Julian Assange denied bail

[tangent4ronpaul]

under the pretext that he is a flight risk....

This, after he turned himself in and the prosecutor dodged his attempts to get together with him... :rolleyes:

Flight risk - RRRRRIIIIGGGGHHHHTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-t

[Philhelm]

The motherfucker turned himself in for fuck's sake! Jesus titty-fucking Christ! All of this presumably for a broken condom? When will people wake up to the media's lies?

[Elwar]

:rolleyes:A flight risk for condom breakage...

[johnny.rebel]

maybe they want to see if Assange really has insurance.

[reduen]

I knew this was coming as soon as he made Hillary Clinton look bad. I posted it a few days ago when the cables came out initially and I remember somone laughed at my post but I can tell you that you do not mess with Bill and Hillary and get away with it...

I can see many people being arrested for supporting this guy and the internet being in danger of being shut down in the very near future... Those hackers that vow to avenge Assange, better work really quick and do one heck of a job or all that they will accomplish is giving the government another reason to protect us.....:rolleyes:

[pcosmar]

I knew this was coming as soon as he made Hillary Clinton look bad.

Honestly.
How can you make her look good?
;)

[reduen]

The motherfucker turned himself in for fuck's sake! Jesus titty-fucking Christ! All of this presumably for a broken condom? When will people wake up to the media's lies?

It is your right of course but why do you choose to offend those of us who have taken Jesus as Lord in such a manner?

[reduen]

Honestly.
How can you make her look good?
;)


Yeah really, good luck with that one. That is one evil woman..

[YumYum]

Honestly.
How can you make her look good?
;)

Have you seen her standing next to Janet Reno? :D

[Lucille]

I knew this was coming as soon as he made Hillary Clinton look bad. I posted it a few days ago when the cables came out initially and I remember somone laughed at my post but I can tell you that you do not mess with Bill and Hillary and get away with it...

I can see many people being arrested for supporting this guy and the internet being in danger of being shut down in the very near future... Those hackers that vow to avenge Assange, better work really quick and do one heck of a job or all that they will accomplish is giving the government another reason to protect us.....:rolleyes:

In related Statist Dept (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/72480.html). news (via LRC):


Writes Butler Shaffer: “Did you see today’s State Department announcement (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2010/12/152465.htm)?”

[specsaregood]

//

[reduen]

In related Statist Dept (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/72480.html). news (via LRC):

How ironic indeed...

[pcosmar]

In related Statist Dept (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/72480.html). news (via LRC):

Wow, Talk about the logical disconnect.
Hypocrisy
Hypocrisy is the state of pretending to have beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually have. Hypocrisy involves the deception of others and is thus a kind of lie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy

[Travlyr]

It is interesting to note that Julian Assange went to the heart of the Empire ... the Mother Country ... London ... the home of The Bank of England ... to turn himself in.

[awake]

Will the whisk him off to be tortured?

[nate895]

To be fair, he does fit the general definition of what is considered a "flight risk." He has friends worldwide and could easily escape to some remote location where no one could suspect where he is. The fact that he turned himself does not outweigh that. That does count somewhat as to whether someone is a flight risk, but in Assange's case it is far outweighed by the fact that he could easily run and never be heard from again with barely the lift of a finger.

This very board demonstrates that in that there are several people, including pcosmar, who have said that they would harbor him if he was a fugitive. There are tons of people with no traceable connection to Assange that would be willing to do that.

That does not mean I think that there is enough evidence to go to trial for rape to begin with. In fact, there is enough evidence to exonerate him of that charge, which is rare. The only thing that he might be obliged to do is to show up at the court for a hearing as to whether he needs to submit to a test for STD's, if the two women could convince the judge that such a measure was appropriate under Swedish law.

[Travlyr]

To be fair, he does fit the general definition of what is considered a "flight risk." He has friends worldwide and could easily escape to some remote location where no one could suspect where he is. The fact that he turned himself does not outweigh that. That does count somewhat as to whether someone is a flight risk, but in Assange's case it is far outweighed by the fact that he could easily run and never be heard from again with barely the lift of a finger.

