TCampbell wrote:BTW, I tried to do something more directly related to the Thunderbolt Trickster, but couldn't make it clear enough without a caption.
Alice Macher wrote:Taliesan wrote:So, Alice, care to tell us what Lisa's GL oath would be?
"At iPod launch, Hot Topic sale,
No evil from me shall be veiled.
Hey evil-doers, full of fail,
Green Lantern'll see your butt in jail.
I was thinking:
"Whatev, you know? Screw labels."
Because I have no problem believing that someone as arrogant as Assange could do that. And I also have no problem believing that Assange did nothing wrong, and governments are trying to railroad him using every recourse they can. (Sweden is not immune to international influence.) Both scenarios, given what I know, are perfectly plausible. Some accusations are valid, some not.
Alice Macher wrote:adamiani wrote:Eh.
I was thinking:
"Whatev, you know? Screw labels."
Wise words, to be sure, but them's a personal statement on sexual orientation, not a suitable crime-fighting motto. "So, Lisa, you're saying that it's wrong to label some actions 'good' and some 'evil?' Relativist!"
Richter wrote:Because I have no problem believing that someone as arrogant as Assange could do that. And I also have no problem believing that Assange did nothing wrong, and governments are trying to railroad him using every recourse they can. (Sweden is not immune to international influence.) Both scenarios, given what I know, are perfectly plausible. Some accusations are valid, some not.
Given how sweden has very strict sexual offense laws and is just as strict in following them up, and also has a rather strict policy of neutrality (like switzerland withoput endorsing and living off tax embezzlement), I doubt this is the "evil USA" hunting down poor Assange.
Besides, publishing secrets of the US is, as far as such things go, safe. The US very rarely really send assassins after anyone, and if they do, the assassins usually are only good for unintentinally hilarious failures (killing Castro with an explosive cigar; bet they labeled it ACME, too). I'd concede he had guts if he puiblished secrets of Russia, or France, or any other state that actually has an assassination policy (or Israel, but THAT is pretty much suicide). And as for charges, what would the US charge him for? Of all western nations, the Us has the most radical press freedom laws. They actually have no case against him. And there will be none.
So long as he just keeps sniping at the US, he is an attention whore, and probably delaying other leaked stuff that might actually be relevant and not consist of things you already know from civil, established medioa. About the only surprising thing so far was how much the Arab states push for Israel to push the US to invade Iran.
Of course, they have to stop this now, and will go for deterrence instead. So by bolstering his ego, and by looking for attention of the gullible Left, Assange might have caused, in the end, a nuclear arms race that might well end in a regional nuclear war.
Yeah, that's utterly heroic.
This afternoon, Julian Assange's counsel Mark Stephens released the following statement:
On the morning of 21 August 2010, my client, Julian Assange, read in the Swedish tabloid newspaper Expressen that there was a warrant out for his arrest relating to allegations of "rape" involving two Swedish women.
However, even the substance of the allegations, as revealed to the press through unauthorized disclosures do not constitute what any advanced legal system considers to be rape; as various media outlets have reported "the basis for the rape charge" purely seems to constitute a post-facto dispute over consensual, but unprotected sex days after the event. Both women have declared that they had consensual sexual relations with our client and that they continued to instigate friendly contact well after the alleged incidents. Only after the women became aware of each other's relationships with Mr. Assange did they make their allegations against him.
The warrant for his arrest was rightly withdrawn within 24 hours by Chief prosecutor Eva Finne, who found that there was no "reason to suspect that he has committed rape." Yet his name had already been deliberately and unlawfully disclosed to the press by Swedish authorities. The "rape" story was carried around the world and has caused Mr. Assange and his organization irreparable harm.
Eva Finne's decision to drop the "rape" investigation was reversed after the intervention of a political figure, Claes Borgstrom, who is now acting for the women. The case was given to a specific prosecutor, Marianne Ny.
The only way the accused and his lawyers have been able to discover any substantive information regarding the investigation against him has been through the media. Over the last three months, despite numerous demands, neither Mr. Assange, nor his legal counsel has received a single word in writing from the Swedish authorities relating to the allegations; a clear contravention to Article 6 of the European Convention, which states that every accused must "be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him". The actions by the Swedish authorities constitute a blatant and deliberate disregard for his rights under the Convention.
We are now concerned that prosecutor Marianne Ny intends to apply for an arrest warrant in an effort to have Mr. Assange forcibly taken to Sweden for preliminary questioning. Despite his right to silence, my client has repeatedly offered to be interviewed, first in Sweden, and then in the UK (including at the Swedish Embassy), either in person or by telephone, videoconferencing or email and he has also offered to make a sworn statement on affidavit. All of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate. Pursuing a warrant in this circumstance is entirely unnecessary and disproportionate. This action is in contravention both of European Conventions and makes a mockery of arrangements between Sweden and the United Kingdom designed to deal with just such situations. This behavior is not a prosecution, but a persecution. Before leaving Sweden Mr. Assange asked to be interviewed by the prosecution on several occasions in relation to the allegations, staying over a month in Stockholm, at considerable expense and despite many engagements elsewhere, in order to clear his name. Eventually the prosecution told his Swedish lawyer Bjorn Hurtig that he was free to leave the country, without interview, which he did.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests