Exactly Craig – was so embarrassing watching the Establishment Media circle its wagons. That halfwitted rent-a-gob Joan Smith clearly didn’t know what she was talking about, and somehow hadn’t managed to learn any of the facts of this whole set-up before going out live on tv!

Esler seemed genuinely shocked that someone was trying to explain what this whole Assange thing was all about – the media continues to do its best to obfuscate the reality of the situation!

Isn’t it obvious that they don’t want to discuss what Assange did? Anyone can find out in seconds, but you’ll not hear the details on Newsnight. The pravda-style hacks wouldn’t be able to continue to peddle the propaganda lie about “sexual molestation” and “rape charges”..

I wouldn’t have kept as calm as you Craig! These vulgar propagandists humiliate themselves.

Good on ya!

The BBC named Diallo because there was nothing to stop them. They seem to be claiming that they cannot name Anna Ardin because Swedish law prevents it, but that law does not apply in the UK. Obviously there is an agenda at work and it was used last night against you.

Excellent points Craig.

Agenda or ignorance, waters were muddied and hornets nests stirred, briefly at least. Anyone who takes the time to read more than 140 characters on this site surely will understand that, on the balance of probability, it is likely that, whatever is going on behind the scenes is at least similiar to other whistleblowing situations and at most, a concerted effort to reach a conclusion that constitutes a form of revenge.

Operation ‘shut him up’ to paraphrase Bill Hicks

Craig – I thought it was a bit of both, Esler pitched it that his moral ourage had some legal backing.
.
Diallo is a excellent example for you to put out there, and often (very good) BBC reporting from war-zones includes interviews with rape victims, not always with their identities concealed.
.
So no question at all, this was selective and absurd outrage (when you realise Ardin had spoken to the press about her allegations), and the BBC owe you an apology.

Anybody who pays their TV licence, is an enemy of humanity.

Meanwhile Ref Syria and from the horse’s mouth, ObomberBush MkII.

“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is (if) we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized,” Mr Obama said. “That would change my calculus. We cannot have a situation where chemical or biological weapons are falling into the hands of the wrong people,” Mr Obama told an impromptu White House news conference. He acknowledged he was not “absolutely confident” the stockpile was secure.

And naturally he has concerns for Israhell.

The US president said the issue was of concern not only to Washington but also to its close allies in the region, including Israel.

http://www.channel4.com/news/obama-warns-syria-on-chemical-weapons
.
Surely he misuses the word calculus in his plotting/planning/calculations. No mention of his evil drone warfare of course.

cal·cu·lus
1. Pathology An abnormal concretion in the body, usually formed of mineral salts and found in the gallbladder, kidney, or urinary bladder, for example.
2. Dentistry See tartar.
3. Mathematics
a. The branch of mathematics that deals with limits and the differentiation and integration of functions of one or more variables.
b. A method of analysis or calculation using a special symbolic notation.
c. The combined mathematics of differential calculus and integral calculus.

John Pilger comments on Assange

“I have known Julian since he came to London and and gave the world vital information about Afghanistan and Iraq which governments had suppressed and denied.

“What is always left out of the public portrayal of Julian is the moral dimension of WikiLeaks. The very mention of morality, of principle, embarrasses those who consort with great power; but ordinary people recognise it straightaway and are not embarrassed; they’re inspired.

“WikiLeaks is about the public’s right to know, and the right to practice the kind of real journalism that has made Julian powerful enemies — enemies he should wear as a badge of courage. Indeed, the whole point about Julian Assange is courage. That’s why this is a day of triumph — triumph for human courage, for principle and for truth.

“Julian has not broken free, not yet, but with the help of the admirable Rafael Correa and his comrades in this embassy, he has seized back the initiative from those who think they have a divine right to rule the world and to lie and commit war crimes in our name. We should celebrate our resistance and salute Julian.”

John Pilger 19 August 2012

http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-War-You-Dont-See-a-Film-by-John-Pilger/164138183607202?v=wall&story_fbid=459666227387728

Hear! Hear!

Joan Smith was right. Most people on the left cannot separate two things:

1) JA is/was a risk taking whistleblower
2) JA is an alledged rapist who has skipped bail.

And Craig Murray has a deeply troubling attitude to women.

Joan Smith was wrong, the evil Marxist-Feminists cannot see that men are innocent until proven guilty.

When has a feminist ever spoken the truth?

Sections of the far-(quasi)left are imploding right now. Galloway, Benn and Murray are tying themselves in intellectual knots to excuse the pathetic Assange. If it were not for the fact that the human rights of two women are currently being relegated to a back-story, it would be very funny.

Most people on the right tend to generalise.

@CE – i’ve never been left in my life, further to the right than the fish knife and years of campaigning to get this daft government elected, 90 hour weeks, interminable committee meetings, regional hustings, leafletting at 5 am in the mornings (especially in band end estates – don’t want to get my head caved in, tricks of the trade dontcha know) and yet I can see this as a stitch up. If you think this is about left vs right then you’re deluded, if you think this about rape, you’re deluded, if you think this is about Craig, you’re deluded. This is a stitch up, a woman scorned with an axe to grind that Julain didn’t appreciate her hidden sensitivity. She’s using the law like millions of spurned women do in divorce cases, she’s fleecing the lad. It’s the victim industry in full international flow.

Very droll Lizard,very droll..:.)

No excuses from this section of the left. If he committed a crime in Sweden, then he should get a fair trial in Sweden. However, he has every right to assurances that he will not be further extradited on the basis of unspecified charges based on activities which are not crimes in the country/s in which he carried them out.

But it’s nice to see the far right and radical feminists in bed together. You can plan the day when a bust condom is a criminal offence here, too.

CE – Joan Smith just touted irrelevant suggestions about the possible pyschic state of Ardin:
“oh, she went to a crayfish party with him because .. sometimes rape victims are in a state of shock! yeah, that’s it! Oh Mr Murray, you’re such a woman-hater!”

Educate yourself, you imbecile!

CE,

“Sections of the far-(quasi)left are imploding right now. Galloway, Benn and Murray are tying themselves in intellectual knots to excuse the pathetic Assange. If it were not for the fact that the human rights of two women are currently being relegated to a back-story, it would be very funny.”

So other than the two women it’s funny that Bradley Manning has been in solitary confinement for 800+days when the US constitutional limit is 120? Funny like that you mean? Or that he’s denied clothing and bedding? Or a trial? Funny like that you mean? Or funny like Sweden has already got form in extrordinarily renditing 2 men who were subsequently tortured? Funny like that? That Assange may also recieve the Manning treatment when there are no charges against him? That sort of funny you mean?

Id sure hate to see you furrow your brow on really serious. issues.

Jives – right on! lets not forget the real crimes here are the US war crimes Manning risked his life and his sanity to make public.

This Assange story is a con-trick, designed to distract attention from the ongoing Imperialist wars

The BBC have a habit of controlling the angle of argument while engineering their invitees. If they wanted a balanced discussion about the Swedish allegations, they would have had e.g. a Swedish attorney but they invited Craig who was not the most qualified on the actual rape allegations. They ambushed him with all that indignant shrieking. Its all part of the overall discrediting game. The shill pundits and journos are working overtime because the British public do smell a rat, or a poodle with a rat. Even the Daily Mail comments are way pro-Assange.

Craig, thanks for the reply. Yes, I did see the exchange and I saw how Esler replied, but that was no excuse for you not to make the obvious point that Swedish law does not apply to Britain.

I think we need a narrative of our own on this one:

Assange went to Sweden and fell in with two girls, both of whom were quite happy until each found out that he had slipped a length to the other. Then humiliation set in as each realised that instead of making the great, ego-boosting, power-tripping conquest that they fondly imagined had happened, in fact they had just been used to polish a knob.

So they started screaming rape to get their revenge for that humiliation. The fact that “rape” in Sweden seems to involve not being entirely honest with a mare as to whether she is being ridden bareback or not just makes the whole thing even more risible.

Nafissatou Diallo and Anna Ardin: both Obama/CIA sting operations.

Why is it ok for the BBC to mention Diallo ? She’s black.

Thanks for proving my point Jives, yet another unable to differentiate between Wikileaks and JA’s alleged sexual misconduct.

If it’s all so simple why doesn’t JA just pop over to Sweden and face down it’s brutal and repressive Justice System.

Thank God for Ecuador, that well known beacon of Human Rights and Democracy.

Myths exposed: http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition

And this is such a simple point:
NONE of the parties to this can expect a fair trial now. NO jury or panel in Sweden could be uninfluenced by the media reports. And that is regardless of the validity of the charges, the fucked-up police procedures or the fact that prosecutor Marianne Ny has an axe to grind;
http://www.skandinaviflorida.com/web/sif.nsf/d6plinks/JEIE-8C8PGS

Whatever are the specifics of the Assangae case, isn’t all of this legal minutiae a perfect distraction for the mainstream media and government? There are obviously bigger things to deal with – the complete hypocrisy and defunctness of the media and government for starters. Easy for me to say behind my screen but still.

Assange is just one man.Whoever he is, not all faith should be put in one man

Nasafitou Diallo concerned the DSK case – the BBC could name her as their was no serious indication that the British left would start hounding her to check the genuiness of her accusations. French politics are not an over-riding concern of the British left.

Obviously, attacking America and the West – lining up behind silly crackpots and haters like you, Pilger, Galloway and Tariq Ali, while they do so – is a massive political objective of the left. So guarding this woman’s identity then becomes much more important – as soon as she is named BY THE BBC, thousands of anti-Western left-wingers who take their security for granted (e.g. YOU) will start trying to attack her.