This very board demonstrates that in that there are several people, including pcosmar, who have said that they would harbor him if he was a fugitive. There are tons of people with no traceable connection to Assange that would be willing to do that.

That does not mean I think that there is enough evidence to go to trial for rape to begin with. In fact, there is enough evidence to exonerate him of that charge, which is rare. The only thing that he might be obliged to do is to show up at the court for a hearing as to whether he needs to submit to a test for STD's, if the two women could convince the judge that such a measure was appropriate under Swedish law.
Nate, you seem to be quick to judge others. People who are flight risks do not turn themselves in. He has not been charged with rape.

[nate895]

Nate, you seem to be quick to judge others. People who are flight risks do not turn themselves in. He has not been charged with rape.

There is enough evidence that I know just from the posts on this board to say that Julian Assange is a flight risk. If you can pick up and leave town with no traceable connections, you are a flight risk, plain and simple. Assange has millions of people worldwide who have no traceable connection to him that would be willing to harbor him as a fugitive, and the tech savvy to create a new, untraceable identity. All he has to do is change his mind about whether he is willing to submit to the authorities, and, poof, he's gone.

Assange is a rather unique individual in this way. Most people who have the resources to flee can be traced if they decide to. For example, rich celebrities or crooks like Madoff or OJ Simpson would have to use a lot of traceable money in order to flee justice. Assange, on the other hand, already has the resources to leave town on a whim.

[pcosmar]

To be fair,

Why would he run to avoid a less than $1000 fine?

Why is the World Police involved at all on nothing but the word of a couple self admitted [redacted]( Promiscuous and predatory females)?

Why would these charges (stupid as they are) even be considered by a different jurisdiction?

I don't think FAIR is even a consideration here.

[Travlyr]

There is enough evidence that I know just from the posts on this board to say that Julian Assange is a flight risk. If you can pick up and leave town with no traceable connections, you are a flight risk, plain and simple. Assange has millions of people worldwide who have no traceable connection to him that would be willing to harbor him as a fugitive, and the tech savvy to create a new, untraceable identity. All he has to do is change his mind about whether he is willing to submit to the authorities, and, poof, he's gone.

Assange is a rather unique individual in this way. Most people who have the resources to flee can be traced if they decide to. For example, rich celebrities or crooks like Madoff or OJ Simpson would have to use a lot of traceable money in order to flee justice. Assange, on the other hand, already has the resources to leave town on a whim.
Why do you consider him a criminal? With what crime SHOULD he be charged, in your opinion?

[HOLLYWOOD]

Global Interpol alert APB... for that $715 fine for condom breakage.

The terrible part of the NWO Totalitarian CFR tyrants... the bastards can setup ANYONE on charges and destroy their lives for defiance.

[nate895]

Why would he run to avoid a less than $1000 fine?

Well, that part is ridiculous. However, there are possible rape charges pending, so that must be factored into a judge's decision, particularly a foreign judge who is determining whether or not he ought to be extradited, not Assange's guilt or the current charge.


Why is the World Police involved at all on nothing but the word of a couple self admitted [redacted]( Promiscuous and predatory females)?

Because it's their job by treaty. The evidence against the party is irrelevant until the extradition hearing. Then, the judge can decide whether there is enough evidence to proceed to a trial in their court, which in this case is an English one. There is not enough evidence for a trial according to English common law precedent, so if the English courts were ruling according to the old Law of Nations, they would be obliged to offer Assange asylum from these bogus charges.


Why would these charges (stupid as they are) even be considered by a different jurisdiction?

They would have to be in order to determine whether to proceed with the extradition process. The right of extradition is an important right, whereby the accused has the right to challenge and have a hearing according to the law of the jurisdiction he is in. If Assange is asserting that right (particularly since he is a subject of the crown, and therefore HMG is obliged to protect him), the British court has to proceed as they would if the charge was brought by its own prosecutors.

[heavenlyboy34]

In related Statist Dept (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/72480.html). news (via LRC):

Press freedom day? What Orwellian irony! ;)

[silentshout]

Global Interpol alert APB... for that $715 fine for condom breakage.

The terrible part of the NWO Totalitarian CFR tyrants... the bastards can setup ANYONE on charges and destroy their lives for defiance.

