back to article Julian Assange: I'm quite happy to sleep on Ecuador's sofa FOREVER

Julian Assange says he'll stay in the Ecuadorian embassy in London even if allegations of sexual assault against him in Sweden are dropped. The Wikileaks supremo said that even if the Scandinavian cops decide not to clap their hands on him, he still fears he will be extradited to the US for publishing thousands of confidential …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. RISC OS
    Devil

    The question is...

    ... is the Ecuadorian embassy happy to let him sleep on the sofa forever?

    Either someone will have to pay for them or his dirt on Ecuador hat better be really good... you know the dirt he said he would release if they didn't take him in ;)

    1. Steve Crook

      Re: The question is...

      Sooner or later, he will need medical attention that cannot be managed in house. At that point it's going to get interesting.

    2. Michael Hutchinson

      Re: The question is...

      Aren't there H&S regulations that say you must have a fire drill every x months? That'd get him outside.

      1. Pen-y-gors Silver badge

        Re: The question is...

        Dunno - ask an expert on Ecuadorian H&S law...

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: The question is...

          Embassies are under the laws of the country they're in. They're not sovereign territory, that's a common misconception. Although they are immune from lots of local laws/fines.

          Anyway, it's so small, he doesn't have to come outside if there's a fire drill, just make his way to the nearest exit and shout, "I'm here".

          I wonder if this is now going to be the least desired posting in the Ecuadorian diplomatic service. Like Ulan Bator is in the British... "If you don't get that report on my desk by lunchtime, then I'll send you to London to cook Assange's dinner!"

    3. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: The question is...

      If they want him out... import some bed bugs. :-)

      Then all they need to do is flea bomb the place after he leaves.

  2. Titus Technophobe
    Stop

    This would be an Assange view of the law.....

    I would think if he goes to Sweden thus fulfilling the UK's international obligations to respond to an EAW, and then proves himself innocent neither country would have much problem allowing him his legal rights to have asylum as a political refugee in Ecuador.........

    1. Gordon 10 Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

      Indeed yet again we have Assange muddying the waters and confusing a personal legal issue with issues affecting Wikileaks. Julian Assange <> Wikileaks although the odious little man has a vested interest in creating a view that it does.

    2. Suricou Raven

      Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

      Until the US submits their own extradition request.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

        Any country in the world can submit an extradition request. This does not mean it will be granted.

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

          If he'd gone to Sweden last year, this could all have been finished by now. I can't see them being likely to find him guilty anyway, given there were only 2 people in the room at the time. And he's not accused of violence, so there shouldn't be any injuries to look at. There's not likely to be much evidence.

          But instead he's hung around here, stringing it out. A year ago the US didn't look to have an extradition case ready. Myself I doubt they'll be able to make one that's likely to be accepted by UK or Swedish courts. They've mistreated their potential witness, Bradley Manning, and that's not likely to go down well. But such case as they can put together is more likely to be ready, the longer this goes on.

          1. david wilson

            Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

            >>"But instead he's hung around here, stringing it out. A year ago the US didn't look to have an extradition case ready. "

            But at least if his delays does give the US time to put a case together and try to extradite him, he'll be proved both Right and Important, which is all that really matters.

          2. t.est

            Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

            Well, I don't want to take any sides here, but Sweden allowed CIA to transport people Egypt to be "interrogated" in the most mild way.

            So both parties have their point, it's hard though to know what the truth in reality is. I'm neither surprised of whether he hides from the rape investigation, or actually have real reasons to be concerned of own future. There is no neutrality anywhere.

          3. mmeier

            Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

            Let's face it, the worst thing the USA can do to Lasagne is: Nothing!

            Let's assume he goes to Sweden, is interviewed and blood tested. Results are either

            a) No charge, declared "persona non grata" and 48h later two burly stewards throw him out an SAS jumbo on Sydney international. If he was nice and calm they may even wait for the gangway

            b) Charge due to having unprotected sex while suffering from an STD. Basically the same as above with maybe a short stay in a Swedish prison

            In both cases he will have a last press conference on Sydney Airport (and the USA will make sure there is A LOT of press) and the world will remember him as what he is: A self-absorbed, paranoid egomaniac.