The different obligations that the BBC has regarding its audience in the two cases are clear. You obviously are pursuing your own agenda, and it’s entirely indicative of your selfishness and your desperate desire to self-promote that you completely ignore that obligation. But hey, I am sure you can justify it to yourself with the usual tedious moral supremacist guff about the crimes of USA

Re the Lib Dem Green selling his soul in the Stoadsman, he says this:
Three: “Sweden should guarantee that there be no extradition to USA”

It would not be legally possible for Swedish government to give any guarantee about a future extradition, and nor would it have any binding effect on the Swedish legal system in the event of a future extradition request.

By asking for this ‘guarantee’, Assange is asking the impossible, as he probably knows. Under international law, all extradition requests have to be dealt with on their merits and in accordance with the applicable law; and any final word on an extradition would (quite properly) be with an independent Swedish court, and not the government giving the purported ‘guarantee’.

Probably an intentional diversion. Under Swedish law, a person whom Sweden has extradited from another country A may not be re-extradited to another country B without the permission of A’s government. Hence, the answer lies in Hague’s hands, as it appears that the Swedes won’t come over here and interview Assange. If the UK doesn’t give its explicit permission, Assange can’t be extradited (legally) to the US from Sweden. Simples.

The point you make between Diallo and Ardin is a very good observation of duplicity in the media. But as I’ve just mentioned in my blog the truth is alien to the media these days.

Obviously, attacking America and the West – lining up behind silly crackpots and haters like you, Pilger, Galloway and Tariq Ali, while they do so – is a massive political objective of the left. So guarding this woman’s identity then becomes much more important – as soon as she is named BY THE BBC, thousands of anti-Western left-wingers who take their security for granted (e.g. YOU) will start trying to attack her.

An “argument” which applies with absolutely equal force to Assange, of course. But no-one’s attacking him at all, are they? Pardon?

“Anna Ardin, 31, has told the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet that the complaints were “not orchestrated by the Pentagon” but prompted by “a man who has a twisted attitude toward women and a problem taking no for an answer.””
.
I am thinking we can all read about that in any forthcoming book she may write. I wonder that if she does will she be donating all her royalties earned to a rape crisis centre ?.

Komodo –

An “argument” which applies with absolutely equal force to Assange, of course. But no-one’s attacking him at all, are they? Pardon?

No it doesn’t apply with equal force at all.

A)Assange promoted his own name and was a public figure prior to publishing thousands of classified US documents.

B)He published thousands of stolen and classified US government documents, with no guiding motivation other than disclosure for the sake of it. This is CLEARLY NOT EQUIVALENT to making a claim to being a victim of rape.

C)Of course he is going to be attacked for the actions he took (not that were taken against him, he chose to publish these stolen docs, not like claiming to be raped at all). Are you really that naive to think that governments and diplomatic services can afford to have their private classified correspondence published for all to see? Do you not understand why this might be considered criminal? If he was not Western, I think he probably would have been assasinated by now – certainly if he was Russian or had done that to Russia.

One of the worst aspects of this farce has been the collusion between JA and Ecuador to debase the Political Asylum System. Allowing a common criminal to claim PA is a gross insult to the many people around the world who are actually in danger of political repression on a daily basis.

Apologies to John Goss if he posted it here, but this looks pretty comprehensive:
http://www.nnn.se/nordic/assange/suspicious.pdf

Some of us need to ask ourselves if, should a well loved and cuddly Lib Dem MP have been the central figure in a similar scenario in the UK, how many seconds the CPS would have paused before breaking into gales of laughter and tearing up the charge sheet.

why will assange not allow himself to be questioned for the charges of rape and is he being sought for rendition by the united states.

If the rape charges were dropped then what would his situation be?

Yeah, CE, unlike the UK threatening to break the Vienna Convention on the status of embassies.

Completely disagree CE – Ecuador are only showing the asylum system for what it has become, which is just a tool for the west to try and take the moral high-ground. They are playing us at our own game.

Agreed Komodo. Not the right move by the UK gov, but does not excuse Ecuador and JA’s behaviour either.

Press Freedom Index.

Sweden = 12th
Ecuador = 104th

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldwide_Press_Freedom_Index

“Allowing a common criminal to claim PA is a gross insult to the many people around the world who are actually in danger of political repression on a daily basis.”

Are you a common cunt ?

Assange has repeatedly stated that he will consent to be questioned
27 September. After lingering in Sweden for five weeks, Julian
Assange departs for Germany and then England, with Ms. Ny’s
consent. On the same day, she issues a secret warrant for his arrest
(see “Abuse of Office by Prosecutor Ny” on page 31).
When Julian Assange departs from Sweden:

• He has still not been interviewed by prosecutor Ny, despite
repeated attempts to arrange a mutually agreeable time.

• He has not been provided with a precise description of the
alleged behaviour which Ms. Ny regards as criminal.

• He has not been provided with any information about the case
in his own language, as required by a European treaty to which
Sweden is a party.

Here’s his lawyer:
I have [since] been in fairly continuous
dialogue with the prosecutor’s office, offering
that Mr. Assange would voluntarily
undergo interrogation in any number of
ways from London. I said that he could
answer police questions by telephone, by
video link (at his own expense), by Skype
or by attending at Scotland Yard’s interview
suite or at the Swedish embassy in London
or by providing an answer on affidavit to
written questions.… I have never been
given a sensible reason by the prosecutor
for rejecting [these alternatives].…
I have read suggestions that Ms. Ny has
made in the press that it would be contrary
to Swedish law to interview him abroad.
This is wrong, because there is no such law.

And please READ the above .pdf link.

Clark,

No he isn’t.

It would be easier for the US to extradite JA from the UK than Sweden.

This is an untruth put forward by JA and his cheerleaders to expand the myth of JA and Wikileaks.

Anna Ardin is a key part of the conspiracy to torpedo Wikileaks and guarantee impunity for crimes past, current and future.
In order to protect itself the Empire seeks full spectrum dominance. Control of the media and sources of news and information are of cardinal importance.
Wikileaks presented a real threat to a system which has been based on crude lies since the beginning of the Cold War in 1948.
As Assange showed truth is a very powerful weapon; the clouds of lies surrounding the imperial wars were easily dissipated, and the credibility of the US government, and its sordid satrapies, was dramatically reduced by the publication of Wikileaked information.
To defend Wikileaks from, characteristically, a campaign of lies and misinformation the truth has to be told. And the truth is that Anna Ardin is not the victim of rape but an asset of the most evil institutions, in an Empire more criminal and dangerous than any other in history, bent on suppressing the truth and subjecting its citizens to rule by lies and liars.

Not to identify Ardin’s role in this conspiracy would be to mislead the people and to assist their enemies.

Jay: Assange is not charged with rape, or for that matter manslaughter.

Additionally, Hague would be courting domestic electoral disaster if the US pulled him directly from here on what would have to be a trumped-up charge. The Swedes have history for being accommodating, and in any case the EAW would have to be dealt with before another state pushed its snout in.

Re. “common criminal”, CE…while we’re promoting the human rights of some rather promiscuous young ladies, whatever happened to the good old Little England principle of “innocent until proven guilty”?

What Murray and his coalition of disdain have failed to justify is why Mr Assange is not prepared to face due process in Sweden. Sweden is a country with an open, fair and just legal system. If the allegations are a sting, as Murray and co believe, Assange will be found innocent.

Presumably Murray, Galloway and Co would advise against all travel to Sweden on the basis of the corrupt nature of its legal system.

Will K,

“Nasafitou Diallo concerned the DSK case – the BBC could name her as their was no serious indication that the British left would start hounding her to check the genuiness of her accusations. French politics are not an over-riding concern of the British left.”

I think you’re misreading a growing global consciousness of moral interest in stories that now don’t adhere to localised geopolitical spheres of influence as they once did.The internet has driven this change and global awareness.

“Christine Assange”
.
http://www.news.com.au/world/ecuador-to-announce-assange-asylum-britain-threat-to-raid-embassy/story-fndir2ev-1226451503293

JW,

“What Murray and his coalition of disdain have failed to justify is why Mr Assange is not prepared to face due process in Sweden. Sweden is a country with an open, fair and just legal system.If the allegations are a sting, as Murray and co believe, Assange will be found innocent.

Presumably Murray, Galloway and Co would advise against all travel to Sweden on the basis of the corrupt nature of its legal system.”

Sorry but you’re either being deliberately selective by riffing on a singular dimension of the case whilst eschewing appreciation of the multiple interwoven dynamics or are just missing the whole point entirely.

The essence of this case is that the Swedish system may not be reliable or trustworthy at all due to US pressure upon it,thereby wholly endangering Assange’s chances of a fair trial.

Also fun:
http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/lawyer-for-assange-accusers-has.html

Another Swedish prosecution under Bodstrom’s aegis. Note the prosecutor’s change of mind. Note the lack of transparency. Note the connection to US companies:

http://boingboing.net/2012/07/08/peter-brokep-sunde-railro.html

I once had a great dinner party with CE and begged CE to stay over at my place. CE is one of the coolest!

I’ve looked over the comments section again and I now feel that CE has raped me.

I feel like CE is the greatest ever; lets have a “crayfish party” for CE.

Now that the “crayfish party” is over will anyone come with me to the police and assist me in filling a rape complaint against CE?
I’m sure that if we do not act now, or until after the next “crayfish party” in CE’s honor, CE is bound to rape again!
Think of the children please!
CE is a potential RAPIST!!!!