Yes. At least people are slowly waking up and seeing this..i hope. It is disgusting.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Apparently one of the women has ties to the CIA?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

[Jordan]

Honestly, I think its an attempt to test Assange's patience. If he releases the key while in custody, the entire capacity of several intelligence agencies is going to be used to comb through it.

If anything particularly damaging is discovered, lawsuits will be filed, and he'll be taxied around the world, from court to court in extradition.

[pcosmar]

Well, that part is ridiculous.

It all is.
But even from your description, it assumes that the LAW is even relevant anymore.

This case is demonstrating that it obviously is not.
:(

[nate895]

It all is.
But even from your description, it assumes that the LAW is even relevant anymore.

This case is demonstrating that it obviously is not.
:(

I think that is becoming more and more the case. However, I am simply saying that you cannot convict this particular judge for this particular ruling. You could convict this judge for actually allowing the extradition. In that case, whoever this judge is should be removed from the bench.

[moostraks]

In related Statist Dept (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/72480.html). news (via LRC):

I found this section particularly ironic
we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information. We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age.


lol...

[Freedom 4 all]

Assange is in a difficult position here. It's like having a very powerful gun with only one bullet. I wonder if there would be some way to release like 1/10th of the file and threaten to release more if not let out of prison immediately.

[pcosmar]

In that case, whoever this judge is should be removed from the bench.
And how is that done, exactly, when the whole system is both corrupt and complicit.

Short of the French Revolution model, I do not see it happening.

[nate895]

And how is that done, exactly, when the whole system is both corrupt and complicit.

Short of the French Revolution model, I do not see it happening.

Notice I said should. Should does not mean will. I should have washed my whites yesterday. Did I? No. The legal process would be, for Prime Minster Cameron, should HMG be doing its job, to recommend the judge be removed from the bench.

[Todd]

:rolleyes:A flight risk for condom breakage...

lemme see.

Revealing government lies and deception or scandal involving going bareback?

I'm having trouble deciding on the importance of one over the other.

[tangent4ronpaul]

And how is that done, exactly, when the whole system is both corrupt and complicit.

Short of the French Revolution model, I do not see it happening.

https://jspivey.wikispaces.com/file/view/guillotine.gif/99995181/guillotine.gif

-t

[TheeJoeGlass]

It is your right of course but why do you choose to offend those of us who have taken Jesus as Lord in such a manner?

Because he can? Try ignoring things that bother you.

[tremendoustie]

Why would someone who is a flight risk turn themselves in :confused:

[charrob]

Julian Assange denied bail .

What is it going to take to get Americans out in the streets? This is an absolute outrage. :mad:

------------------------------------------------------------------

For anyone interested:

Veteran-Led Civil Resistance to U.S. War
Share · Public Event
Time Thursday, December 16 · 10:00am - 1:00pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Location Rally at Lafayette Park, Washington, D.C. @ 10AM - March to the White House for civil disobedience
Pennsylvania Ave and Jackson Pl, NW
Washington, DC

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Created By VotersForPeace.us

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is time for the anti-war movement to pick up the pace and demonstrate that Americans want the current wars ended and out-of-control military spending reversed.

Our allies in the peace-veterans community are taking the lead and we are joining them. Veterans for Peace has announced a rally and civil resistance action in Washington, DC on Thursday, December 16th. This will be the largest veteran-led civil resistance to U.S. wars ...

Every day the horrors of the U.S. war-occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan continue – deaths of civilians, deaths and casualties of U.S. soldiers, incarceration of local people without charges, abusive searches of their homes at night and, too often, their torture. The long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have already drained our national treasury of $1.1 trillion and will cost Americans trillions more even if they ended today, primarily due to the need to treat U.S. soldiers; casualties now exceed 100,000 victims.

You do not have to risk arrest at the White House to participate with us on December 16th. You can be there in support. You can take photographs and videos. You can write about the event to spread the word that Americans are saying no to war. If you cannot be there in support, you can phone Congress and the media and demand the defunding of the ongoing wars.

