To be honest your concerns on human rights are not really supported by your BNP-style comments on immigration.
A High Court judge has rejected a call to keep Julian Assange in jail while the courts consider Sweden's extradition request. The Wikileaks founder, wanted in Sweden for questioning in relation to alleged sex crimes, was granted bail on Tuesday, but was held in prison pending today's appeal by the Crown Prosecution Service. …
s. pam: "we allow dole sucking mutant illegal immigrants more rights, and free money"
No we don't. Even legal immigrants usually have "NO RECOURSE TO PUBLIC FUNDS". You can't be illegal and get "free money" - you get precisely nothing. If you mean asylum seekers, then they are not allowed to work whilst their claims are processed so are given usually pretty meagre benefits, no matter what your tabloid of choice might tell you. As for rights, even hard-working fully legal immigrants are often not allowed visits from overseas relatives in case they overstay - I know as I'm struggling to get my brother-in-law here for a holiday now - it's not easy! Know what you're talking about before spouting off.
Sorry for the off-topic rant folks but I hate how this kind of lazy prejudice gets repeated and reinforced and taken as absolute fact.
S. pam, you have devalued an otherwise valid point about Julian Assange with your fact-free off-topic tabloid bigotry.
Anyway about the Assange case....
If you guys were willing to give up Gary, you will give Julian up too if the US asks. I have never seen so much drama over being wanted for questioning in all my life. Maybe having to pay a huge bail is standard fare there. Even with your better press and parliamentary system, your politicians still do the opposite of what you guys ask of them.
Over here in the states you don't need to post a bail if you have not been formally charged with a crime... Wanted for questioning means you just need to be picked up to give a statement.
I do acknowledge that if Jullian was an American citizen and was captured here, im sure he would be treated just as badly if not worse. All they have to do is mutter the "T" word....
"I do acknowledge that if Jullian was an American citizen and was captured here, im sure he would be treated just as badly if not worse"
Without a doubt he would have been mysteriously assassinated by now if he was in America, that or he'd get the chair and Bradley Manning would never be heard from again either.
How is basically being placed under house arrest independence of US pressure?
They can pick him up any time they like, they can monitor his every move and as they know where he is, they can even monitor all his communications.
So don't hold it up as this wonderful example of freedom from US pressure. Superficially its sounds like a nice sound byte but when looked at in detail, its meaningless at best and at worse it comes across as very sycophantic to the government. Oh how wonderful of the government's fair moves. Bullshit, it means nothing.
If our government were truly independent they would exposed the current diplomatic communications between the US, Sweden and the UK, then tell the US and Sweden where to put their extradition paperwork. Then and only then would I say we were independent of US pressure. As it is, our leaders in their own words say they are worried about their "special relationship" with the US, which basically means bending over to their US counterparts and taking it relentlessly.
> Glad to see that at least British courts are still independent of US pressure, even if Sweden as a nation isn't.
Except it was the the Crown Prosecution Service that opposed bail and not Sweden, and as the McKinnon case has shown the US/UK extradition treaty is strongly asymmetrical ..
Given the disproportionately high bail, together with other conditions, Assange was practically guaranteed to walk today - obviously an attempt by a vindictive Crown pissed off at losing the decision and wanting to drive Assange's costs higher.
Now that we know who forced this failed gearing, when is the Anonymous group going to test the UK government's cyber defences?
Julian did us all a favor - uncovering what "Rule Of Law" means to America:
Der Spiegel has an interesting piece on a CIA Rendition from Italy:
"When the CIA abduction of cleric Abu Omar was uncovered and a Milan court indicted the agent, Washington had a problem. Geheime Depeschen belegen nun, wie die USA die italienische Regierung bedrohten. Secret dispatches now demonstrate how the U.S. threatened the Italian government. Premier Berlusconi kam gern zu Hilfe. Premier Berlusconi was happy to help."
Just need that grand jury to authorise snatching him, some nice repeated death sentence threats from US officials and he won't be going anywhere.