I can anticipate the potential of CE’s rapey comments even now.

So the entire Swedish Justice System is proven as unreliable and untrustworthy, purely for having the cheek to investigate claims of rape against JA?

You’re tying yourself in knots here, merely to defend to the indefensible.

“I have always stood for justice and freedom.” (Except in Sweden)

I wouldn’t worry about it. Never mind the politics and the censorship, the Newsnight guy comes across as a patriarchal jerk, the kind of man who still looks down on women as the weaker sex. It is this kind of patriarchalism that has been routinely abused by women’s groups (who give a really bad name to feminism) so as to advance their angry anti-men and anti-father campaigns. They need money for those campaigns, and so high profile cases like this quite naturally will be jumped on by them.

Glenn Greenwald on Twitter:

Strange mystery: if extradition to Sweden has nothing to do with US, why does the WashPost want sanctions on Ecuador? is.gd/wU68kO

Link goes to dailykos.com/story/2012/08/21/1122440/-WaPo-s-Tacit-Threat-to-Ecuador-for-Granting-Assange-Asylum

Do not be confused into thinking there are proper “jury trials” in Sweden. People are not selected from your peers to be your jury. Jurors are elected politicians who wish to do their chosen party’s bidding and much of this type of thing is kept secret. What price a fair trial under those circumstances? And the Committee for the Prevention of Torture has made clear that the system in Sweden is unsatisfactory in barring communication of those held. What better a place to have him banged up and bundled off in secret. And yet supposed supporters of freedom think this is a good idea dn that Sweden has a fair justice system. Someone needs to do a tv programme about that, not attacking Craig Murray for telling the truth and highlighting the pompous absurdity of the BBC.

CE,

“So the entire Swedish Justice System is proven as unreliable and untrustworthy, purely for having the cheek to investigate claims of rape against JA?

You’re tying yourself in knots here, merely to defend to the indefensible.

“I have always stood for justice and freedom.” (Except in Sweden)

No CE,nobody’s tying themselves in knots.It’s your points that are generalised around a singular selective axis.Nobody is arguing the whole Swedish system is unreliable at all.It’s simply because of the unusual dimensions of this specific case that there are genuine fears that all is not as it seems in this ONE case.When you look at all the curious aspects there are certainly valid reasons for questioning the efficacy of matters at the Swedish end of this.

What part of this do you not understand?

Wow you guys are blinkered.

1. Assange is more likely to be extradited from the UK than from Sweden. In Sweden the US would need to prove the merits of an extradition warrant through both the UK and Swedish system.

2. Jives to suggest that the Sweden is subject to US pressure is a grose insult to the Swedish justice system.

The incident should be viewed in isolation. Justice is blind and it should be irrelevant whether a person is a hero of the left or the right or has a past as a mass murderer or a member of the beatles. It’s all totally irrelevant.

If your mother or sister made an allegation of rape to a western police service, I think you’d be pretty outraged if a tinpot South American country intervened to pervert the course of justice.

Jives, the Swedish system has repeatedly been criticised by human rights bodies for its failures and for denying rights to those it holds, sometimes indefinitely. If you look at Swedish commentaries and those in the country who know they system, you will see that they are saying that Sweden will simply hold him without trial indefinitely and deny him access to the outside world. Great eh? Or is that what those who defend freedom want? Or do you disagree with the Council of Europe’s repeated attacks on the Swedish “justice system”? Sweden is an ideal country to try and bury an inconvenient person in the system.

lol…
I hope you remembered to delete your blog’s handy guide to revenge against people who screw your girlfriend, Nick.

This one, put up on the 30th Sept, but since deleted (and cache deleted) from both of Ardin’s blogs.

Step 1
Think long and hard about over whether you really need revenge. It is almost always better to forgive than to repay.

Step 2
You should know not only who you want revenge against, but exactly why you want revenge against him. Revenge should not just be taken against a person, it should be taken against an action.

Step 3
The principle of proportionality. Revenge should match the crime not only in magnitude but in type. Good revenge is connected to what was done to you. If you for example want to avenge someone who’s been unfaithful or dumped you, the punishment [sic] should have something to do with dating / sex / fidelity.

Step 4
Brainstorm punishments that fit the category of your required revenge. To continue the example, you could break up your victim’s current relationship, or make sure his new girlfriend cheats on him, or put a damper on his sex life, or set him up with a bad partner.

Step 5
Figure out how you can revenge systematically. Maybe a series of letters and photos leading his new girlfriend to believe you’re still together is better than a big lie once in a while?

Step 6
Rank your schemes low to high in terms of probability of success, effort on your part, and satisfaction if achieved. The ideal scheme should rate highly in all three rankings but a greater effort and more capital can secure output for the other two actually more important parameters.

Step 7
Put your plan into action. And remember to keep your goal as you operate, and make sure your victim suffers in the same way he made you suffer.

JW,

“2. Jives to suggest that the Sweden is subject to US pressure is a grose insult to the Swedish justice system.”

Really JW? They’ve certainly got previous…

http://www.hrw.org/news/2006/11/09/sweden-violated-torture-ban-cia-rendition

Will K,

This statement, “with the usual tedious moral supremacist guff about the crimes of USA” broadcasts to me the limited range and emotional vacuum of your mental sphere.

I have written three times to President Omama suggesting an apology to Iraqis for decimating their lives with butchery, extermination and genocide considering the war was illegal based on lies. To some people, I agree, this catastrophe is a mere afterglow along the vein of time. So be it.

Yet the crimes of the USA remain unsolved murders, cold cases in cardboard boxes deep below the Pentagon. Atonement is in obeyance, lessons are still to be learned. That is why the atrocities continue even today as we read and struggle to comprehend how the US adopts Al-Qaeda’s tactic of secondary attacks for drone strikes, follow-up up physical assaults specifically targeting people coming to the aid of the wounded:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/20/us-drones-strikes-target-rescuers-pakistan

Buy hey! al-Qaeda is America is it not?

This is for CE, addressing most of his comments, from this column in NYT, by Michael Moore and Oliver Stone (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/opinion/wikileaks-and-the-global-future-of-free-speech.html?_r=2)

“All such allegations must be thoroughly investigated before Mr. Assange moves to a country that might put him beyond the reach of the Swedish justice system. But it is the British and Swedish governments that stand in the way of an investigation, not Mr. Assange.

Swedish authorities have traveled to other countries to conduct interrogations when needed, and the WikiLeaks founder has made clear his willingness to be questioned in London. Moreover, the Ecuadorean government made a direct offer to Sweden to allow Mr. Assange to be interviewed within Ecuador’s embassy. In both instances, Sweden refused.

Mr. Assange has also committed to traveling to Sweden immediately if the Swedish government pledges that it will not extradite him to the United States. Swedish officials have shown no interest in exploring this proposal, and Foreign Minister Carl Bildt recently told a legal adviser to Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks unequivocally that Sweden would not make such a pledge.

The British government would also have the right under the relevant treaty to prevent Mr. Assange’s extradition to the United States from Sweden, and has also refused to pledge that it would use this power. Ecuador’s attempts to facilitate that arrangement with both governments were rejected.

Taken together, the British and Swedish governments’ actions suggest to us that their real agenda is to get Mr. Assange to Sweden. Because of treaty and other considerations, he probably could be more easily extradited from there to the United States to face charges.”

Is that clear enough?

Well that didn’t take long.

We might be losing an arguement! IRAQ, IRAQ, IRAQ!

Congratulations a finer example of whatabouttery you are unlikely to find.

*checks preceding posts*
Nope, nothing about Iraq. Quite a lot about CE’s “points”, though. Am I reading the wrong blog?

Sweden cannot and will not pledge to reject an imaginary extradition application.

I imagine JA knows this full well, but it provides another opportunity for empty vacuous grandstanding.

CE: “Sweden: If Assange faces death row in US we won’t extradite him”
http://rt.com/news/sweden-us-assange-extradition-209/

Will K

21 Aug, 2012 – 1:53 pm

Komodo –

An “argument” which applies with absolutely equal force to Assange, of course. But no-one’s attacking him at all, are they? Pardon?

No it doesn’t apply with equal force at all.

A)Assange promoted his own name and was a public figure prior to publishing thousands of classified US documents.

B)He published thousands of stolen and classified US government documents, with no guiding motivation other than disclosure for the sake of it. This is CLEARLY NOT EQUIVALENT to making a claim to being a victim of rape.

You haven’t been listening Will K, NOBODY HAS CLAIMED TO BE A VICTIM OF RAPE, duly ignored by the BBC, Guardian and yourself. Three friends,. one of them the investigating officer, talked and two of them decided that they did not like his personal hygiene and alleged sexual molestation.
Anna Ardin’s behaviour was outright criminal as she distorted her own case by deleting tweets and emails.

Have you, will K, got a record of the telephone conversations between the two women and the prosecutor?

To your point B, you make it sound as if these papers were intrinsically important notes not many were privy to, once again spreading a fallacy, some 2 million had access to the same information, including some very unsavoury characters who were implemented in the Fallujah massacre and more.
To remind you, this was the straw that broke the US torturers back, imho enough reason for Bradley Manning to act as he allegedly has, a moral duty to humanity, a word you obviously attach no value to.

Baiting us here with misinformation and deluded claims that Assange would be safe to go to Sweden, in face of the facts, Rove’s mission, Obama’s personal obsession with ‘being found out’ given the facts and past record of the Swedish Government, is entertaining, but futile.