Opposition to these wars is the majority view of the American people. The government is not representing us. It is time for Americans to demand that they do so. http://votersforpeace.us/press/index.php?itemid=4657

For more information on this important protest visit, Stop These Wars, see http://www.stopthesewars.org/.

[reduen]

Because he can? Try ignoring things that bother you.

You might try taking your own advice. Anyone ask you to open your pie hole....? :rolleyes:

[specsaregood]

Julian Assange denied bail

What is it going to take to get Americans out in the streets? This is an absolute outrage. :mad:


Wondering...what does Assange being denied bail in the UK on a warrant from Sweden have anything to do with US and cause for Americans to hit the streets?

[reduen]

For the last half hour, members of congress have been railing out against China for its crimes the freedom of speech. . Really…?

[pcosmar]

Wondering...what does Assange being denied bail in the UK on a warrant from Sweden have anything to do with US and cause for Americans to hit the streets?
Well lets see,
The US Government officials pushing to have him murdered.
The US Government officials putting pressure on foreign government to persecute him
The US Government officials pressuring web sites to deny access
The US Government officials making it difficult to support him financially
The US Government officials being caught lying and manipulating
The US Government officials in ways diametrically opposed to our Constitution

need I go on?

[agitator]

Shouldn't the Swedish chick be going after the company that made the faulty condom?

[specsaregood]

Well lets see,
The US Government officials pushing to have him murdered.
The US Government officials putting pressure on foreign government to persecute him
The US Government officials pressuring web sites to deny access
The US Government officials making it difficult to support him financially
The US Government officials being caught lying and manipulating
The US Government officials in ways diametrically opposed to our Constitution

need I go on?

I don't see how any of that has to do with UK courts denying him bail on a swedish arrest warrant. It wasn't the action of US courts or govt.

[tangent4ronpaul]

Shouldn't the Swedish chick be going after the company that made the faulty condom?

not necessarily faulty. you are supposed to leave a bit at the end. if you just roll the thing on, there is a high probability it will break. It's called user error.

-t

[reduen]

Shouldn't the Swedish chick be going after the company that made the faulty condom?

You would think so... I am simply amazed at the fact that something like this could ever be considered a crime.

[nate895]

You would think so... I am simply amazed at the fact that something like this could ever be considered a crime.

I'm reminded of this quote. It's from Irving Kristol, the Zionist neocon, but it sums up the situation is Sweden (and most of Western Society) rather well:

"The liberal paradigm of regulation and license has led to a society where an 18-year-old girl has the right to public fornication in a pornographic movie -- but only if she is paid the minimum wage."

The situation is very similar in this case. What kind of terminally ill society do you live in that it is perfectly fine, even considered a feat to be repeated, to sleep with two women in scope of 24-48 hours, but only if you use a condom?

[pcosmar]

I don't see how any of that has to do with UK courts denying him bail on a swedish arrest warrant. It wasn't the action of US courts or govt.

I do not believe that for a second. Now do I believe the Swedish charges are without Collusion and Cooperation of the US government. Perhaps even direction.

[charrob]

I don't see how any of that has to do with UK courts denying him bail on a swedish arrest warrant. It wasn't the action of US courts or govt.


He wouldn't have been denied bail for something this ridiculous if the U.S. government was not pressuring foreign governments.

[nate895]

He wouldn't have been denied bail for something this ridiculous if the U.S. government was not pressuring foreign governments.

Oh, yes, assert that there is an indisputable conspiracy of such a great magnitude going on that magistrates in London are forced into obedience, and then indite the American people for not acting on it.

[specsaregood]

I do not believe that for a second. Now do I believe the Swedish charges are without Collusion and Cooperation of the US government. Perhaps even direction.

Are you implying though these foreign governments are merely pawns or agents of our mighty empire? :confused::eek:;):cool:

If so, it doesn't sound to me like Americans need to hit the streets, but rather the citizens of those countries.

[charrob]

Oh, yes, assert that there is an indisputable conspiracy of such a great magnitude going on that magistrates in London are forced into obedience, and then indite the American people for not acting on it.


I think it's pretty obvious by many of the cables that have been released so far that the U.S. government is coercing other foreign governments to do things that is not in their national interest.