            Then, a few years later they will find a drowned Hobo floating in a dirty pond in the outback and the "Wayoutathere Inquirer" will report that Assange fell in there while drunk and died. And no one will care wether he had help staying in or not.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Thumb Down

      Re: This would be an Assange view of the law..... @Titus

      You and the poeple upvoting you don't seem to understand that his innocence or otherwise of the charges against him in Sweden have nothing to do with why he's in trouble in the UK.

      He skipped bail. Dropping the rape charges or being found not guilty will not alter that.

      1. Captain Scarlet Silver badge
        Mushroom

        Re: This would be an Assange view of the law..... @Titus

        I agree, slam him in a UK prison already!

        1. Scorchio!!
          Thumb Up

          Re: This would be an Assange view of the law..... @Titus

          "I agree, slam him in a UK prison already!"

          Indeed. His offence pre dates his attempt to obtain asylum; that is to say, in order to make his way to the embassy in which he is now domiciled (pun intended) he necessarily had to breach a bail order in connection with alleged sexual assaults; he is on bail because he flew from Sweden when he found out from his lawyer that the Swedish police wished to interview and charge him. He does not have a leg to stand on, no matter how much the barrack room lawyers that flit around these parts would wish. Then there is the little matter of his criminal record, which is unenviable, and it is the case that criminals rarely commit one type of offence; they are most noteworthy in respect of one general category of behaviour, an inability to follow societal rules, and that appears apply to everything in question in his life thus far.

          Quite apart from anything else, the Swedes will not allow extradition to the US if we respond positively to the EAW, and Julie has miles of travel in this alone but, no, not Julie; Julie's trying to fool all of the world for as long as he can.

          As to his lie that the UK would breach international law by arresting him in a diplomatic vehicle en route to Ecuador, he would first have to stand on UK soil, the very land whose laws he has breached and, besides anything else, if a country assists a known felon in this manner trouble will surely follow (and it should be noticed that, as others have pointed out, diplomatic 'bags' have been opened in order to rescue people illegally detained by African nations)... ...not that Julie will mind, because he is doing or trying to do a splendid job of team splitting. Just like the cluster B pests to whom I think he belongs.

          Go to Sweden Julie, do it now. It does not matter how loudly and for how long you scream untruths about the likelihood of rendition from Sweden, or how the UK will breach laws by arresting you if you try to flee the Ecuadorian embassy, or any other of your bizarre claims and oleaginous drivel on the Today Programme last year about the women being 'in a tizzy' because you did not use a functional condom. ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12047035 )

          HAND.

          1. t.est

            Re: This would be an Assange view of the law..... @Titus

            According to Swedish news, he had been interviewed and got the green light to leave Sweden from the authorities. So I'm not so sure that he just left because he knew the police would like to interview him.

            If that then is all lies or the truth I don't know. But I find it interesting as a spectator, because it's a pretty interesting political circus. One thing though, if USA really wanted him badly, they would have gotten him already.

            1. Titus Technophobe

              Re: This would be an Assange view of the law..... @Titus

              This seems another of the misconceptions that Mr Assange has it would seem that :

              'On 15th September Ms Ny (prosecutor) told [Mr Hurtig ] (Assange's brief) there were no “force measures” preventing Julian leaving the country, i.e. he was allowed to leave… [Hurtig] (Assange's lawyer) phoned his client to say he was free to leave the country'

              So what seems to have happened was that Mr Assange’s lawyer asked on the 15th if the prosecution were able to detain Mr Assange which they couldn't, and he was therefore able to leave the country. Not being able to stop somebody (a situation which probably changed a couple of weeks later), and being given permission aren't really the same.

              1. Titus Technophobe

                Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....@t.est Posted Thursday 20th June 2013 12:32 GMT

                Regarding claims that Sweden has acted illegally in past extraditions. It would seem there is no dispute that Sweden acted illegally in deporting two Egyptian men – but that was a deportation to their home country. As it was not an extradition the process was different. Doesn't seem to have been any mention of CIA involvement as such.

                Further to this the deportation caused quite a scandal in Sweden, and CIA (maybe this is how this got confused into the Egypt deportation story) rendition flights were stopped altogether in 2006 when to prevent it the Swedish military boarded just such a flight.

                This caused a diplomatic row between the USA and their 'lapdog' partner Sweden. Sweden refused to back down and halted the flights. It would seem the details of all this were leaked in December 2010 by the rather unlikely source Wikileaks.