A very good comparison Craig and the BBC should answer it. But stating their lack of co-hones does not come easy, it is almost impossible, so I will try to answer your why?

Because some within the BBC are inherently RACIST,

and their close relationship with the MI’s makes for poor decision making. I say it again. The BBC should be broken up! they are not fit for purpose, just as this Government, especially the Lib Dems.

I feel that the comments by the anti-Assange/Murray crowd are actually trivialising that extremely nasty offense against a person known as rape.
.
Rape is an extremely frightening, humiliating and traumatising experience which can mark a victim for the rest of their lives. It is in effect being implied that a rape victim might:-
.
A) Afterwards tweet about how ‘cool’ the rapist is.
‘
B) Arrange a party in honour of the rapist.
.
C) Willingly spend another night alone under the same roof as the rapist.
.
A genuine rape victim would surely not even contemplate any of the above actions. In my view the comments previously alluded to are deeply offensive and insulting to people of either sex who have been rape victims, and those responsible for such thoughtless comments should apologise immediately.

When you face extradition, you do not get to negotiate the terms that you will go to the country which has been through the British court system to extradite you.

Furthermore, Assange is in breach of his bail conditions and therefore should be arrested in the UK.

Jives, you’ve quoted HRW, have you read what HRW states about your new hero Ecuador? “Corruption, inefficiency, and political influence have plagued the Ecuadorian judiciary for many years.”

The rub of the nub, just to remind us. Two Reuters Journalist and two children gunned down in cold blood, intentionally.

This is how the US conducts itself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0

You did well Craig.

Gavin Esler looked like he was about to have kittens.

JW,

“Jives, you’ve quoted HRW, have you read what HRW states about your new hero Ecuador? “Corruption, inefficiency, and political influence have plagued the Ecuadorian judiciary for many years.”

Where did i mention Ecuador at all JW? Or that i found the place heroic?

Padraig, thanks for the link that’s what they would say, their profuse explanations do not exclude him being put in jail for life, for speaking the truth, for showing up two faced politicians, generals and warmongering murderers.

Clark, Jives, Galloway, Murray, Assange you are all intellectually and morally bankrupt.

This is not about the US this is about rape.

For anyone to say taht due process should not be followed in a rape case in a western, democratic and free nation is beyond contempt.

In a minute you’ll start arguing that it couldn’t possibly be rape unless there were four male witnesses present.

The inconsistency and hypocracy of the left knows no bounds.

CE, our arguments here are based on factual past behaviour of this allegedly law abiding country, please do let us know what wishful base underlies your assumptions.

Err, Will K… The fact that Assange is a self-publicist doesn’t alter the argument at all. Any possibility of a fair trial has been prejudiced by the publication of his name in the context of the allegations. Just as it has for the complainants. Ardin is and was quite well known in her own circle, and is not shy of promoting herself either.

In any case the genie has been out of the bottle for two years; do we take it that you are in favour of the rest of the world knowing the accusers’ identities while in the UK alone (and notionally in Sweden) it is suppressed? Whatever happened to press freedom?

Who is saying that due process should not be followed? I’m not – with the reservation that it probably can’t be followed with any prospect of justice being done, having been irrevocably prejudiced by subsequent events.
One more time. It is within Hague’s remit to block Assange’s re-export from Sweden. It is within Ny’s remit to question Assange outside Sweden. Neither option has been adopted. If due process were a priority, at least one of them should have been.

Well done Craig- this ‘compare & contrast’ post re Ardin/Diallo has certainly rattled a few cages.

Never seen ‘WillK’ ‘JW’ or ‘CE’ here before, having a pop.

As for ‘empty vacuous grandstanding’ well the cap certainly fits re the ‘twitterstorm’ induced in the last 16 hours by Craig’s appearance on Newsnight.

Is there anything more satisfying to behold than the collective hyperventilating of the Decent Left/NeoCon alliance ?

JW,

“Clark, Jives, Galloway, Murray, Assange you are all intellectually and morally bankrupt.

This is not about the US this is about rape.”

Well those are rather childishly generalised claims aren’t they JW?But they do have a idiosyncratic shrill tenor that’s strangely familiar to me and probably others on this board.

No matter though.

The sense remains,JW,you are unable to see the deeply connected nuances and complexities of this case and are employing blinkers to,i sense,avoid engaging in the broader issues at stake here.

Oliver Kamm is a complete scum and a vicious one to boot. I have personal experience of his nastiness. He is your classic pro-Israeli hack/arm-chair warrior. God how I wish I could get that man (plus all his neo-can pals) into uniform and send him to the front-line in Afghanistan to taste some of his own cooking. It’s to the eternal disgrace of that once proud newspaper The Times that this twerp has any input into its editorials.

Please Craig, don’t give that smug little loser any publicity. Let him rot in his dank, putrid coffin.

JW is politically illiterate. He cannot understand the difference between liberal (in the classical sense of the word) and left which is just a stupid label. As you say, this blog is a meeting point of many political tendencies. The one thing we can safely say is that we are all anti-neo-cons. And proud of it!!!!

there’s no debating this with you. you see conspiracy everywhere.

Just to be clear.

Oswald shot JFK.
Diana died in a car accident as a result of a drunk driver.
9/11 was caused by Al Quaeda
and Sweden has a fair a due process of law and Assange should go and face the music.

Right i’m off.

That’ll be the day shift over then…

WHY IS SWEDEN REALLY AFTER JULIAN ASSANGE?
WHAT SWEDISH – U.S. TIES ARE REALLY AT WORK?

Follow the money to a connection worth billions of dollars, or Swedish Kronors.

Sweden’s Big Trade Deal For Assange. Who profits most?

Cui bono? What has been lacking in reports of the Karl Rove – Prime Minister Reinfeldt connections is how either would benefit.

It is highly unlikely Karl Rove—no friend of the Clintons nor the Democratic Party—would spare Hillary Clinton embarrassment over the WikiLeaks exposure of U.S. Embassy cables.
Is he then still covering and enabling his own Republican party’s involvement in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? Is Karl Rove trying to take down Julian Assange and WikiLeaks out of pure loyalty to the war machine? He doesn’t have the political power. Rove is known as an architect of dirty schemes.

In mid-December of 2010, Investor initiated the purchase of an extremely large portion of the U.S. NASDAQ OMX (stock exchange). Investor’s purchase of millions of NASDAQ shares would give the Wallenbergs/Investor a seat on the board IF U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder approves it.

January 11, 2011 the publisher and editor of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, appears again in the London, U.K. court regarding the warrant filed by the Swedish government over allegations of sexual misconduct. Will the U.K. Court order extradition of Julian Assange to Sweden? The next court date regarding extradition to Sweden is scheduled for February 7, 2011.

Is it just a coincidence, that the DOJ deadline for the ABB review of Anti -Trust matters got extended on January 11, 2011 for the third time?
The new date in February to once again coincide with Assanges court date over extradition to Sweden, is very suspicious.
http://www.abb.com/cawp/seitp202/cf41de865d4968d9c125781500

BINGO! “Badda bing, badda boom”
On February 17, 2011, Börje Ekholm was elected to The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. Board of Directors. Mr. Ekholm is currently President and Chief Executive Office of Investor AB (Wallenbergs), the Nordic-based industrial holding company, where he has held a variety of management positions since joining the firm in 1992.
http://ir.nasdaqomx.com/nasdaq-omx-group.cfm

Attorney General Eric Holder worked for Lehman Brothers and understands the importance, financially and psychologically, of a return on an investment.

Obama, Hillary and Holder get Julian Assange.

Jacob Wallenberg/Investor AB get a massive NASDAQ OMX purchase approved and a seat on the board of NASDAQ, along with the merger of ABB and Baldor.

FYI:
“Esse non Videri” or “To be, and be not seen” is the motto of Sweden’s politically powerful Wallenberg family.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallenberg_family

http://open.salon.com/blog/anonymous_operation_want/2011/01/13/swedens_big_trade_deal_for_assange_who_profits_most

JW wrote:

“This is not about the US this is about rape.”

It is not about rape, because a rape did not happen. It is about the evil feminist slander of an innocent human being.

It is the proof positive that Marxist-Feminists have divorced themselves from the human race. Or should we believe every slander the Nazi’s made about the Untermensch, to be true until proven otherwise?

Dear CE,

on the odd chance that you are *not* a paid member of our most “honourable” MSM, I would suggest you watch the documentary on Assange by the ABC, whose link can be found on this site. To start informing yourself about this issue, so you can stop embarrassed yourself with your ignorance of the case

“Clark, Jives, Galloway, Murray, Assange you are all intellectually and morally bankrupt” – Murray can you hear me? Craig Murray, I have a message for you in the middle of the election campaign. I have a message for you: We have knocked Assange into a trumped up Swedish charge. Craig Murray, as they say in your language in the boxing bars around Madison Square Garden in New York: Your boys took a hell of a beating! Your boys took a hell of a beating!”

At least that what I heard…..

Was there not a JW character in The Dukes Of Hazzard,an old salt intent on taking the county over?

Sorry i digress…

OT sorry, the champagne marxist’s and PFI privatiser’s are meeting again, still they are alluding that Burston has got something to do with the Labour Party of today.

Bob Crow and BBC lackey, the next GE prospective Labour candidate for Norwich South, Clive Lewis will be join by Mark Serwotka blah blah blah.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/education/south_norfolk_village_gears_up_for_annual_strike_school_rally_1_1489416

So many comments I am not sure if this article by Moore and Stone and carried by STWC has been posted here.

http://stopwar.org.uk/index.php/usa-war-on-terror/1794-how-to-resolve-the-julian-assange-issue-by-michael-moore-and-oliver-stone

Thanks to Jon and others for defending my right to debate and encouraging reasoned argument over mindless insults.