And, yes, the citizens of those countries should be out in the streets as well.

[pcosmar]

Are you implying though these foreign governments are merely pawns or agents of our mighty empire? :confused::eek:;):cool:

If so, it doesn't sound to me like Americans need to hit the streets, but rather the citizens of those countries.

It is Global, but it is largely led by the worlds largest superpower.
And yes, the response needs to be Global. Wikileaks is Global.
As is,

YouTube - Anonymous to the Governments of the World - Web Censorship (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbqC8BnvVHQ&feature=player_embedded)

;)
:cool:

[nate895]

I think it's pretty obvious by many of the cables that have been released so far that the U.S. government is coercing other foreign governments to do things that is not in their national interest.

And, yes, the citizens of those countries should be out in the streets as well.

Have they forced lowly magistrates to do anything? Do you understand the extradition process?

We are inditing a judge for what seems to be a justified ruling. If and when he rules that Assange must be extradited despite Assange asserting the right of extradition as a person, and, more importantly for the British courts, as a Royal Subject, then is the time to protest. I highly doubt the Royals are willing to give up what little power they have left to empty threats from the American Ambassador.

[charrob]

Are you implying though these foreign governments are merely pawns or agents of our mighty empire?

I'm implying these other governments do not have the backbone to stand up against the U.S. government. Many of the released cables are proof of that.


If so, it doesn't sound to me like Americans need to hit the streets, but rather the citizens of those countries.

I think the citizens of the world should be out in the streets over this, including the citizens of this country since it's our government pushing its weight around. An innocent man has been arrested and can't get bail: it's pretty obvious this never would have happened if he wasn't part of wikileaks.

[libertybrewcity]

anyone else upset about this? This could be the end of wikileaks. Even if they release the insurance file, who is going to take the reigns?

[nate895]

anyone else upset about this? This could be the end of wikileaks. Even if they release the insurance file, who is going to take the reigns?

If Wikileaks ends because one guy went to jail, then they have a truly pathetic organization.

[TXcarlosTX]

:rolleyes:A flight risk for condom breakage...

That's the reason why I don't use condoms!

[charrob]

Have they forced lowly magistrates to do anything? Do you understand the extradition process? We are inditing a judge for what seems to be a justified ruling.

A "justified" ruling? How is this in any way "justified"?


I highly doubt the Royals are willing to give up what little power they have left to empty threats from the American Ambassador.

I think it's their own government (pressured by our government) that pressuring them, not an American Ambassador.

I remember before the iraq war people who retired from NSA wrote in the paper about how colleagues (still working at NSA) were coming to them telling them they were pressured to do things with intelligence that they didn't feel comfortable with. They were just peons, but the coercion came from the top down to their bosses.

[pcosmar]

anyone else upset about this? This could be the end of wikileaks. Even if they release the insurance file, who is going to take the reigns?
http://twitter.com/wikileaks


Today's actions against our editor-in-chief Julian Assange won't affect our operations: we will release more cables tonight as normal"

Injustice upsets me.
Wikileaks will go on.

[nate895]

A "justified" ruling? How is this in any way "justified"?


See my earlier posts in this thread. Assange is clearly a "flight risk."

[Rancher]

See my earlier posts in this thread. Assange is clearly a "flight risk."
Clearly. :rolleyes:

That is why he turned himself in. He did not realize the global elite were serious. Now if they will just let him go he can hide maybe in the mountains of Afghanistan.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[nate895]

Clearly. :rolleyes:

That is why he turned himself in. He did not realize the global elite were serious. Now if they will just let him go he can hide maybe in the mountains of Afghanistan.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Questions asked as a factor for flight risk (http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/criminal-case-guide/flight-risk.htm

1. Does this person have ties to the community? Assange: No
2. Is he employed in the community? Assange: No
3. Does he have family members in the community? Assange: I don't know, probably not close ones considering he's from Australia.
4. Has he previously appeared for scheduled hearings or has he previously fled? Only relevant situation is the present, where he was not available for the possibly required STD test.
5. How much can the defendant afford to pay? No clue.

2/4 or 3/5 at least, and possibly all 5 count against him.