            2. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge
              Boffin

              Re: This would be an Assange view of the law..... @Titus

              test,

              I think you need to reread the court documents of the first extradition hearing.

              He never had the green light to leave Sweden.

              He left because he knew that the interview was a formality before they charged him with the crime.

              And to your point, no. He's not worth creating an international incident over. He's a prick, sure, but if the US has enough evidence to haul him in on an espionage charge... there is no statute of limitations.

      2. tom dial Silver badge

        Re: This would be an Assange view of the law..... @Titus

        But doesn't that just mean that those who put up the bail forfeit? I seem to remember reading a while back about some long-faced benefactors who would be losing their money over this.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This would be an Assange view of the law..... @Titus

          >But doesn't that just mean that those who put up the bail forfeit?

          No it doesn't just mean that. It means that, which is why the benefactors are a tad miffed, and that Assange has commited a criminal act, which is why he will be arrested as soon as he leaves the embassy.

    4. Velv Silver badge
      Flame

      Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

      If he'd gone to Sweden under the original request, he be out by now even if the Swede's had found him guilty.

      What he's done is used his power, influence and position to avoid prosecution for potential sexual offences (this remains for a court to prove). We've seen a few other people recently who've been found guilty of using their "public standing" and fame to get away with sexual offences.

      IF (and it is an IF) he's guilty of such offences, he should face the appropriate penalty. That does not automatically make him liable for extradition on entirely unrelated offences. If he was accused of murder would we be so defensive of his rights? What if there was video evidence of his guilt, would we be so quick to defend the Saint of Wikipedia. "He's done so much for us" has been said about many people, should they get away with crimes because of this. (sarcasm alert) It is, after all, "just rape" he is accused of (/sarcasm alert)

      1. mmeier

        Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

        What if there is a bit more in it? Normally I agree the basic offence is "slap on the wrist and then Lars and Olav throw him across the next border". BUT! if he has/had a nice STD then the not-use of a condom gets problematic. And given that a lot deals with "didn't use one" and he has refused a blood test...

        1. jason 7

          Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

          Chances are if he did a brief spell in Swedish clink he may find his cell roomier and better than his room at the embassy.

          Probably better internet access too.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

          BUT! if he has/had a nice STD then the not-use of a condom gets problematic. And given that a lot deals with "didn't use one" and he has refused a blood test...

          Actually, I have been thinking about that too, and I wonder if the girls have been tested. Their lawyer is very tightlipped, so he's not going to tell, but I think Assange's real concern behind al the BS about US extradition may be that he has indeed left a present behind (I agree with you that it appears he makes a habit of going at it without protection). It may even be the case that one of the girls had a test straightaway (although I don't know if anything presents that quickly, it is possible that she preserved "evidence" to test). If Assange's lawyer got wind of that it would be no surprise that he immediately fled the country.

          It's all speculation, of course, but it could offer an alternative explanation of Assange's frankly *desperate* attempts not to be extradited. I don't know what Swedish law says about wilful infection, but I doubt it will be mild. They seem to have done at least something decent about the rights of a rape victim instead of telling them it's all their fault because of the way they dress.

          There is another side effect: if Assange is indeed found to have infected someone he'll have an image problem that he won't be able to recover from (well, more than he has already). Being shipped to the US would at least give him some martyrdom, but being locked up in Sweden for distributing STDs will not just end the remnants of his "career" based on simple, hard facts, it could also possibly bring charges from other people he slept with.

          Hmm. We can't but speculate. Shame the Swedes don't do anything in absentia..

    5. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge
      Black Helicopters

      @Titus Re: This would be an Assange view of the law.....

      If Julian goes to Sweden, faces the music... it gets murky.

      Because of his actions, the UK could refuse to let him in.

      He jumped bail, and caused a lot of embarrassment for the UK. Does he get charged after the Swedes are done? I don't know.

      Could he go to Ecuador? Maybe, but he may be forced to go back to Australia. He is travelling on an Australian passport.

      From Australia, he may be allowed to go to Ecuador or they may take his passport.

      I'm not saying that he can't get to Ecuador but that it may not be that easy.

      And this is regardless of what the US Government does or doesn't do.

      1. FrankAlphaXII Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: @Titus This would be an Assange view of the law.....