I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the cordiality I’ve been shown by most posters. Thank you.

A working link to “Sex, Lies and Julian Assange” direct from ABC (Australia).

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.htm

When Julian Assange arrived in Sweden in August 2010 he was greeted like a conquering hero. But within weeks there was a warrant out for his arrest and he was being investigated for rape and sexual molestation. Today he is taking sanctuary in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, arguing he won’t receive justice if he’s taken to Sweden and that US authorities are building a case for his extradition.

Next, Four Corners reporter Andrew Fowler examines in detail what happened in those crucial weeks while Julian Assange was in Sweden. What was the nature of his relationship with the two women who claim he assaulted them? And what did they tell police that led the authorities to seek his arrest?

“I will not tell any media how I am going to represent the women in court.” Lawyer for Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén

Both Assange and his supporters believe the attempt by authorities to force his return to Sweden is simply the first step in a plan to see him extradited to the United States.

“Sweden has frankly always been the United States’ lapdog and it’s not a matter we’re particularly proud of.” Assange supporter

“The US has nothing to do with the issue here, it’s simply a matter between the UK and Sweden.” Jeffrey L. Bleich, US Ambassador to Australia

Four Corners looks at claims the United States is working hard to unearth evidence that would lead to a charge of “conspiracy to commit espionage” being made against Assange – which in turn would be used in his extradition from Sweden. The program also documents the harassment experienced by Assange’s supporters across the globe – including his Australian lawyer – and the FBI’s attempts to convince some to give evidence against him.

“Sex, Lies and Julian Assange”, reported by Andrew Fowler and presented by Kerry O’Brien, goes to air on Monday 23rd July at 8.30pm on ABC1.

====

Start at 20 min in if short of time.

JA is wanted for arrest, not questioning. This cannot be done in London.

The amount of people lining up to insult Sweden and question the impartiality of the Swedish Justice system is both astounding and deeply concerning. This is a country which prides itself on it’s neutrality.

I wouldn’t care if wikileaks had revealed the entire US senate to be alien lizards wearing Mission Impossible style masks, I’d still want him to face justice and due process followed over the alleged sexual assault of two innocent women.

So many useful idiots blew smoke up JA’s nether region he probably started to believe his own hype. Now his own, and wikileaks, reputation is shattered.

Jon:

I have spent the better part of 2 days being insulted on other threads for pointing out inconsistencies in the rape accusations and drawing attention to the grand jury sitting to consider charges against JA. I don’t think it’s unfair to call someone politically illiterate if they equate support JA with being on the left but I will try to be less “abrasive”.

Incidentally, Charles Crawford has not replied to my postings.

@CE:

What is your reaction to the Australian documentary?

Does JA not have reasonable grounds for believing he is being set up?

‘Thanks to Jon and others for defending my right to debate and encouraging reasoned argument over mindless insults.’

It would help us all to stick to ‘reasoned argument’, CE, if within a couple of hours of first posting here you didn’t accuse the blog host, and some of the regular commenters, of ‘vacuous grandstanding’.

I’m all for civility- where civility is due.

@CE:

“This is a country which prides itself on it’s neutrality.”

This is pure emotional hogwash. Americans would also say the same about it’s justice system, media etc.

@CE

“Thanks to Jon and others for defending my right to debate and encouraging reasoned argument over mindless insults.”

“So many useful idiots blew smoke up JA’s nether region he probably started to believe his own hype. Now his own, and wikileaks, reputation is shattered.”

Do you understand the meaning of “mindless insult”?

The only person I accused of vacuous granstanding was JA. In fact this seems to be his raison d’etre.

Posting on phone, I’m always open to counter arguments so will watch the ABC docu later.

Compared with, say, Paxman & Maitlis, Esler is inherently shallow—as was evidenced almost daily when Newsnight’s website used to run presenter blogs. Allow for his ignorance. Treat him with added caution.
.
Was immediately apparent that neither he nor Joan Smith were even aware of ABC’s coverage of the story, though the most detailed to date & readily accessible for weeks.
.
ABC is not exactly some obscure fly-by-night channel down-under. The corporation is Australia’s counterpart of the BBC. 4Corners is sometimes described as its version of Panorama: it’s been going more than 50 years & as one might therefore expect, has won many awards.
.
Smith & Esler’s ignorance of the background to such a major running story is professional incompetence inexcusable in a cub reporter—they hadn’t even ‘read the cuttings.’

O/T Please sign this 38 Degrees Petition requesting the highest scrutiny of St Theresa’s draft snooping bill.

‘We’ve got just 48 hours to send thousands of messages to the committee of MPs with the power to derail the government’s snooping plan. This is our big chance to influence the Committee’s report. The report could support the plans – or could say there are major problems, making it hard for the government to push ahead.

Right now, there’s a risk that the report will focus mainly on the technical details. But to derail the government’s plans, we need the report to do more than this. It needs to focus instead on the major threats to our freedoms and right to privacy.

The Committee will want to do a thorough job examining the plans. If tens of thousands of us send them emails about why we value our right to privacy, we can make sure the report asks the big questions – and that could be enough to kill the snooping plan.

Can you send a quick email to the Committee?
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/protect-privacy-email