Now we just need some serious journalists to investigate the actual charges, might not work out well for the yanks.
Anyone know what happened to that file labeled 'insurance'?
Mr Assange appeared on the steps of the High Court in London just in time for the 6pm News Progs.
Now he's off to deepest Suffolk until the extradition hearing starts in the New Year.
Perhaps then we might get to find out if the evidence (from Sweden) stacks up.
BB is still watching him. My only worry is that RAF (aka USAF Lakenheath) is not that far away from his place of bail residence. Just right fora bit of Black Ops Rendition then?
Given that banging him up was entirely their idea from the beginning.
No really, the Swedish authorities don't give a damn about whether he got bail or not; keeping him inside was just UK.gov being vindictive.
Julian Assange: "Hey, I heard some women are making allegations of sexual assault. Would you like to talk to me?"
Swedish Prosecutor: "Hmmm no, actually. Thanks for calling."
---One month later---
Swedish Prosecutor: "Hello?"
US: "Hey there, America calling. That Julian Assange bloke is proving to be a bit of a nuisance with all of this 'airing of our laundry'. Could you get him back for that sex trial thing?"
SP: "What? Firstly, no, because we didn't think there was a case. Secondly, no, as he's not here any more."
US: "np kthxbai!"
InterPol: "Hello, InterPol."
US: "Hey, I hear that Julian Assange is wanted in Sweden for sex crimes, and he's fled to the UK!"
Interpol: "OMGWTF?! Get dat guy! SWEDEN YOU GET HIM BACK NAO!"
Sweden: "what is this I don't even"
US: "We got InterPol involved. HE'S A TERR'RIST!"
Sweden: "Ugh... FINE. UK send him back please. Sorry, US making us do it."
UK: "Ugh... FINE. £250k bail while we consider it.
Anonymous: "FOR THE LULZ!"
Check back next week for the next instalment of JA vs Totalitarian Regimes !
The UK and Sweden are equally open to US pressure, and Assange is no safer from trumped up US espionage charges on bail than he was in prison. The priority of believers in freedom of speech and transparency in government should be setting up a defence force worthy of the name rather than trusting in the dubious independence of our legal system or the half-arsed shenanigans of Anonymous.
Thats right because everyone in America is a right wing Darwin hating Palin loving gun toting redneck Republican moron that wants to destroy the rest of the world (granted we do have far more of these folks than we need but still). Yes our government always sucks but whose doesn't really. Remember this is the land where FOSS got big as well as many other lefty leaning movements (hippies, etc). Careful with that broad brush.
The same can be said about Russia, Germany, France and the UK. Lord Protector and Napoleon anyone ?
I am a white ("caucasian") guy and I admit having not been too much concerned about the nasty treatment of people with darker skin by the U.S. because of all that crap emanating from Wahabistan. Not good from my side, probably.
Now the U.S. government is trying to nail down a white guy like me and I realize it is time to fight. Overall, the U.S. State is a completely unapologetic bully who will never even say "sorry". Did Obama say "sorry" for the mistake/malice of his predecessor ? Did Vice President Candidate Palin say "sorry" ? No, she hinted that Assange should be, well, what ? Abducted ? Killed ? Poisoned ? Ah, yes just be declared a terrorist.
A Canadian Official hinting at "killing by drone" ?
I now fully well understand why de Gaulle built the Nuclear Arsenal Of France with French Engineers. He knew that France needed it not just against Russia, but also against America.
Vive la France ! Vive la Liberte !
".....I now fully well understand why de Gaulle built the Nuclear Arsenal Of France...." Really? I thought it was more as a way of not having to ask the English or the Yanks for help the next time the Germans came round to give the Les Francais a good kicking. Of course, the fact that ickle France got to hide behind the NATO shield whilst squealing on and on and on about their independence does kinds undermine the whole argument. Maybe it was so de Gaulle could shoot really large white flags into orbit?
