—of rape because they know everyone always stupidly believe them. You have to be a cutting-edge, break-from-the-herd high brain type to see through the lies that bitches always tell against men. If you believe the women, you must be ignoring war crimes. There—now I'm a radical free thinker, too.

[Dr. Medulla]

I only get the Rich Asshole Pedos Inc newsletter for the crossword puzzle!

Heston gets it for the record reviews.

And the chart positions.

Shakin Stevens: The Rich Asshole Pedo's Elvis.

Poor Shaky doesn't deserve this.

Probably not, but he's had every opportunity to denounce Heston and hasn't.

[Marky Dread]

Heston gets it for the record reviews.

And the chart positions.

Shakin Stevens: The Rich Asshole Pedo's Elvis.

Poor Shaky doesn't deserve this.

Probably not, but he's had every opportunity to denounce Heston and hasn't.

Plus he's never once attempted to join the board and defend himself. So therefore he's on shaky ground.

[Marky Dread]

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.

No, Marky, think it thru, follow the logic. Because the US has engaged in war crimes (does anyone here actually doubt that?), accordingly the women who accused Assange of sexual assault are "NATO whores." It would be moronic to give the benefit of the doubt to the women because, you know, women regularly lie about this stuff. Women are always coming forward and accusing men—especially high profile men—of rape because they know everyone always stupidly believe them. You have to be a cutting-edge, break-from-the-herd high brain type to see through the lies that bitches always tell against men. If you believe the women, you must be ignoring war crimes. There—now I'm a radical free thinker, too.

I didn't realise this thread was about following logic. Sorry I'm out.

[Dr. Medulla]

And the chart positions.

Shakin Stevens: The Rich Asshole Pedo's Elvis.

Poor Shaky doesn't deserve this.

Probably not, but he's had every opportunity to denounce Heston and hasn't.

Plus he's never once attempted to join the board and defend himself. So therefore he's on shaky ground.

People tend to get their throats slit when that happens.

[Dr. Medulla]

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.

No, Marky, think it thru, follow the logic. Because the US has engaged in war crimes (does anyone here actually doubt that?), accordingly the women who accused Assange of sexual assault are "NATO whores." It would be moronic to give the benefit of the doubt to the women because, you know, women regularly lie about this stuff. Women are always coming forward and accusing men—especially high profile men—of rape because they know everyone always stupidly believe them. You have to be a cutting-edge, break-from-the-herd high brain type to see through the lies that bitches always tell against men. If you believe the women, you must be ignoring war crimes. There—now I'm a radical free thinker, too.

I didn't realise this thread was about following logic. Sorry I'm out.

More seriously, yeah, me, too. Let the "whores lie" crowd baste in their contempt for women.

[Marky Dread]

Shakin Stevens: The Rich Asshole Pedo's Elvis.

Poor Shaky doesn't deserve this.

Probably not, but he's had every opportunity to denounce Heston and hasn't.

Plus he's never once attempted to join the board and defend himself. So therefore he's on shaky ground.

People tend to get their throats slit when that happens.

And then there was Vince.

[Stefano1972]

Significantly, the Swedish charges never made it beyond the preliminary investigation stage, where they were left to simmer for nine years before being dismissed for lack of evidence.
In November 2019, the Swedish prosecutor's office admitted the lack of evidence and rejected all remaining charges. Thus ended the longest preliminary investigations in the history of Sweden.
Therefore, throughout the proceedings Sweden never collected sufficient evidence to prosecute Assange, much less to convict him of any crime.

[Flex]

I think there's more to the story with Sweden ultimately dropping charges, but I don't really want to get into an argument about it because I want to take my own advice that I'm about to give: Julian Assange doesn't matter, and discussions of him (pro- and con-) simply distract from the work - invaluable work - WikiLeaks did. And it gives, quite wrongly, the impression that one man is the movement or the mission. It's not, and he's not. What matters isn't the moral turpitude of one man, it's what information WikiLeaks uncovered in their heyday and how that mission might proceed. If that mission can't be bigger than one man, that's a big problem.

The only people who benefit from litigating and relitigating Assange's personal failings are western govenments looking to distract and Julian Assange himself hoping to divert well meaning people into thinking the only way to fight is to prop up a single man. But tear down your idols and kill your heroes, one man doesn't matter - they never do. The work is what matters and it's always, always bigger than a single person.

With that, I plan to never give Assange another moment of thought when I can devote my limited time and attention to things that need it.

[Marky Dread]

I think there's more to the story with Sweden ultimately dropping charges, but I don't really want to get into an argument about it because I want to take my own advice that I'm about to give: Julian Assange doesn't matter, and discussions of him (pro- and con-) simply distract from the work - invaluable work - WikiLeaks did. And it gives, quite wrongly, the impression that one man is the movement or the mission. It's not, and he's not. What matters isn't the moral turpitude of one man, it's what information WikiLeaks uncovered in their heyday and how that mission might proceed. If that mission can't be bigger than one man, that's a big problem.

The only people who benefit from litigating and relitigating Assange's personal failings are western govenments looking to distract and Julian Assange himself hoping to divert well meaning people into thinking the only way to fight is to prop up a single man. But tear down your idols and kill your heroes, one man doesn't matter - they never do. The work is what matters and it's always, always bigger than a single person.

With that, I plan to never give Assange another moment of thought when I can devote my limited time and attention to things that need it.

How soon now can we expect Space Flex to put a military base on the dark side of the moon and bomb the shit out of this god forsaken planet?

[chocolatejesus]

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.