[charrob]

Well, that part is ridiculous. However, there are possible rape charges pending,

No there's not. Both women admitted it was consensual sex. That's why so many prosecutors from sweden got their warrants thrown out in Britain- because the guy did nothing wrong according to British law.

He is no danger whatsoever; he's been asking to be interviewed constantly and no one took him up on it. He turned himself in because he realizes how ludicrous all of this is, and he's sick of it and wants to get this over with. The fact that a british judge denies bail and he's sitting in a jail cell right now is a total abomination. And, i might add, I highly doubt that british judge acted on his own without coercion from the powers that be.

[nate895]

No there's not. Both women admitted it was consensual sex. That's why so many prosecutors from sweden got their warrants thrown out in Britain- because the guy did nothing wrong according to British law.

He is no danger whatsoever; he's been asking to be interviewed constantly and no one took him up on it. He turned himself in because he realizes how ludicrous all of this is, and he's sick of it and wants to get this over with. The fact that a british judge denies bail and he's sitting in a jail cell right now is a total abomination.

Read about flight risks from legal sources and get back to me. You are disputing his guilt, not his flight risk. His guilt is irrelevant, legally speaking, as to whether he is a flight risk.

[reduen]

Glen Beck on right now, ranting about Assange's "Socialist Connections" Any truth to this?

He has also mentioned Ron Paul two or three times now but in a fairly favorable light......

[specsaregood]

Glen Beck on right now, ranting about Assange's "Socialist Connections" Any truth to this?

thats funny, i thought he was just praising US libertarianism the other day

[reduen]

thats funny, i thought he was just praising US libertarianism the other day

edited... sorry...

[pcosmar]

Glen Beck on right now,
..

And you're listening to him. :confused:

[charrob]

Read about flight risks from legal sources and get back to me. You are disputing his guilt, not his flight risk. His guilt is irrelevant, legally speaking, as to whether he is a flight risk.

Nate the guy is innocent and everybody knows it- including the judge that denied bail. I truly believe this was done to extradite him: the time to be out in the streets is now; once he's extradited to this country it's too late for him.

Do you honestly believe he would have been denied bail if he was not associated to wikileaks?

[eOs]

Ben Gleck loves to tie people together..his rant on Assange/socialists was likened to how they stick racists on the liberty movement.

[reduen]

And you're listening to him. :confused:

I was scanning for news concerning the Republican Steering Committee.... Give me a break this one time would ya..? ;)

[pcosmar]

I was scanning for news concerning the Republican Steering Committee.... Give me a break this one time would ya..? ;)
Well be careful.
that stuff will rot your brain.
;)

[HOLLYWOOD]

No there's not. Both women admitted it was consensual sex. That's why so many prosecutors from sweden got their warrants thrown out in Britain- because the guy did nothing wrong according to British law.

He is no danger whatsoever; he's been asking to be interviewed constantly and no one took him up on it. He turned himself in because he realizes how ludicrous all of this is, and he's sick of it and wants to get this over with. The fact that a british judge denies bail and he's sitting in a jail cell right now is a total abomination. And, i might add, I highly doubt that british judge acted on his own without coercion from the powers that be.

No doubt, we've seen all the statist or biased judges throughout the world, even though it may not violate any laws. This whole INTERPOL operations has exposed TPTB do control all... even a global manhunt to get a possible fine of $715. :rolleyes:

[nate895]

Nate the guy is innocent and everybody knows it- including the judge that denied bail. I truly believe this was done to extradite him: the time to be out in the streets is now; once he's extradited to this country it's too late for him.

Do you honestly believe he would have been denied bail if he was not associated to wikileaks?

Why do you keep bringing up irrelevant points? His guilt or innocence wouldn't matter as to whether he is a flight risk if he were accused of petty theft in a village in Chad where he had never been, and everyone knew that he hadn't been there.

[charrob]

Why do you keep bringing up irrelevant points? His guilt or innocence wouldn't matter as to whether he is a flight risk if he were accused of petty theft in a village in Chad where he had never been, and everyone knew that he hadn't been there.

So why not put him under house arrest instead of a jail cell? Put one of those bracelets on him that would show if he left the house? But a jail cell for doing nothing wrong???