Since the Swedish prosecutors have already thrown this out once saying there is no case to answer. I'm all for rapists being nailed to trees upside down, but if the summary of this case in the Daily Fail is anything to go by there is no wonder the Swedes originally through the case out.
>Thats right because everyone in America is a right wing Darwin hating Palin loving gun toting redneck Republican moron that wants to destroy the rest of the world<
Admitting it is the first step... Joking. Unfortunately there's right minded people, bankers and politicians. Normal people just want to get on with their lives, don't want wars or people starving in the third world or children being raped or terrorists blowing things up. And then there's bankers and politicians who have a vested interest in the above things.
Used to be the church and state controlling the populace but they allowed the serfs to learn to read.
".....And then there's bankers and politicians who have a vested interest in the above things...." Yes, you mean like George Soros, allegedly the cash if not the mastermind behind the Obumbler's rise, and also thought to be funding Wikileaks, a "liberal" and also one of the most successful investment bankers alive. Oh, but did that blow a big hole in your spoonfed beliefs? So much easier to blame all the World's ills on "bankers" just because they have more money, isn't it?
I'm guessing you missed the one about how Grace Mugabe is suing a Zimabawean paper for repeating one of the Wikileaks cables that linked her and Mugabe's cronies to the massive appropriation of Zimbabwean diamond mining profits? No-one had really paid any attention to the matter until Grace Mugabe said she was intent on "clearing the Mugabes' good name"!
As many of you will know, i am neutral in this i.e. i don't support wikileaks and assange or the governments. The sex case against him is either trumped up or real (sadly we cannot read people's minds). From what i understand what constitutes rape in Sweden is different from that in Britain. What i don't like is some wiki supporters sending demeaning messages to these rape victims (i am sure victims of rape will condemn their actions)
I wonder, can you use on of those wonderful british government ankle devices as a tracking target for a US drone? Wait for the bang, Sweden set him up, England supplied the tracking device, US will supply the attack drone, bye bye mansion, must have been an unfortunate gas explosion!
".....What i don't like is some wiki supporters sending demeaning messages to these rape victims...." The really hilarious bit is the alledged rape victims are both rather left-of-center types that would normally swoon at the idea of helping an "anti-establishment" organ like Wikileaks (I'm guessing that idea may have had something to do with their attraction to Mr Assange's organ as well). Now they're being assaulted by their own for "smearing" someone the Wikileaks supporters hold as above the law.
The problem is the majority of the WIkileak supporters I have spoken to seem to be just blindly obedient and reactive to whatever they are told is the latest "cool" movement to support. It reminds me of the Penn & Teller episode where they got hippies to sign a pertition to ban "di-hydrogen monoxide as used in the nuke industry and pesticide production" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi3erdgVVTw). As Penn puts it: ".....Saving the World is sexy, but you gotta spend a couple of minutes to find out if you're really saving the World and not just being herded around by some politically motivated a$$h0le...."
"The really hilarious bit is the alledged rape victims are both rather left-of-center [sic] types"
"that would normally swoon at the idea of helping an 'anti-establishment' organ "
Well Anna (Bern)ardin is on-record as being ardently anti-Castro, which according to your dribbling presentation of the political spectrum makes her anti-socialist and anti-left. You also seem to have convinced yourself that anti-establishment types like US Libertarians are left-of-centre. Like ... Penn Jillette
You're pretty much following the line put forward in the right-wing press that these allegations are a real problem for the left. Are those on the right also not in favour of fewer rapes and more transparent government?
>George Soros is a Hungarian-American financier, businessman and notable philanthropist focused on supporting liberal ideals and causes. He became known as "the Man Who Broke the Bank of England" after he made a reported $1 billion during the 1992 Black Wednesday UK currency crises. Soros had correctly anticipated that the British government would have to devalue the pound sterling< 'Business Insider'
Had to google him in all honesty, but after reading about him I'd have to place him squarely in the banker column, and my views are just that, simply humble opinions.