        Unless he keeps dragging ass in London, there is nothing the US will be able to do to him in Sweden. Unless the Swedes have an axe to grind because he's failed to appear for quite awhile now.

        The FBI may indict him here and issue a warrant, but its up to Sweden to extradite him, and at first, if he'd have just gone there and dealt with the Police, he'd have nothing to worry about. Now, he sure as hell does because I'm sure the Swedish Police and Prosecutors are on a mission to burn him because he's been evading. Whatever his paranoid reasoning, that's how it looks to a cop or Prosecutor. He may get his wish to be extradited here, they'll just convict him and throw him in Marion or Terre Haute, like all the high profile convicts. He would have been best off in a place like Sweden, but he had to be stubborn to attract more attention. Idiot.

        1. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge

          @Frank...Re: @Titus This would be an Assange view of the law.....

          Typically when someone flees jurisdiction, then fights the extradition warrant, and then bugs out to a foreign embassy, you can bet someone in Sweden is going to continue to want to pursue it.

          Assange wants to hide out in hopes that this dies down? That's not going to happen.

          Looking at Roman Polanski, he was found guilty and jumped bail before sentencing. To this day, he can never set foot in the US. (Even though the girl he raped doesn't want to be involved and has since put the past behind her.)

          One could expect the same for Sweden because Assange made this more than just a he said / she said case of rape. (non-consensual sex) He gave them the two finger'd salute. (We yanks just use one. ;-)

          So he can't expect the Swedish issue to die any time soon.

          To your point. If the US were to open a sealed grand jury vote to indict, because of his leaving Sweden for the UK, even if back in Sweden, The US would still require both the Swedes and the UK's permission. So that's going to be a non-starter unless of course Manning's trial reveals some nasty tid bits which is what Assange is really afraid is going to happen.

          The US can wait.

          You can google this, but just to be thorough...

          Section 3282 of Title 18 : non-capital offense unless expressly stated shall be instituted within 5 years.

          (This covers everything that isn't expressly listed separately. Its your catch all )

          Section 3281 of Title 18: Capital offenses can be filed at any time. Note that while Assange may not face the death penalty, the charge still has the option of a death penalty and therefore would fall in to this bucket.

          Section 3286 of Title 18: 8 year statute of limitation for non-capital terrorism charges. (But doesn't seem to be applicable depending on how you define 2332b.

          Then there is Section 783(e) of Title 50 which may be applicable under the 'Subversive Activities Control Act' (whatever that means) and is good for 10 years.

          So if the US has any evidence of Assange doing something other than publishing the documents, he's either going to be faced with a 10 year stay in the Embassy, or Life.

          I'd say that the US has plenty of time. (IMHO if the US has evidence and can charge him under the espionage act, that's one where there is no statute of limitations and they will wait until he leaves the UK and possibly Sweden.

          What I don't know is what the UK will do because of his jumping of bail. Do they get him after Sweden or do they just send him back to Australia?

        2. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge
          Boffin

          Re: @Frank ... Re: @Titus This would be an Assange view of the law.....

          The charge of Espionage is a potential Capitol offense. Even if they take the death penalty off the table, there is no statute of limitations. This is what probably scares Assange.

          So the US can wait.

  3. Katz
    WTF?

    Bah

    It amazes me the amount of bashing Julian Assange receives. We in the UK regularly allow in refugees for asylum who either hate the UK or end up committing crimes/terrorist acts. At the very least these people just bleed the welfare system dry. But the government allows this to continue.

    But for somebody who wants information freely open in the public domain and let's face it, it wasn't 'dangerous' information, we're swallowing the media vilification of him. The more the media attacks Assange, the more I believe in his concerns. I don't blame him for feeling he's being screwed over by the U.S via Sweden and the UK. He highly like is. What worries me more is the evident level of corruption and manipulation of our own governments. That is frightening.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Bah

      I don't give a toss about Assange.

      His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done

        Don't be silly, he just published the video, he didn't pilot the helicopter.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done

          No, he edited the video, editorialised about it and published it.

          There is no point to wikileaks if they do anything other than publish the original documents/data with no comment and only redacting names of people who could see endangerment to life.

          As I understand it, the bit of the video which was chopped off is where someone with an RPG takes aim at the helicopter, but doesn't fire. This totally changes the perspective of what happened afterwards.