[specsaregood]

Ben Gleck loves to tie people together..his rant on Assange/socialists was likened to how they stick racists on the liberty movement.

He does like to just throw stuff out there. I remember fondly his rant about those darn "anarchist socialists". lol

[nate895]

So why not put him under house arrest instead of a jail cell? Put one of those bracelets on him that would show if he left the house? But a jail cell for doing nothing wrong???

Because he's a hacker who could find a way to disable to the bracelet? Assange has all the resources he needs to disappear and never be seen again without being locked in the Tower of London (figuratively speaking, of course).

[Lucille]

LRC: Higher Than the Crown (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/72486.html)


A dear friend, a magistrate in London, tells me he was astounded and horrified by the decision to deny bail to Julian Assange, since by British legal procedure, he clearly deserves it. There is a higher authority than the Crown, I told him, and it’s in Langley, Virginia.

[charrob]

Because he's a hacker who could find a way to disable to the bracelet? Assange has all the resources he needs to disappear and never be seen again without being locked in the Tower of London (figuratively speaking, of course).

Two things: He handed himself over to get this over with because it's been such a pain in the ass; he knows he's not guilty and so does everybody else. However, he also knows if he would disable a bracelet when he's under house arrest, that that would be a legitimate crime. He would not do that. He's trying to prove his innocence here by having handed himself in. (Plus, wouldn't there be some electronic way of knowing if the bracelet was disabled?)

Second, I think our disagreement stems from not agreeing on why he was not permitted bail:

a) you believe it was because he was a flight risk.
b) i believe your belief was an excuse that was used but that the real reason was so they could hold him until a further decision is made on whether or not they can legally extradite him to the U.S.; and i believe the U.S. government is the ultimate force behind him not getting bail.

If the reason was truly him being a 'flight' risk, a house arrest would have been made imho.

[nate895]

Two things: He handed himself over to get this over with because it's been such a pain in the ass; he knows he's not guilty and so does everybody else. However, he also knows if he would disable a bracelet when he's under house arrest, that that would be a legitimate crime. He would not do that. He's trying to prove his innocence here by having handed himself in. (Plus, wouldn't there be some electronic way of knowing if the bracelet was disabled?)

Second, I think our disagreement stems from not agreeing on why he was not permitted bail:

a) you believe it was because he was a flight risk.
b) i believe your belief was an excuse that was used but that the real reason was so they could hold him until a further decision is made on whether or not they can legally extradite him to the U.S.; and i believe the U.S. government is the ultimate force behind him not getting bail.

If the reason was truly him being a 'flight' risk, a house arrest would have been made imho.

I am not saying that you are necessarily wrong in your assertion that it was some sort of conspiracy. I am saying it doesn't have to be one. It is possible the judge made the right decision for all the wrong reasons. It has happened before, and it almost certainly will happen again.

I am saying that unless Assange is under constant surveillance, then he is a flight risk. That requires being locked in a jail cell, unfortunately. My entire point was that Assange could leave town from house arrest and they would never find out where he is because he has a million friends in a thousand different places and the tech savvy to create whole new identity that could fool a world-class investigator.

[Lucille]

Related:

Naomi Wolf: Julian Assange Captured by World's Dating Police (formerly known as Interpol) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/interpol-the-worlds-datin_b_793033.html)

Heh.

[QueenB4Liberty]

I am not saying that you are necessarily wrong in your assertion that it was some sort of conspiracy. I am saying it doesn't have to be one. It is possible the judge made the right decision for all the wrong reasons. It has happened before, and it almost certainly will happen again.

I am saying that unless Assange is under constant surveillance, then he is a flight risk. That requires being locked in a jail cell, unfortunately. My entire point was that Assange could leave town from house arrest and they would never find out where he is because he has a million friends in a thousand different places and the tech savvy to create whole new identity that could fool a world-class investigator.

But he voluntarily turned himself in, so why would he leave from house arrest if he was trying to prove his innocence? I don't think he would.

[nate895]

But he voluntarily turned himself in, so why would he leave from house arrest if he was trying to prove his innocence? I don't think he would.