There is no doubting Soros's intelligence or guile, but it is amusing to see people blindly painting all "bankers" as evil, capitalist-cum-Fascists-cum-bloodsuckers. The financial industry is just like every other, packed with individuals with differing points of view. Whilst there are common themes - usually education and well-above-average earnings - they don't have a mold somewhere for making bankers. Indeed, one of the most successful I have met was born in Mosside into a family that had not worked for three generations, yet he pushed himself through Uni and now drives a Porsche (please note I didn't say all the "differing points of view" didn't leave them open to a few personal foibles).
Soros made his money legally, even the bit where he rooked the Bank of England of so much cash. He simply played by the rules set by the politicians. All the current press hoohah about blaming the recent economic depression on "evil bankers" completely forgets that all the bankers did was play in the sandpit made by the politicians of the day - those would be socialist Labour ones in the UK's case, and a Dummicrat-dominated (both houses) setup in the US (and Bush is on record in 2003, warning about the Dummicrat-inspired policies of Fannie Mac and Freddie Mac that led to the collapse of the US mortgage market that kicked off the depression). Dummicrat Barney Frank was one who publicly proclaimed that Bush's warning was simply a political move to discredit FM & FM, stating in 2003 that both were robust and solvent - I bet he felt stupid when the US taxpayer had to stump up for "$150 billion worth of stock in the enterprises and $1.36 trillion worth of mortgage-backed securities" in an attempt to avoid the economic crash only five years later (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2010/10/14/frank_haunted_by_stance_on_fannie_freddie/).
In the UK, the drive to blame it all on "the bankers" seems to be coming from Ed Miliband's camp, because they know nothing unites the traditional Labour base than slagging off rich people. It bears an uncomfortable similarity to the simplistic National-Socialist propoganda blaming Germany's ills on the "rich, capitalist Jews".
"Soros made his money legally"
And? Just because something is licet, doesn't make it defensible by any other yardstick. Some words you don't know are "ethics" and "morals".
"He simply played by the rules set by the politicians."
Hey, if you wanna invoke Nazism, then killing Jews was just playing by the rules.
"all the bankers did was play in the sandpit made by the politicians of the day"
No. All the bankers did was make a shit load of money for themselves and hang the consequences for anyone else. You may think that's a fine way to behave. Okay. So fuck off to Bankerland were you can all feed off each other. As it is, most aggressive capitalists cannot provide for themselves and their over-inflated, infantile "needs" and positively require that others do some actual work so there is a society that can support them. They can damn well pay some of it back.
You may want to denounce that as socialism, but it differs from Tory policy by a matter of degree, not form. Indeed, the greater good is pretty much the whole point of society. Otherwise, explain the concept of society without recourse to anything that is other to the self.
"those would be socialist Labour"
Still flogging that old horse? If indeed such a policy were socialist, then New Labour are ... laissez-faire capitalists? Do explain. Without recourse to tired old pejoratives.
"In the UK, the drive to blame it all on 'the bankers' seems to be coming from Ed Miliband's camp"
Seems to you maybe. But that kind of talk has been said by all sides of the debate since before Ed Miliband gained party leadership.
"....And? Just because something is licet, doesn't make it defensible by any other yardstick...." Did you mean "legit."? As in legal? That's the point - the bankers work to the financial laws, politicians make those laws, and the people elect the politicians. If you don't like the laws then convince the people to change the politicians to ones who will enact the laws you like. That's called democracy. Problem for you is most of the electorate have a clue, so you have SFA chance of imposing your views. Just to give you zero wriggle room, Labour was in power from May 1997 to May 2010 and in complete control of the economic process and laws the financial instituions worked to. Their lack of foresight, policies and/or political cowardness (and in particular Gordon Brown has to take a massive amount of the blame) led to the economic depression in this country. Blaming it all on the bankers is just typical of politicians trying to dodge the truth.
".....Some words you don't know are "ethics" and "morals"...." So it's only ethical or moralistic if it fits your perception of political correctness? What, given up on the old "all property is theft" mantra?