          1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

            Re: His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done

            To be fair to Wikileaks they did publish the un-edited version of the 'collateral murder' video.

            To be realistic about Wikileaks they also did their own credibility massive damage by releasing an edited version (which I suspect is the one most people saw) that gave a false picture of the event.

            Funny how they then refused to edit out the names of the Afghan informers, because it was their job to just release stuff, but seemingly that didn't apply to playing silly-buggers with the evidence in a different case.

            1. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge
              Boffin

              Re: His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done

              "Funny how they then refused to edit out the names of the Afghan informers, because it was their job to just release stuff, but seemingly that didn't apply to playing silly-buggers with the evidence in a different case."

              This could be potentially damaging since it would separate him and wikileaks from being a member of the press.

              1. Scorchio!!
                Thumb Up

                Re: His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done

                I don't know if you've ever considered this, but doesn't Julie's face seem a little... ....well, a little bitchy? Do you think he is a case of 'bitchy resting face'? [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3v98CPXNiSk#at=51 ] (Please forgive my ignorance, I forgot how to do El Reg html tags.)

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Coat

            Re: His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done

            "As I understand it, the bit of the video which was chopped off is where someone with an RPG takes aim at the helicopter, but doesn't fire."

            Well, how dangerous was it, anyway? What kind of RPG are we talking about? It's one thing if he was attacking with Breath of Fire or Shining Force, but Chrono Trigger or FFVII - that's entirely different.

            1. Scorchio!!

              Re: His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done

              ""As I understand it, the bit of the video which was chopped off is where someone with an RPG takes aim at the helicopter, but doesn't fire."

              Well, how dangerous was it, anyway? What kind of RPG are we talking about? It's one thing if he was attacking with Breath of Fire or Shining Force, but Chrono Trigger or FFVII - that's entirely different."

              Taking the matter seriously for a second, with only a minute amount of time to decide, what would you do? To put it another way, Gerry Adams - formerly commander of the PIRA Belfast Bde - and his friends claimed the British were shooting to kill, but you never heard a shrewd journalist ask a couple of questions; 1) do the IRA shoot and/or bomb to kill? 2) what does it mean to not shoot to kill?

              It is only in Hollywood and computer games that the bad guy is wounded and not killed, or that his firearm is shot out of his hand. Even with a sniper scope (and I once was a marksman with a bolt action rifle, whilst terrified of my 9mm para side arm, a Browning pistol which bucked around in my hands like a mad thing[1] ) from a distance or close up you do not aim to wound; you aim at the thorax or give your enemy the advantage. This almost inevitably means death with a larger calibre firearm, partly because of the calibre involved, and partly because of the speed of the round, which quite literally pulls flesh from the target down the hole, and punches out a massive exit wound. Shit happens when you party naked, and no amount of cuddly, fluffy bunny thinking will change war, which is by definition fucking awful.

              This is clearly not Hollywood or a computer game, and the PC claims that people must not shoot at armed suspects, or must at very least shoot only to wound, these claims are made by idiots who lack knowledge about warfare and lack respect for those who are about to be shot.

              Your (I believe ironic) point is well made.

              [1] I was given a severe bollocking for my inability to hit the target, because my life could depend on it. For my performance on a bolt action rifle I was praised and I could never equate the two, and this to an extent illustrates my point.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Bah

        "His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done."

        Which is precisely why he can't get justice, as people like you have already presumed his guilt.

        That should be alleged victims.

        1. Scorchio!!
          FAIL

          Re: Bah

          " "His victims, on the other hand, deserve to see justice done."

          Which is precisely why he can't get justice, as people like you have already presumed his guilt.

          That should be alleged victims."

          This is not the court in which he would be tried and, as you know, he fled the Swedish jurisdiction not long after their police rang his lawyer to tell him that they wanted to interview him prior to making an arrest if not satisfied with his responses - this is the usual pattern in the Swedish CJS, which gives people facing allegations the chance to make a satisfactory explanation and provide evidence to support their claims - and, what is more, his lawyer claimed the Swedish police had not subsequently been in touch with him; he was force to retract this claim in a UK court, on reading his mobile phone log. It seems to me that a lot of Assange's entourage and supporters are of a like mind where it comes to the truth and to justice; Julie comes first.