I've answered this question a gazillion times already.

[johnny.rebel]

I've answered this question wrong a gazillion times already.
fixed it for ya

[Peace&Freedom]

I've answered this question a gazillion times already.

And all those answers have lacked credibility, based on the context. If we've learned anything for the gazillionth time through the wikileaks document dumps, it's that the the US/western governments can, and will do whatever bullying of other countries is necessary, and cite any legal procedure (relevant or not) as a pretext for whatever enforcement action it wants to conduct against its targets. Yes, it is POSSIBLE the denial of bail was a "reasonable" decision the judge just innocently reached, but the "flight risk" rationale was plainly MOST LIKELY a canard to keep Assange in custody due to US pressure.

[Todd]

.

What is it going to take to get Americans out in the streets? This is an absolute outrage. :mad:

Can't think about getting out in the street. Must watch Dancing with the stars.... American Idol....and Homer Simpson......if time....Fox news. *Drool*

[HOLLYWOOD]

Judge Napolitano... "No, I repeat NO charges have been filed in any court in Sweden."

Wow, the Judge went through the complete scenario of Julian Assange, Britain, and Sweden his girlfriends with amicable multiple meetings. How the British has turned this into a spectacle.

"Manufactured charges that violate the; Treaty of Brussels, Magna Carter, and US Constitution."

[idirtify]

Honestly, I think its an attempt to test Assange's patience. If he releases the key while in custody, the entire capacity of several intelligence agencies is going to be used to comb through it.

If anything particularly damaging is discovered, lawsuits will be filed, and he'll be taxied around the world, from court to court in extradition.

I’m afraid of something far worse. It looks as though their prime directive was to use any excuse to get him behind bars – and alone. Any honest person must face the possibility that he may never be seen (alive) again.

[nate895]

And all those answers have lacked credibility, based on the context. If we've learned anything for the gazillionth time through the wikileaks document dumps, it's that the the US/western governments can, and will do whatever bullying of other countries is necessary, and cite any legal procedure (relevant or not) as a pretext for whatever enforcement action it wants to conduct against its targets. Yes, it is POSSIBLE the denial of bail was a "reasonable" decision the judge just innocently reached, but the "flight risk" rationale was plainly MOST LIKELY a canard to keep Assange in custody due to US pressure.

Irrelevant. The known facts are sufficient to explain the judge's ruling. Lacking further evidence, it is vain speculation to assert anything further.

[idirtify]

Judge Napolitano... "No, I repeat NO charges have been filed in any court in Sweden."

Wow, the Judge went through the complete scenario of Julian Assange, Britain, and Sweden his girlfriends with amicable multiple meetings. How the British has turned this into a spectacle.

"Manufactured charges that violate the; Treaty of Brussels, Magna Carter, and US Constitution."

Yeah, the judge was on fire tonight! He gets better all the time. His final word was incredibly good. It’s good that he keeps on the Assange case all throughout the show (at different times). IMO he could jettison his show’s popularity by reporting on nothing else, but that’s just me. I JUST HOPE THE JUDGE KEEPS HIS RUBBERS ON :)

[Peace&Freedom]

Irrelevant. The known facts are sufficient to explain the judge's ruling. Lacking further evidence, it is vain speculation to assert anything further.

The existing facts only establish your speculation about the judge's ruling. They do not establish your interpretation as the most likely explanation. Based on the background context, the most likely and relevant explanation is that US pressure led to the ruling.

[nate895]

The existing facts only establish your speculation about the judge's ruling. They do not establish your interpretation as the most likely explanation. Based on the background context, the most likely and relevant explanation is that US pressure led to the ruling.

Do you mind thinking about that and then posting it again? What you just said is that the known facts establish my assertion that Julian Assange is actually a flight risk, but that we can't use that as an explanation? Have you ever heard of Ockham's Razor?

[Peace&Freedom]

Sigh. Occam's Razor only applies when you are comparing apples to apples, not apples to oranges. What I have said is that US pressure led to an improper ruling (apple). You assert that the ruling was proper and untainted by US pressure (orange). You are calling your interpretation of the ruling better than others, whereas the facts do NOT support that.