"....No. All the bankers did was make a shit load of money for themselves and hang the consequences for anyone else..." Wrong again! What the bankers did was make lots of money for their companies, which then paid them a salary and gave them a bonus which you obviously feel was unwarranted or politically incorrect. What you fail to grasp is most companies pay their workers to do a job and, if they exceed or meet targets, give them a bonus. If they don't the employees will go work for another company. The salesmen at my company get a far larger percentile bonus than any of the bankers figures I've seen quoted, it's just the amounts are smaller because the jobs are different. You may think bankers don't do any work but if they didn't then they wouldn't last long in their jobs. But then I suspect your definition of "work" revolves around traditional manual labour at the coalface, right, comrade? Try moving into the twenty-first century.
"....and positively require that others do some actual work..." And here is the proof of your deluded prejudice - you assume bankers don't do any "work", because they don't do manual labour, but make much more money than you. So, let's compare a modern banker with a modern industrial worker. A banker/trader sits in front of a screen, reads data from it and predicts what will happen, and presses buttons to make actions (purchases or sales) happen based on his/her experience and training. Compare to a steelworker in a modern plant, that sits in front of a screen and predicts what will happen to the molten steel from the data on his screen, and presses buttons to make the plant machinery manipulate the smelting process based on his/her training and experience. Now, don't tell me you think your comrades in the steelworks don't deserve a paycheque just because they don't swing a pickaxe anymore! In short, it's obvious to me that your prejudices have nothing to do with reality and a lot to do with simple jealousy.
"....Still flogging that old horse?..." The only dead horse being flogged around around here is the rediculous idea that bankers alone somehow caused the economic crash, and that's being flogged by you.
"....If indeed such a policy were socialist, then New Labour are ... laissez-faire capitalists?...." Don't tell me, you think the only real "labour" politicians sit a lot further to the left than Blair? Newsflash for you - Tony Blair managed to make Labour electable by burying the old Labour and presenting a view to the electorate that was closer to the center. Neil Kinnock's mistake was for years trying to accomodate the old Labour views of the trade unions and the left whilst trying to appeal to a populance that had largely moved on from manual labour and into a services economy. Ed Milliband's cuddling up to the Kinnocks and being the trade unions' puppet simply exposes why he will fail to do anything other than help the Tories convert the remainder of the Lib Dem vote into true-Blue voters next election - because the populance will definately not want the unions running the country.
"....But that kind of talk has been said by all sides of the debate since before Ed Miliband gained party leadership." Yes, because the Labour spinmerchants started looking for a scapegoat a lot earlier. All Miliband has done is push the same message to the max because he thinks it will unite the Labour base behind him.
"Did you mean 'legit'? As in legal?"
No. I meant 'licet'. That which is permitted. Get a fucking education. Just because something is permitted doesn't mean one should just go ahead and do it. I'm sure you would have no issue with your partner very legally cheating on you. And I bet you very legally call your mother a cucking funt at very opportunity. What's that? There are other codes of behaviour besides the law? Yes, Mr Bryant, there are.
"That's the point - the bankers work to the financial laws, politicians make those laws, and the people elect the politicians. If you don't like the laws then convince the people to change the politicians to ones who will enact the laws you like. That's called democracy."
You have a deliciously rose-tinted (and largely erroneous) view of democracy.
"Problem for you is most of the electorate have a clue,"
Really? You later claim the electorate acts out of self-interest, not from pressing the clue switch. So your thesis is that the only rational behaviour is pure self-interest. You have heard of The Prisoner's Dilemma? Again, why be a part of society if Me is the only game in town worth playing? Unless ... could it be ... that ... society is good for all of us ... but in order for that to work ... we have to give ... as well as take ...
You also seem to be claiming that, until last year, the electorate were a bunch of socialists.
"so you have SFA chance of imposing your views."
Who said anything about trying to impose my view? I merely expressed a view. On an internet forum. I think you're projecting again.