          As to the matter of whether people in this country, not the original jurisdiction note, have opinions that are of any import in respect of the presumption of guilt, irrelevant; Assange is wanted in a Sweden, not in the UK. YMLT to ask the Afghan informants whose locations he made publicly available, resulting in threats from the Taliban. They only wanted a few mines cleared apparently, but Julie said words to effect that it was tough, they are informants and knew what to expect. He did this in front of season journalists who were stunned.

          HTH. HAND.

          1. Titus Technophobe

            Re: Bah

            Julie said words to effect that it was tough, they are informants and knew what to expect. He did this in front of season journalists who were stunned.

            The same sentiment he presumably extends to Bradley Manning........

            1. Jack Project

              Re: Bah

              "The same sentiment he presumably extends to Bradley Manning........"

              Is he the ginger one in Eastenders?

            2. Scorchio!!
              Thumb Up

              Re: Bah

              " Julie said words to effect that it was tough, they are informants and knew what to expect. He did this in front of season journalists who were stunned.

              The same sentiment he presumably extends to Bradley Manning........"

              About whom Assange has said precious little, having donated only a minute amount of money to Manning's defence. Perhaps he believes he might reveal his link Manning if he does anything more... ...but, as Saint Joseph Stalin once indicated, it's a mere statistic.

              Anyhow. How depressing these kooks are. I think I need the release of nitrous oxide. [Half man half bike.]

      3. Bleu
        Paris Hilton

        Re: Bah

        Victims? Oh, I see, you mean the woman who bragged about her score and the quieter one who colluded with the other after they'd compared notes.

        Only thing they seem to be victims of is a desire for celebrity dong, hell, even Jules's famous lack of taste for the occasional bath or shower didn't put them off.

        Background of the first of Jules's very willing conquests is really interesting, as are her known movements immediately after the two `victims' had colluded.

        Paris, 'cos we'd like tothink she has the taste to avoid bedding those who enjoy being stinky.

        1. Androgynous Cupboard Silver badge

          Re: Bah @ Bleu

          Traditionally it's considered bad form to accuse alleged rape victims of gagging for it, especially when your information comes from the internet rumour mill and not from court proceedings (which said alleged rapist is trying to avoid).

          Or does no not mean no where you're from?

          Pure class, Bleu.

          1. h3

            Re: Bah @ Bleu

            Yeah but the Swedish definition of rape includes all kinds of stuff that isn't even a crime here.

            Loads of other stuff has been lumped in with it.

            They could have sorted it out before he ever left Sweden they are abusing the system.

            Feminists are really female supremacists. (People generally realise stuff like White supremacists are bad).

            (I don't particularly like Assange but that is irrelevant).

            1. david wilson

              Re: Bah @ Bleu

              >>"Yeah but the Swedish definition of rape includes all kinds of stuff that isn't even a crime here.

              Loads of other stuff has been lumped in with it."

              Which suggests that some amount of caution would be advisable for someone who reckoned they were a target for dirty tactics.

              And that even for selfish reasons, it might have made sense for to agree to an STD test once it was clear that at the very least there was either some unhappiness with the claimed unprotected sex, or some Dark Scheme brewing.

              >>"They could have sorted it out before he ever left Sweden they are abusing the system."

              That might have been easier if he hadn't run away when they were trying to arrange an interview.

              >>"Feminists are really female supremacists."

              Personally, I find the word troublesome, since it seems to cover far too many positions, but is often used without qualification as if all those positions were meaningfully similar.

              Not to mention that (because of the wide range of views it gets used to cover) many people who would share the views of some people calling themselves feminists avoid the term because of the views of other people calling themselves feminists.

              I can think of a large number of intelligent women I know who believe in equality [according to one or other definition of equality] but unless they'd made a point of telling me, I would have little idea whether any particular one would consider herself a 'feminist'. Or any other kind of 'ist'.

              1. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge
                Boffin

                Re: Bah @ Bleu

                Uhm just a couple of nits...

                Rape is one of the 32 offenses where you don't have to show a duality of the crime.

                So whatever Sweden says is rape, is considered rape in Sweden.

                The interview where he 'ran away' was the formality meeting where he would be charged with the crime.

                Its not an 'interview' in terms that many people understand.

                The only person abusing the system is Assange.

                He needs to man-up.

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019