So far, 38 Degrees members have done an amazing job of standing up against the government’s snooping plans. Nearly 200,000 of us have signed the petition, and 70 MPs all round the country have had a copy of it hand-delivered by local 38 Degrees members.

~~~~~

This is the membership of the Joint Committee.

Rt Hon Nicholas Brown Labour
Michael Ellis Conservative
Dr Julian Huppert Liberal Democrat
Stephen Mosley Conservative
Craig Whittaker Conservative
David Wright Labour
Lord Armstrong of Ilminster Crossbench
Lord Blencathra (Chair)Conservative
Baroness Cohen of Pimlico Labour
Lord Faulks Conservative
Lord Jones Labour
Lord Strasburger Liberal Democrat

{http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/draft-communications-bill/membership/}

Posting on phone, I’m always open to counter arguments so will watch the ABC docu later.

Maybe you should also have commented later, once the facts have sunken in, ce, would you not agree?

See what the pathetic Guido Fawkes and Mike Wallace have come up with:

http://order-order.com/2012/08/21/6500-reward-to-set-off-ecuador-embassy-fire-alarm/

I wouldn’t put it past our govt…….

@Nevermind:

“Maybe you should also have commented later, once the facts have sunken in, ce, would you not agree?”

Yeah that’s what I thought too. Kind of an admission of defeat.

PM Radio 4 now about to discuss issue

[Mod: link added]

Craig – to answer your question, no great conspiracy in my view.
Esler, slave to political correctness and second-guessing his BBC bosses, reacted on the hoof, egged on by an over-excited Joan Smith. He hadn’t thought it through, and feared it was his Matthew Wright/John Leslie moment. This was a live debate after all. I’m not sure this is so much a case of BBC policy as their usual double standards and Esler busking it. They are UK-centric at the BBC… the DSK case was a long way from home, the protagonists sufficiently distanced and the alleged victim’s name already all over the telly… they just followed the lead of the American networks. Really, the people employed in BBC news are not half so bright nor cunning as they used to be. I don’t think this would’ve happened on Paxman’s watch.

Ok, I’ve watched the ABC docu and it does nothing change my view. The talking heads defending JA seem to be his colleagues and legal teams in various countries. I still see no reason why it is better to hide from the law in an Ecuadorian embassy rather than face Swedish justice. To argue both these women and the Swedish Justice system are agents of US imperialism is risible.

Forget the personalities, and both wikileaks and the US’s dangerous behaviour. An alleged common criminal is abusing the political asylum system to evade the ends of justice. The fact he is hiding behind a country with it’s own somewhat dodgy human rights record merely clarifies the mans rank hypocrisy.

With regards to extradition, why would the US make a martyr of JA when he’s doing a superb job of destroying his own reputation?

Assange’s anonymous supporters hit back hard at the UK’s version of the modern state: http://bit.ly/OVobMX

Firstly, thanks to who ever changed the code to stop removing newlines. tedious havng to add dots.

I’m not going to Mince words. Gavin Elser is a cunt of the highest order. Having watched the interview on Newsnight I duly noted that Esler’s final repetition of his outburst was “please do not name a rape victim on television” deliberately IMO omitting the crucial ‘potential’.

Anyone who watches the BBC, especially the repulsive Mark Thompson’s refusal to broadcast only two DEC humanitarian appeals, both of which were for aid for the victims of Zionist Massacres in Lebanon and Gaza, or especially the way the odious Andrew Marr, on News at 10 09-04-2003 lied through his teeth claiming that Iraq was taken without a bloodbath and the Iraqis were celebrating [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_JC371jxPI ],will know that the BBC is a slave to the Rothschild-Masonic-Zionism and it’s warmongering neoconservative Leo Straussian supporters.

I also distinctly recollect that a few months ago another cunt of the highest order, plum throated twat Tim Wilcox demanded that an interviewee on his program didn’t refer to the fictional assassination of the already dead Osama Bin Laden as an ‘Assassination’ on the grounds of BBC impartiality.

Esler, Willcox, that other nauseous Elite mouthpiece Frank Gardner, and others simply wouldn’t hold on to their careers if they weren’t willing to comply with the unwritten rules. Propaganda mercenaries the lot of them!!

The excellent Noam Chomsky demolishes Andrew Marr into the snivelling snotrag he really is in this interview and tells him why he is compliant… 3 parts posted here on my forum … http://www.smeggys.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=21662

Assange is being set up hook lien and sinker

Clark:

Just to clarify, CE barrelled in calling us JA’s “useful idiots” when it turns out that he has not studied the allegations against Assange as contained in the ABC documentary. That is a stark admission of defeat in his debating tactics.

But I totally agree, understanding the other’s side point of view is never defeat.

@CE:

It is curious that in your reply above, you don’t answer any of the specific challenges to the prosecution’s case raised in the documentary.

Why is that?

@CE:

Vituperation is not argument.

How do you account for Anna Ardin’s (oops, am I allowed to mention her name?) contradictory behaviour after the alleged rape?

How do you account for the police dropping the case?

How do you account for the grand jury in the US?

Damn it, CE, if this blog is going to be about debate, then let’s get down to the nitty-gritty and debate!

That’s probably where we differ Clark.

I believe that there is no real threat of JA facing extradition from Sweden.

Despite my distaste for his dangerous actions, I do not believe he should be extradited or that the US should have any involvement in this matter. These two women deserve to have their complaints fully investigated(and not by internet detectives or Gorgeous George), that’s the bottom line for me.

Assange did not just, fully cooperate, he stayed, voluntarily for 5 weeks. He had permission to leave Sweden.

@CE:

“I believe that there is no real threat of JA facing extradition from Sweden.”

Actually, it’s not what you believe in this case. The question is whether it is at all reasonable for Julian Assange to believe that he is being set-up. The ABC documentary provides a very clear answer.

I’m not privy to the Swedish prosecutions arguments or evidence unfortunately.

I believe this should be settled in a Swedish court of law, not by media character assassinations of the two women in question.

It’s not up to the accused to decide if they’re being set up.

@CE

“media character assassinations of the two women in question.”

Evidence. I want you to point to specific examples of this in the documentary.

@CE:

“It’s not up to the accused to decide if they’re being set up.”

It absolutely is when everything is pointing in that direction!

“It absolutely is when everything is pointing in that direction”

I’m glad you don’t work for the Judiciary.

These women have set themselves up, ce, by contacting a friendly police contact who duly ‘persuaded’ these two to make it a judicial case.
why would Ms Wilen refuse to sign the statement, if it was true, why did she leave in tears?
was it because she did not get the police to calm down?

was it because she wanted to have nothing more to do with this impromptu set up?

Is it a proper conduct to take a statement from close friends? should she not removed herself and let somebody else investigate this alleged incident?

All day you have argued without knowing the facts, by your own admission, do you think that makes you a credible person to debate with?

CE, Surely, under presumed innocence, Assange could in your terms only be described as a “suspected common criminal” and not a “common criminal” as you assert.

I find myself wondering what your reaction would be if Assange were to be cleared of these accusations. It is difficult to imagine that such a decision would satisfy you, or that it would result in a retraction, or apology. Would you ardently be calling for justice and for indictment of the women?

CE is concern trolling and has no real argument, just outrage. You keep asking it for supporting docs, and it moves on to the talking point.

Send it to someone who cares, like Fawkes.

Agreed Clark, The Swedish Police have not been watertight and behaved without absolute probity. Does that mean I think JA should hide out in an Ecuadorian Embassy to avoid answering charges? No.

People with agendas on both sides will undoubtedly attempt to fill the media vacuum with their own slant or take on the affair. That’s why I would like to see the facts laid out in a court of law.

Thanks Clark but it’s to be expected. CE is simply avoiding a real debate.

I was outside the Ecuadorean embassy on Hans Crescent today and saw a woman who may have been Margaret Hodge, but I’m not certain. Has anyone heard that she’s doing a bit of negotiating?

I find it impossibly hard to believe that George Galloway really thought he was helping people to focus on the real issue (“WIKILEAKS, stupid”, in his words) when he made a video to publicise his opinion that if all the sexual allegations against Julian Assange were true, then he’d only be guilty of bad manners rather than anything criminal.

I am not referring to his macho and sexist misunderstanding of the notion of consent, which I imagine is shared by many rapists. (Actually one of the accusations in my opinion wouldn’t even amount to bad manners, but one of them could easily constitute rape, on any sensible definition of the term.)

I mean his idea that he’s seriously wants people to focus on the state persecution of Wikileaks. How can he be so naive? As a seasoned politician – so experienced, for example, in meeting foreign leaders in times of international heaviness and reporting back to London – how can he really think he’s helping?

Anna Ardin is CIA. This is proved at the 99% level.

@Clark – Ardin herself used to work for Expressen, as an intern.

Smeggypants, when Andrew Marr took over the desk of Neal Ascherson on the Observer the quality of journalism sank from superb to mediocre.

O/T Can somebody please translate this. It is, I think, in Uzbek and appears to be about Gulnara Karimova, so might be interesting.

Sokh Anklav Гулнора опа сиз яна “Кипригимни бўяб, лабларимга бироз ялтир-юлтир қўйишга бир хотин сифатида ҳақим борми?” депсиз…
жуда хакингиз борда ким сизни буяшларингизга гап килди???хохлаганча буямайсизми?аммо далада ишлаётган минглаб миллионлаб узбек опажонларимиздан олиб гапирсак ундай макияж дунёда йук десангиз хам булади,сиз куйинг анави “COCO CHANEL-mademoiselle”ларни, сиз бир даладаги аёлларимизни олдига бориб макияжларига назар солинг…
Эсимда бор бир марта далага бориб,кушни аёл кизларимиз билан далани кок уртасида сухбат килиб колгандим,сухбат килиб утирган пайтимда елкамни кулим тегмайдигон жойини пашша тишлаб колди,роса кашлагим келиб тут дарахтига югираман десам,кушнимиз Эгам акани кизи тохтаб туринг мен кашлаб куйяман деб,бир кашлаб куйдилар,шилиб олгандай булди, эъ опа бул…ди буууулди Гулнора опа деб зурга тухтатдим,кейин нима билан кашладингиз деб сурасам, “эй мана ука кулимни курмаяпсизми? “деб кулларини курсатдилар,ёрилиб ёрилиб шувокдай каттик булиб колган, аммо худди Узбекистон чегараларига сим тортган симларингиздай куллари каттик шувокдай булган, мана сизга узбекона буяшлар…” l’oreal professionnel” savon créme билан роса 3 йил ювсалар кейин у куллари силлик булиб колиши мумкин,чунки далада умрбод тупрок ушаб пахта улгур деб жон куйдириб юрган миллат мехнаткаш опа сингилларимиз хам кам эмас..,уша опалар хам буйягиси келади ба умед дунёга келганку ахир…ёки улар учинчи сорт одам деб хиосбланганмисиз? Уларни буяишини ким уйлайди? Нима учун Европа далаларида бир дона аёл кишини курмайсиз? шохи борми Европа аёлларида? бизни аёларимиз качонгача далада кулларини ёрилтириб юрадилар? качонгача майда чуйда гаплар билан бир бирмизни камситиб юрамиз? Нима учун кишлок хужаликни замонавий техникалардан ишлашни жойига, бечора аёлларимиз етакни белга байлаб тинмайдилар? Майли айтайлик СССРда Москва мажбурлаб ота онамизни пахта ерларидан чикмайдигон килган десак,нимага халигача уша ахвол?халигача нимага кишлок хужалик ишлари аксарият узбек аёллидан ажрамаган??