"Just to give you zero wriggle room, Labour was in power from May 1997 to May 2010 and in complete control of the economic process and laws the financial instituions worked to. Their lack of foresight, policies and/or political cowardness (and in particular Gordon Brown has to take a massive amount of the blame) led to the economic depression in this country. Blaming it all on the bankers is just typical of politicians trying to dodge the truth."
Where do I blame anything, let alone everything, on the bankers? Quote me. Truth is a tricky thing, aint it. And ... what exactly do you think I want to wriggle out from? I mean, your breath stinks a bit, sure, but ... ? WTF? Is your reading comprehension that poor?
"So it's only ethical or moralistic if it fits your perception of political correctness?"
Where did I say that? Quote me. The point was that there are other guides to behaviour than the law.
"Wrong again! What the bankers did was make lots of money for their companies, which then paid them a salary and gave them a bonus which you obviously feel was unwarranted"
The £34bn spent on recapitalisation in 2009/2010 was indeed money made for the banks. How are these bonuses warranted again? Did it add more to the economy than a million steel workers might have? Was it the result of real work?
"Most companies pay their workers to do a job and, if they exceed or meet targets, give them a bonus."
Come on. Really?
"If they don't the employees will go work for another company."
You have a deliciously rose-tinted (and largely erroneous) view of the labour market.
"And here is the proof of your deluded prejudice - you assume bankers don't do any 'work', because they don't do manual labour, but make much more money than you."
Prejudice. Funny word that. You've assumed an awful lot about me. One might say that you have judged me before knowing any facts. Some call that prejudice.
"So, let's compare a modern banker with a modern industrial worker."
How're those steelworker bonuses coming along? I rather fancy I'll quote me some toff on this matter 'ere long.
"The only dead horse being flogged around around here is the rediculous idea that bankers alone somehow caused the economic crash, and that's being flogged by you."
Alone? Quote me on that. Caused the economic crash? Quote me, Mr Bryant, or apologise.
"Don't tell me, you think the only real 'labour' politicians sit a lot further to the left than Blair?"
Never mind your wild assertions regarding my politics. You were halfway through trying to claim that socialists created a sandpit for the rich to play in. Hint. Sometimes names aren't very accurate signifiers. Can you say Deutsche Demokratische Republik? And, FYI, services industries have trades union as well. Your circle still isn't square.
"Newsflash for you - Tony Blair managed to make Labour electable by burying the old Labour and presenting a view to the electorate that was closer to the center."
Give Bryant enough rope and he invariably hangs himself. So you admit that New Labour is not a socialist party. Hint. Not everything to the left of centre is socialist.
"Ed Milliband's cuddling up to the Kinnocks and being the trade unions' puppet simply exposes why he will fail to do anything other than help the Tories convert the remainder of the Lib Dem vote into true-Blue voters next election - because the populance will definately not want the unions running the country."
I rather fancy that they don't want a bunch of Old Etonians running it either. Perhaps that's just the Wykehamist in me talking. And your take on the Lib Dems is the most ill-informed and loltasic political commentary I've read since the Tea Party shat themselves into existence. Most former Lib Dem voters are 'never voting Lib Dem again' because of its current alignment with the Tories.
"Yes, because the Labour spinmerchants started looking for a scapegoat a lot earlier. All Miliband has done is push the same message to the max because he thinks it will unite the Labour base behind him."
Ah. So Miliband the Puppet Master is pulling the coalition's strings is he?
'Bankers have to realise that the British public helped to bail out the banks and it is very galling when they see bankers pay themselves unjustified bonuses. The banks have got to think about their social responsibilities.'
That was Miliband was it? The speaker doesn't seem to share your view of the electorate's way of thinking. Can you guess who it was? Perhaps this quote will help:
'People who work hard and have paid their taxes are seeing billions of pounds of taxes go into these banks and yet large bonuses are still being paid. That's just wrong. [...] I wouldn't deny the teller in a bank the £1,000 or £2,000 bonus if they have a modest salary. What I am talking about is bonuses to the board, to senior executives, to big traders, to big money earners. That's completely wrong.'
Game. Set. And fuck off.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019