Европага келгансиз макага кузиз тушган булса махсус апаратлар сув сепиб туради, унака кетмонни олиб сув хайдаб келай деган европалик аёлни умризда курмайсиз хам,бизда эса кечалари ухламасдан кетмонни елкага куйиб сув хайдаб юрадигон аёлларимиз ачиб ётибти…Нимага хана хунна нарсаларга кизикасизу хакикиы узбекона хаётимизни узгартиришга кизикмайсиз? сиз лакиённый музани кийволиб дала сахроларга сафар килиб озгина улар билан сухбатлар утказиб ута даражада керакли уларга кишлок хужаликка доир нарсалар билан таъминлашга жуда хма курбингиз етади ва сизни фойдангиз хам жуда яхшику ахир..

Фармацевтика ва Медицинани ривожлантиринг!!! Агар эътибор берган булсангиз аптекачиларимиз бозоркумга ухшаб колган,находки дори дармонларни хам олиб сотарлик килиб куйган булсангиз? устига пул куйиб “российскийда ака” бу дори деб сотишади махтаб???? Кайси давлатда фармацевт ишчиси махтаб дорини сотганини кургансиз? Фармацевт махтаб эмас рекомендация ва кандай истеъмол килиш кераклигини айтмасдан Россиядан келган дорисини махтаб сотмокда бунга нима деб жавоб берасиз???

Духтирхоналар эса бундан баттар,эхе хатто дехкончиликимиз девзира гуручгача главный врачга олиб бориб кейин апендицитни олиб ташаймиз… шу нарсаларга Всеобщая Медицинская Страховка чип карталарни ташкилаб хар бир фукарони кулига “carte VITAL” ни яхши биласиз шунака килиб беришга курбингиз етадику ахир!!!

Сиз бундай керакли нарсаларга эътибор бермасдан кераксиз нарсаларга вактингизни кетганингиздан ачинаман холос…Агар шундай хаётга зарур нарсаларни килганизда балким сизга бутун узбек халки кушиб ашула айтиб мазза килиб юрган булардик,хали хам кеч эмас,тахтдан кетмагансиз шу мен айтган камчиликларни чукур уйлаб курсангиз булади деган максадда ёзияпман холос,майли ишларизга омад клей ккотиб колди кафелимни боса колай…
Яхши кунларда куришайлик танкидимни тугри кабул киласиз деб умиддаман,Илойим аёлларимизни куллари ёрилмасин,силлик булсин дойим.. орзу умидларига етиб тинмай макияжчилар булсинлар,пахта далаларда эса тинмай махсус апаратлар ишласин! аптекаларда бозоркумга ухшаган аптекачи эмас,хакикий фармацевт специалистлар ишласин,духтриларимиз девзирани ойликларига сотиб олсинлар ва хоказо … Омин Аблоху Акбар!!!Йигитпирим кулласин Ва Баракатух суф!! суф !!

“Why the contradiction?”

One is white, one is black. Is it possible that they are being treated differently for that reason? There are other examples of what you might term indirect racism in the MSM. Eg Sometimes I read MSM stories about crimes and the person who was caught, and the colour of skin is mentioned if it is black, but not white.

“CE is concern trolling and has no real argument, just outrage. You keep asking it for supporting docs, and it moves on to the talking point.”

Ben, this is exactly what I am talking about. It’s all about getting on high-horses and ignoring all the counter-arguments.

I am not even saying that Assange is innocent. I just want people to look at the circumstances of the case and try to put themselves in Assange’s shoes. Why is this so difficult?

I see that my comment was placed in moderation for the first time. I trust I am not considered some sort of threat to the debate.

Clark/Jon:

Thanks guys! Actually, I’d rather be considered a danger than spam -)

Just watched Newsnight on Iplayer – with AA’s name blanked out. Craig should not be upset about his performance. Under the circumstances he did extremely well, and asking viewers to do their own online research, was extremely sensible as was giving a list of whistleblowers (including himself) who have been immediately smeared with sexual and other allegations following their revelations. I had no problem hearing what Craig was saying despite the bluster and overtalking.

Well done,

Tony

“I am not even saying that Assange is innocent.”
It is pretty clear to me he is innocent of criminal charges. Guilty maybe, of having casual sex with some unsuited admirers, oh what a fiend.

It’s very disappointing that the British press can’t produce something like the Four Corners doc.

On a related topic; “The Riots, In Their Own Words”, was another example of the BBC’s selective memory. No mention of Birmingham or the balls-up of the trial of those accused of the murder of 3 young men. This is another example of shoddy policing adding to well-established tensions. At least the Brum Mail has a vote:

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/birmingham-news/2012/08/20/birmingham-riots-thousands-back-calls-for-murder-retrial-97319-31656629/

Assange is guilty of ‘tickling the tail of the Dragon’, Ecuador. It’s the Cardinal sin for the governed who fail to swallow the flounder, whole.

Sexual misconduct is the fav manner for the Ruling Class to maintain their Order. If I blame Assange for anything, it’s Human Weakness.

Hey, I feel quite important. Either I’ve worried some powers that be, or something I don’t know about is preventing it, but when I search Google for my blog link to today’s post I cannot find it.

http://johngossip.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/breaking-news.html

I would appreciate it if others would try please.

“It is pretty clear to me he is innocent of criminal charges. Guilty maybe, of having casual sex with some unsuited admirers, oh what a fiend.”

Not according to the two victims, you remember them, two innocent women(presuming they’re not CIA agents)? Two women, who according to them, instructed him to use a condom, which he ignored. What a guy.

http://rixstep.com/1/20110204,04.shtml

N_ Do you mean this Margaret Hodge nee Oppenheimer?

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5434-sue-akers-arresting-phone-hackers-but-she-never-arrested-child-abusers-in-islington-in-the-1990s

Also on Wikipedia Child Abuse Controversy {http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Hodge}

CE, honestly, Read your link – http://rixstep.com/1/20110204,04.shtml

”
STOCKHOLM/LONDON (Rixstep) — Sofia Wilén and Anna Ardin arrived at the Klara police station in downtown Stockholm on Friday afternoon 20 August 2010. There are varying stories even from the girls themselves about what they were up to.

Thanks to a breach of office by prosecutor Maria Häljebo Kjellstrand, the bizarre story was a world sensation only a few hours later.

The chief claimant broke down when she heard her former lover was arrested in absentia and hunted on the streets of Stockholm. It’s not known if she ever completed her interrogation, had it read back, or approved it.

Chief prosecutor Eva Finné dismissed all allegations but one (and rescinded the arrest warrant) eight minutes short of twenty four hours later. The final allegation was to disappear sometime the following week. …
“

@CE:

I have read your link and the testimony of close friends of the 2 girls. What emerges is a confused picture. I don’t believe what happened is rape but I accept the girls may have been initially reluctant to complain about JA for the “greater good” of a cause that they admired.

But this still does not answer the questions about the grand jury, the Statfor emails, or Craig’s information from his contact within the FCO? Why are the American so interested in seeing Assange go to Sweden?

@Mary – yes, that’s the one. She is only the person I saw by the embassy today if she has changed her hairstyle back towards how it used to be, though!

Craig’s appearance on Newsnight was a put-up job from the start. The debate was carefully framed so that Craig immediately had to distance himself from Galloway’s (rather unhinged) diatribe, which was shown at the end of the report and then immediately returned to at the start of the debate. By putting Galloway’s version to Craig as if that represented his altogether more reasoned views, based, as they have been, on legal perspectives and a more detailed analysis of the allegations than has been attempted by almost any member of the establishment media (or George Galloway), he was immediately cast as a defender of rape.

The report itself was full of carefully crafted propaganda, focusing in on Che T-shirts outside the Embassy and spurious claims about Assange having “allied” himself with the Ecuadorian government and its human rights record. It’s subtle with the BBC, finely honed from decades of experience and warrants special attention. The substantial air-time given to Padre Reidy was to give ample opportunity for him to paint Assange as an ego-maniac. That he may be, but again it is playing the man and not the ball. The inclusion of Joan Smith was clearly designed to wrong-foot Craig by introducing a division of leftist opinion. Joan Smith was there to continually hammer home the idea that left-wingers have betrayed a left-wing cause and she returned to it time and again (“But my problem with this is how insulting it is that all these men – and it is mainly men – on the left are queuing up to cast aspersions on these women who are making very serious allegations of sexual wrong-doing”). I should think Craig was prepared to be put up against a genuine opponent of Wikileaks and not an establishment leftist shill there to re-route the debate down classic identity politics lines so favoured by the establishment left.

Craig was quickly shut up after he attempted to list examples of charges of a non-whistleblowing nature being brought against whistle-blowers shortly after the act of whistle-blowing, including those made against himself, at which point Esler had to shout him down with the usual “that’s a very clear point”. Then came the moment that Craig “named the victim” and the righteous indignation poured forth. This gave Esler and Smith the opportunity to present Craig as beyond the pale (“You see how little respect this man has for women who’ve made serious allegations?”). Esler then treated Craig like an errant schoolboy, waving his script at him, but anyone with half a shred of integrity can see that Craig is an honourable, decent, principled fellow who drew the worst out of the BBC that night. Esler asked Craig to “make a point” and he duly did, making the point that the woman had attended a party with Assange the day after the alleged rape, having turned down somebody else, and Esler immediately retorted: “I’m sure that’s all very interesting…”. An absolute disgrace from start to finish. Well done, Craig. I’m sure most people can see it for what it was.

And well observed Giles.

Excellent summary Giles.

Thank-you Giles for your clear insight. I have to admit crucifying myself that evening (and night) for failing to preempt the inevitable ruse.

@Giles – I didn’t watch the prog, so many thanks for this summary.

@Craig – arghh! I was going to respond to your statement that “Yet (the BBC) have a policy that Anna Ardin, the accuser of Julian Assange, must not be named – or investigated; by saying “either that, or they wanted to stitch you up”. If they had such a policy for honest reasons, they could have told you beforehand.

But that was before I learnt that they actually put George Galloway on the same programme, and tried to put it to you that you were saying the same as him!

What on earth did Galloway think he was doing? Surely he can’t be so thick? He looks very much like a man with a “false bottom” (двойное дно) as they say in Russia.

Some people posting here are demonstrating incredible naivete.

It seems they have not heard the expressions “justice is blind” and “the law is an ass.

Throw political agendas into the mix, and there is absolutely no possibility that Assange would get a fair trial in Sweden.

Only someone who knows nothing about law would have faith in the law.

That is the reason that he should fear having to go there. He would be tried, condemned as a rapist, Wikileaks and several other human rights ventures would be shut down because of their association with a rapist, and the powerful countries would go on waging wars and exploiting little guys like Equador.

I’m not going to be popular with this post here, but still, I do like to counter what tends to go as orthodoxy here.

1) I supported and support the disclosures made by Assange and Wikileaks. I absolutely agree they were in the public interest. I was disappointed when he suddenly decided to release the entire files without the intended anonymizations, but over all I think his actions were correct.

2) That does not make him an infallible saint. As much as we like Assange for what he did with WL, let’s please keep that apart from what he might do in his spare time. Someone can be a hero to wider society while being a misogynist “at home”. Someone can even be a hero and a petty or not so petty criminal. People are not just “good or bad”.

3) I don’t know whether he has committed rape or not. He should be presumed innocent until found guilty but he should NOT be deemed “innocent per se” and thus exempt from trial in a rule of law-abiding country.

4) Rape or sexual molestation is one of the most difficult crimes for people to bring to attention. Read some accounts from rape victims, read some studies which were made about this: Most people who were raped, especially if by someone they knew or thought to know well, don’t just wake up the next morning, walk straight to the police, tell everything and the whole truth. That’s not how the psychology of genuine rape victims works and the sooner we accept this the better.
From my limited experience in research on sexual violence, nothing of what I’ve read so far makes me believe these women could not be genuine rape victims. If you discover that someone whom you’ve met, whom you’ve liked even, whom you even had consensual sex with, in the end turns out to be someone who molests you or who forces you to unprotected sex, that will be a very disturbing discovery. You may think that it’s “your own fault” or something like that, you will in any case not walk straight to the police. The fact that they only went there together, and perhaps even needed encouragement from police to make a charge, is completely normal in rape cases.

5) If you hear hoofbeat, think of horses, not of zebras. What is more likely:
a) Julian Assange, whom most of us here (except Craig) don’t know (well) in person may be a misogynist guy and even a sexual predator.
b) The CIA set up a trap in a Scandinavian country, using someone whom the media and some Assange supporters keep describing as a ‘left-wing feminist’. Now, think about this for a moment: how many ‘left-wing feminists’ you know are ardent CIA fans? If you were a left-wing feminist and the CIA would approach you, would you say “Oh yeah, I’ll fake a rape incident, do incredible damage to the cause of all genuine rape victims, get a man into prison innocently, and all this just to further the cause of the neo-imperialist USA”? REALLY? For me, this story has very little credibility indeed.
My conclusion: JA should be treated just like everyone else against whom accusations of a crime are made: he should receive a fair trial in Sweden, his human rights should be guaranteed etc. But it doesn’t mean that he gets to choose how he is interrogated (Have you ever tried telling the British police / CPS “Oh yeah, you can talk to me on the phone for one hour, and then I’ll just hang up and that’ll be it, chaps…”?) and he doesn’t get special privileges for being a “hero”. The one and the other have, de iure and de facto, nothing to do with each other.

This got longer than it should so I’ll stop here. Just some food for thought.

Two women, who according to them, instructed him to use a condom, which he ignored. What a guy.

Yeah the fucking dildo did not operate as per the dial setting.

These are the kind of women who are at the roots of convenience homosexuality, any self respecting man would rather make love to himself, and or his own gender to get away from the harridans of this sort.

Instructed! fucking instructed! It says it all, it is a fucking power trip for these women and not a shag mate.

Sweden indeed is the Wallenbergs private playing field, with these kinds of rape laws every man in Sweden is a criminal awaiting his turn in jail.

Michael:

Forget the popularity. As fas as I am concerned, you are raising important issues,

My question is simple: In your opinion, is it possible that Assange is guilty of “legal” rape and being set up for extradition to the United States?

Well said Michael.

Disgusting post from Fedup, is that sort of stuff allowed on here?

Every woman has a right to protect herself from disease and infection.

OFF TOPIC sorry..

The report here is not from my own source yet confirms my post I reported here some months ago now. Thank-you.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/08/21/257444/terrorist/#.UDP5gKFlSiF

Fedup: sorry, but you make me sad to be a man. Have a guess why the woman get the final say on contraception? here’s a hint: men walk away after sex and they can’t get pregnant. Women can. the risks involved for them are very different and if a man can’t accept that, he shouldn’t be having sex. I’m not even going to get started on the rest of your diatribe.

VivaEcuador: honestly, I don’t know. In theory, the US can send an extradition request to any government in the world wherever Assange happens to be. Is Sweden more likely to comply than Ecuador? Certainly. More likely than the UK? Doubtful. Is the Swedish justice system great – and here I talk specifically about the judicial review of an extradition decision, NOT the rape trial? Of course not. Is it worse than the British and other Western European systems would be in this context? No. If the government decides to extradite Assange for this political offense, will the judiciary overrule them? I don’t know, I’d hope so. Will Strasbourg allow it? No. Is Sweden able to ignore Strasbourg? Perhaps, but much less likely than Britain fro
past experience.

As you can see, there is no guarantee in Sweden
But there wouldn’t be any in Ecuador either. Suppose Ecuador elects a right-wing pro-US govt in 2 years?

All I’m saying is: Assange will face a US extradition risk for the rest of his life, wherever he is. He’s smart enough to have figured that out when starting the disclosures.

What we can’t give him is a get-out-of-jail-free card for any crime he may have committed or may yet commit, just because being in custody might make it easier to extradite him. Before the law, everone is equal, and heroes in one domain shouldn’t get privileges in other domains.

@CE

@CE 6.43pm
‘It’s not up to the accused to decide if they’re being set up.’

WHAAAAT?!

I can’t believe you said that; I really think it indicates that you are exercising absolutely no imagination in this! That you aren’t really letting any of the information ‘speak’ to you at all.

If you are really seeking the truth and not a specious debate, you must put yourself in the place of any such ‘accused’ – ie one who considers themselves to be being fitted up – and imagine then abnegating all responsibility for your own safety – a thing which, plainly, you would be barking mad to do.

Every woman has a right to protect herself from disease and infection.

What kind of right is that for women only? Do men have not an equal right to protect themselves from disease?

Why you assume that only men are afflicted with infectious sexual diseases?

“Instruction” is for the school kids and lame of brain, and nowhere does it imply equality of any sorts. Therefore It is every man’s right to reserve the right to tell the bossy bitch; move over Beethoven and don’t waste my time.

This is fucking prissy bitches power playing and not women, these kind of identity politics are only good for those kind of tossers and not us normal run of the mill we the people.

Michael
if a man can’t accept that, he shouldn’t be having sex

Yeahp sure, now that the intercourse directorate has issued its edict, who can argue with that?

The miserable negative view of men that you paint, evidently us men are extras that world can do without:

guess why the woman get the final say on contraception? here’s a hint: men walk away after sex and they can’t get pregnant

You have been watching too many Jeremy Kyle shows.

How about in atoning for their sins every man ought to have a couple of pumpkins shoved up his butt?

Why do you assume all the ills of world are due to men? Are you some kind of puny, bullied, man hater too?

Michael wrote:

“I’m not going to be popular with this post here…”

Your right… fuck off.

Fedup seems kind of well meaning sometimes but immature and protaginistic at others. I think he is a borderline troll and not typical of this blogs commentors.

Michael, your argument of Assanges plausible guilt seems based on your personal idea of what would be an unlikely FBI attack.
I base it on the statements which prosecutors and the claimaints have released to the News.
Are you up to speed with the Australian Broadcasting Corporations documentary on these matters?
-
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19/3549280.htm

Has anyone noticed the Zionist Neocons go on attack mode? These people who only have anything to say when it comes to defending Israel or attacking its enemies?
The have even come out with his a “Anti-Semite” slogan. They say it against anyone Israel hates.
And you know all these Zionist Nazis, who are so concerned about the two ladies who admittedly engaged in consensual sex with assange, weren’t just silent about Dominique Strauss-Kahn, but they screamed his innocence and accused his accusers of being anti-Semites.

Michael you are a racist Nazi, we can all see it.

Craig said: “So many trolls, but not one has answered why they made no outcry at the BBC naming of Diallo while the investigation was still ongoing, and what is the difference.”

I answer because “strauss kahn” Is a Zionist Jew under the protection of Israel and the Neocons which makes him above the law.

His victim was a Black African Muslim making her beneath the protection of the law.

Assange revealed information from Zionists sources confirming what we had known already. But the Zionists Newocons denied and stated were lies designed to defame the Zionists/Neocons and their foot soldiers. This made him a target, and all accusations how ever incredible as credible.

In short what I am saying is the BBC is the British governments mouth piece. The British government does what they are told to by America and the American government does what they are told to by Aipac. Aipac does what they are told to by Israel. And Israel does what they are told to by Satan himself.

Arsalan said:

Michael you are a racist Nazi, we can all see it.

No we all can’t. Some here seem to be acting like agent provocateurs.

Fedup seems kind of well meaning sometimes but immature and protaginistic at others. I think he is a borderline troll

Come again?

Patronising yet full of crap. The last time you started pissing around with me, you wound up taking cover behind the Mod. now give over with your statistical analysis.

To find the agents of greater circle jerk filling the thread with “identity” politics, that is played up to cover up the empire running rampant with no regards for any and all international agreements or conventions, is the obscenity that evidently we are behoved to tolerate.

The obscenity of a legitimate nations sovereign territory is under the threat of invasion by our police force under the threatened orders of our foreign secretary in the way of arresting a guy whom disobeyed the orders of wearing a condom when he was laying the roadies of the fame in some other piss pot foreign land.

Then you fucking have the temerity of calling me a troll?

“Your right…Fuck off”.

I presume you mean you’re?

I’ve only been here a day but your sole contributions seem to be swearing and hurling insults at people?

Seems like a reasonable place is there mods in here?

Sunday Moonday Tiwsday Wodensday Thorsday Frigsday all good pagan names still in use today.

Rape and pillage – that’s what Vikings do isn’t it? And their women folk would be very disappointed if they didn’t do.

Assange is professional spy working for Israel, so there’s plenty of s**t, good old Norse word, on the faces of the US and UK and very little on his paymasters. So that should make the US and UK happy with him. Yah?

Why haa the BBC gone all gooey, high-principled and Christian all of a sudden? These freemasons and friends of Israel want publicity. It keeps their paymasters happy.

Just the BBC doesn’t want to be seen as the one doing the free advertising.

Ok, thanks clark.

Much to some of your posters annoyance, I’ll probably be back!

Guano said;

Assange is professional spy working for Israel,

I’m wondering if you’ll be telling us Mordechai Vanunu is next?